This Friday is Good Friday, the day on which Christians commemorate the crucifixion and death of Jesus Christ. The name may seem counterintuitive to many Christians and nonbelievers, since the day is typically viewed as a solemn one, often observed with fasting and somber processions. Why is Good Friday called Good Friday?

Probably because good used to mean holy. There are a few theories about why Good Friday is called Good Friday, but only one seems to be supported by linguists and by historical evidence.

The first of these theories is that Good Friday is called Good Friday because, Christians believe, there is something very good about it: It is the anniversary, they say, of Jesus suffering and dying for their sins. “That terrible Friday has been called Good Friday because it led to the Resurrection of Jesus and his victory over death and sin and the celebration of Easter, the very pinnacle of Christian celebrations,” the Huffington Post suggests. Perhaps this logic has helped the name stick—it is certainly how many Christians today understand the name—but it is not where the name originally comes from.

The second theory is that the Good in Good Friday derives from God or “God’s Friday.” Wikipedia, for example, puts this theory forward citing a 1909 entry in The Catholic Encyclopedia. In a separate article on the same subject, the Huffington Post does the same. However, there seems to be no basis for this etymology. “The origin from God is out of the question” according to Anatoly Liberman, a professor at the University of Minnesota who studies the origins of English words. (Liberman also told me that English speakers have a long history of speculating about a relationship between the word good and the word god where there is none.) The linguist and lexicographer Ben Zimmer agreed, noting that the German for Good Friday isn’t actually “Gottes Freitag” (“God’s Friday”), as the Catholic Encyclopedia suggests, but rather Karfreitag (“Sorrowful Friday”). “None of the early examples in the Oxford English Dictionary imply that it started off as God’s rather than Good, so I don’t really see this as more than speculative etymology,” Zimmer added.

The third and final theory, the one supported by both the Oxford English Dictionary and every language expert I contacted, is that the name comes from an antiquated meaning of good. “The answer seems pretty clearly to be that it’s from good ‘holy,’ ” responded Jesse Sheidlower, the president of the American Dialect Society, when I put this question to him. Liberman agreed, noting that if you consider the other names for Good Friday—“Sacred Friday” in the Romance languages (Viernes Santo, e.g.), “Passion Friday” in Russian—“the OED’s explanation makes excellent sense.” The OED also notes that there was once Good Wednesday, the Wednesday before Easter, which these days is more commonly known as Holy Wednesday.

The reason for this variation is that Easter always falls on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the spring equinox. So, in 2018, Easter will be celebrated on April 1, and on April 21 in 2019.

I can't understand why the church
and most people call the day Jesus
was crucified [Good Friday]

Why not call it Evil Friday
or Killin' Friday.

And what's up with Easter?
What happened to Resurrection Day?

Seems as if [biblical religion] has gone off the tracts..

It would appear that the Cathlicks chose to "celebrate" this "crucial" event within our walk in Yahweh. By creating a "weekend" event to "end" their paganistic suffering of no meat, paint yourself with ashes, have a day of gluttony first on "fat Tuesday," and then give something up that is signifying a sacrifice.

Look at all that "capital" the Roman "pagan" Cathlicks generate out of something "without" WE would be DAMNED forever!!

How can you turn the ONLY WAY TO Yahweh into a money pit?

You involve the pagan Cathlicks!!

The 20 most obese places in the world

American Samoa
Nauru
Cook Islands
Tokelau
Tonga
Samoa
Palau
Kiribati
Marshall Islands
Kuwait
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Micronesia
The Bahamas
Barbados
Belize
Qatar
Egypt
United States
Saudi Arabia
Bahrain

Awesome!!

You turned my comment, "one day of gluttony," into a lifestyle.
That is quite the perception of assumption you have going on there

It would appear that the Cathlicks chose to "celebrate" this "crucial" event within our walk in Yahweh. By creating a "weekend" event to "end" their paganistic suffering of no meat, paint yourself with ashes, have a day of gluttony first on "fat Tuesday," and then give something up that is signifying a sacrifice.

Look at all that "capital" the Roman "pagan" Cathlicks generate out of something "without" WE would be DAMNED forever!!

How can you turn the ONLY WAY TO Yahweh into a money pit?

You involve the pagan Cathlicks!!

I see it as practicing false doctrine.

What is there to gain by doing something that is not Godly, by Yahweh's standards at all?

What are we to say?
Yay, good for you for following 2 to 4 weeks of mythology. That has absolutely nothing to do with the "facts" that took place on Calvary!!

I'd rather tell them the truth.

That is specifically what Yahshua did!!

So Peter was lying about being in ONE mind, language (unknown tongue to them), body, and spirit in the Book of Acts?

Gotta remember that according to you, one of Yahshua disciple's is bsing us

The "virgin" foretelling was an add in just like first two chapters in Books of Matthew and Luke!!

Not sure how not Mary being a virgin keeps Yahshua from being God but some lean that way

Read Isaiah 7:14 :


Isaiah 7:14 Amplified Bible (AMP)

14 Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Listen carefully, the [a]virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and she will call his name Immanuel (God with us)

To follow the argument given by I Am, not only would you have to prove the pagans`s not only might have heard the prophecies, which for sure they did. But that they taught this before the book of Isiah was written.

Historical context[edit]
While it is widely accepted that Isaiah the prophet did not write the entire book, there are good reasons to see parts of chapters 1–39 as stemming from the historic Isaiah ben Amoz, who lived in the Kingdom of Judah during the reigns of four kings from the mid to late 8th century BCE.[23][31] During this period, Assyria was expanding westward from its origins in modern-day northern Iraq towards the Mediterranean, destroying first Aram (modern Syria) in 734–732 BCE, then the Kingdom of Israel in 722–721, and finally subjugating Judah in 701.[32] Proto-Isaiah is divided between verse and prose passages, and a currently popular theory is that the verse passages represent the prophecies of the original 8th century Isaiah, while the prose sections are "sermons" on his texts composed at the court of Josiah a hundred years later, at the end of the 7th century.[33]
Book of Isaiah - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Isaiah


And even if you could prove that the Pagans did? You would still have to prove that the prophecy given in Isaiah, was stolen from the Pagans and inserted into scripture.

On top of that? Then you would be claiming that the book of Isaiah, was false and would have to delete it from Scripture.

But that is not all folks. Throw Isaiah out? Then you have to also to declare Mathew a false book, and toss that out. Since, if Isiah is a false prophet, then Mathew which declares the prophecies found in Isiah about the virgin birth are full filled, would also be false.

Matthew 1:22-23 Amplified Bible (AMP)

22 All this happened in order to fulfill what the Lord had spoken through the [a]prophet [Isaiah]: 23 “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and give birth to a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel”—which, when translated, means, “God with us.”

But it does not stop there, sorry.

You have thrown Isaiah out and Matthew, but guess what other books quote Isaiah , and give it validity ?

- Mark, quotes Isaiah 6 times

-Luke quotes Isaiah, 6 times

-John quotes Isaiah,4 times

-Acts quotes Isaiah, 5 times

-Romans quotes Isaiah, 18 times

-Corinthians quotes Isaiah, 7 times

-Peter quotes Isaiah , 6 times.

-Galatians quotes Isiah,1 time

- Ephesians quotes Isaiah, 1 time.

- Hebrews , quotes Isaiah, 1 time.

-Revelations, quotes Isaiah, 1 time.

In order to claim that Isaiah was lying about a virgin birth? According to I Am`s claim? You have no New Testament left.

What many do not understand is that the Catholic faith is a set of teachings that came to the human race when Jesus Christ, the God-man, the Incarnate Son of God, came down from Heaven, became one of us, and taught these teachings. This is in contrast to the other faiths, which are, in whole or in part, the made-up teachings (opinions) of some mere human being. All who are sincerely seeking truth will discover the Catholic faith.

The Bible says Jesus arose three days after He died. The way the Jews counted time, that included Friday, Saturday, and Subday.

Catholicism, founded by Jesus Christ. Protestantism, founded by Martin Luther.

The ancient Jews counted differently than we do. We would say that it is two days from Friday to Sunday but the ancient Jews would count Friday and say it was three days.

How many years was it from 1960 to 2000? We would say 40 but the ancient Jews would say 41.

Written by those who were there that day...."At about half past nine o’clock this Friday morning, Jesus was hung upon the cross. Before eleven o’clock, upward of one thousand persons had assembled to witness this spectacle of the crucifixion of the Son of Man. Throughout these dreadful hours the unseen hosts of a universe stood in silence while they gazed upon this extraordinary phenomenon of the Creator as he was dying the death of the creature, even the most ignoble death of a condemned criminal."
TUB

That's not the way Jews counted time. But even if Jesus died on Wednesday and not Friday, He still died for our sins, and that's the important thing.

Read the Bible...read the Bible...oh yeah, that compilation of books the Catholic Church put together in 393 a.d.

What good does it do to read God's word, if we don't believe in the Catholic Church, the entity that put God's word together in the first place?

The only way we know the Bible is the inspired word of God is that the Catholic Church says so. To believe in the Bible without believing in the Catholic Church would be like believing in the Boy Scout Handbook without believing in the Boy Scouts.

Without the interpretations of the Catholic Church, the entity that put the Bible together in the first place, the Bible is a hodgepodge of real and apparent contradictions that can be made to say anything anybody wants it to say, and can be made to support any ism under the sun.