The only crucifixion mentioned in Hebrews (hence in Paul, also) is of the corpse of Jesus

[Giuseppe]

Note that the modification of the date of resurrection implied the modification of the date of crucifixion, but not of 3 days (or nights) before (per Jonas): but only of 1 day (or night) before, as it was usual among the Pagan ceremonies of Tammuz, etc.

[Ben C. Smith]

Note that the modification of the date of resurrection implied the modification of the date of crucifixion, but not of 3 days (or nights) before (per Jonas): but only of 1 day (or night) before, as it was usual among the Pagan ceremonies of Tammuz, etc.

Not sure what you are referring to here.

[Ben C. Smith]

Another relatively unexpected event if the crucifixion was believed by the Pillars: Hebrews and Revelation didn't need the Eucharist episode. Why did they need an allegory/prefiguration of the Lamb Immolated, when they had already the original Lamb Immolated?

Vice versa, the crucifixion of Jesus requires the Eucharist to replace the Jewish Passover (Lamb-based) with a new Gentile Passover.

Note that the epistle to the Hebrews famously typifies Jesus Christ with respect to the daily sacrifices and/or to the sacrifices of the Day of Atonement.

[Giuseppe]

I am saying that, by moving the day of resurrection from 14 to 15, one would expect that the day of death would move accordingly only of 1 day: from 11 to 12. Instead, it seems (unfortunately I don't have here the evidence of this claim) that the death was moved only 1 day before the new date of resurrection (so: the 14).

[Ben C. Smith]

I am saying that, by moving the day of resurrection from 14 to 15, one would expect that the day of death would move accordingly only of 1 day: from 11 to 12. Instead, it seems (unfortunately I don't have here the evidence of this claim) that the death was moved only 1 day before the new date of resurrection (so: the 14).

You are again misunderstanding what happened. Nobody moved anything to 15 Nisan. The celebration was either every year on the same day of the month (14 Nisan) or every year on the same day of the week (Sunday). Apples and oranges.

[Giuseppe]

Another relatively unexpected event if the crucifixion was believed by the Pillars: Hebrews and Revelation didn't need the Eucharist episode. Why did they need an allegory/prefiguration of the Lamb Immolated, when they had already the original Lamb Immolated?

Vice versa, the crucifixion of Jesus requires the Eucharist to replace the Jewish Passover (Lamb-based) with a new Gentile Passover.

Note that the epistle to the Hebrews famously typifies Jesus Christ with respect to the daily sacrifices and/or to the sacrifices of the Day of Atonement.

I mean the specific Eucharist episode as described in Paul and in the Gospels, with the blood given to drink and not shed/sprinkled on the people around. Note also the implicit parallelism made by the same author, even if he talks in conflictual terms, with the Pagan sacrifices.

[Giuseppe]

You are again misunderstanding what happened. Nobody moved anything to 15 Nisan. The celebration was either every year on the same day of the month (14 Nisan) or every year on the same day of the week (Sunday). Apples and oranges.

ok but the motivation was not (or not only) the diverse calendary but the desire to dissociate more and more from the Jewish Passover.

[Ben C. Smith]

You are again misunderstanding what happened. Nobody moved anything to 15 Nisan. The celebration was either every year on the same day of the month (14 Nisan) or every year on the same day of the week (Sunday). Apples and oranges.

ok but the motivation was not (or not only) the diverse calendary but the desire to dissociate more and more from the Jewish Passover.

This motive is what I cannot prove to myself. Preserving Sunday ("the Lord's Day") as the day of celebration would be both practical (since the day of the week would remain the same each year) and symbolically sound (since the resurrection on "the eighth day" is a good symbol for the "beginning of another world," as Barnabas says, for example). Since that in and of itself is a good (and attested!) motive, other motives may be superfluous.

[Ben C. Smith]

Another relatively unexpected event if the crucifixion was believed by the Pillars: Hebrews and Revelation didn't need the Eucharist episode. Why did they need an allegory/prefiguration of the Lamb Immolated, when they had already the original Lamb Immolated?

Vice versa, the crucifixion of Jesus requires the Eucharist to replace the Jewish Passover (Lamb-based) with a new Gentile Passover.

Note that the epistle to the Hebrews famously typifies Jesus Christ with respect to the daily sacrifices and/or to the sacrifices of the Day of Atonement.

I mean the specific Eucharist episode as described in Paul and in the Gospels, with the blood given to drink and not shed/sprinkled on the people around. Note also the implicit parallelism made by the same author, even if he talks in conflictual terms, with the Pagan sacrifices.

Well, I do not think the Eucharist originally had anything to do either with the crucifixion or with the Jewish Passover. It was a formal meal, held in the Jewish fashion, but it was symbolic of community and eschatology (as per the Didache), not of sacrifice of any kind, literal or figurative.

[Giuseppe]

Psalm 96:10, as reported in the Vulgate, is an example of a Christian interpolation, being found only in Latin and not even in the Septuaginta:

Dicite in gentibus quia dominus regnavit a ligno

Psalm 22:16 in the Greek version doesn't show so explicitly the cross.