[JHavard]

Why do you insist on a literal 72 hrs? In any case, we celebrate three days, beginning with the evening of the Lord's Last Supper and ending with the morning of the first day of the week?

But His body wasn't in the heart of the earth on the evening of the last supper, it was the next evening.

The RC's build a doctrine on the word "grace", and you think we're being picky when we believe that when Jesus said 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth, He meant exactly that.

The fact Jesus body laid for 3 days and nights and the next day it would have been decaying, as was Lazarus on the 4th day, and you fluff it off as a non-important event?

Jesus also understood how many hours were in a day,

John 11:9-10 Jesus answered, Are there not twelve hours in the day? If any man walk in the day, he stumbleth not, because he seeth the light of this world. But if a man walk in the night, he stumbleth, because there is no light in him.

You really don't see anything wrong with ignoring this scripture and setting up your own version of the truth do you?

Your RC ship has become so big and cumbersome, it can't be directed, or guided any longer can it.

JH

[RobbyS]

Given the diagreements between John and the synoptic goaspels on the date of the Last Supper, and the many other differences in detail of the different reports of the Passion, death and resurrection of Our Lord, is it not common sense to say that
we cannot know from the Scriptures alone precisely what happened or in what order? Your argument seems typically Protestant is that it starts from denial of Catholic doctrine and practice and is interested in Scripture only to the extent that it supports that assertion. From that time on proof-texting" became the usual approach from either side and it makes consensus impossible.