The Crucifixion Not Friday

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Correct. The weekly Sabbath was also a holiday, Nisan 15. That Sabbath was a high day. If July 4 fell on the Sabbath in the USA, we could say that the Sabbath was a holiday. A year later, the same holiday would fall on a Sunday. Just because the Sabbath was a "great" day does not prove Nisan 15 would always be a Sabbath.

I claimed that that Nisan 15 could be presumed to be a Sabbath by deduction. Namely.

1. The Hebrew text says the waving of the Omer was the day after the weekly Sabbath
2. The LXX text says the waving of the Omer was the day after the first day of the feast.
3. Therefore, they are both a Sabbath.

That was my "deductive" argument that Nisan 15 (the first day of Unleavened Bread) could be called a Sabbath, However, one of the premises is faulty.

1. Text Y says you should assemble before God on the Sabbath.
2. Text Z says you should assemble before God on Thursday.
3. Therefore, Sabbath is Thursday.

One of the premises is faulty because the conclusion is false. If the Hebrew text says the waving of the Omer occurs on the day "after the Sabbath" and the LXX says the waving of the Omer occurs on the day after the First Day of Unleavened Bread, it doesn't necessarily mean they are one and the same. The LXX wrongly "translated" the day after the Sabbath to the day after the first day. The LXX didn't call it a Sabbath and why should we? The Pharisees argue the first day of unleavened Bread in the LXX was translated as Sabbath in the Hebrew then we should reckon the first day of unleavened bread as a Sabbath. I don't buy that argument anymore.

Understand. My point was that day was on the weekly sabbath and it was also the 15th.

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

Understand. My point was that day was on the weekly sabbath and it was also the 15th.

A high day is one of the annual Jewish holidays in the Jewish Calendar. They call it a High Day; we call our "high" days Holidays. So, if a Sabbath is called a High Day, it simply means the weekly Sabbath coincides with an annual holiday. In early Church history, the book of John calls the weekly Sabbath that followed Jesus's crucifixion a "great" day (John 19:14, 31). When Polycarp was murdered, it happened on a Great Sabbath, Martyrdom of Polycarp 7:1, 8:1. Since we know there was no Jewish holiday that fell on the day of Polycarp's death, we know that a "great" Sabbath could also mean something like when we call Friday "Good Friday". In Mayrtrdom 7:1 Polycarp is taken into custody on the day of Preparation (Friday) and was killed the next day.

Chapter 7
So taking the lad with them, on the Friday about the supper hour, the gendarmes and horsemen went forth with their accustomed arms, hastening as against a robber. And coming up in a body late in the evening, they found the man himself in bed in an upper chamber in a certain cottage; and though he might have departed thence to another place, he would not, saying, The will of God be done.

Chapter 8. Polycarp is brought into the city​

Now, as soon as he had ceased praying, having made mention of all that had at any time come in contact with him, both small and great, illustrious and obscure, as well as the whole Catholic Church throughout the world, the time of his departure having arrived, they set him upon an ass, and conducted him into the city, the day being that of the great Sabbath.

 

[AFrazier]

There was no day other than the seventh day at or around the time of Easter that was called "Sabbath" in the first century.

That's not actually correct. The 15th of the first month was considered a holiday sabbath. A great debate between the Pharisees and the Sadducees resulted in the interpretation of Leviticus 23:15 recognizing the 15th as the sabbath from which the count to Pentecost should commence (Schol. to Meg Ta'an.). This is a confirmed tradition by Josephus, who was a Phariseee and a priest during the first century (Joseph. AJ 3.250–252), and also by the Talmud (bRosh. Hash. 6b). The count to Pentecost commenced on the 16th, which was the "morrow after the sabbath."

An additional piece of corroborating evidence is Matthew's circumlocutive statement that the day after the crucifixion was the day following the day of preparation. Rather than calling it the sabbath, which is the day following the day of preparation, he referred to the sabbath deliberately as the day following the day of preparation rather than just calling it the sabbath, because the week contained two sabbaths with the holiday sabbath on the 15th, and to call the day after the crucifixion the "sabbath" might have resulted in confusion as to the day of the week.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

That's not actually correct. The 15th of the first month was considered a holiday sabbath.

The 15th of Nisan is the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and according to Leviticus 23:6-7, it is a day of holy convocation when no ordinary work is to be done. Some sources suggest that Pharisees and later Rabbis referred to it as a Sabbath, based on the interpretation of Leviticus 23:15. However, in Koine Greek, the term "Sabbath" typically refers to the weekly Sabbath rather than an annual festival.


In John 19:31, the phrase "for that Sabbath was a high day" has led to discussions about whether Nisan 15 was considered a High Sabbath, meaning it coincided with both the weekly Sabbath and an annual feast day. Some theologians argue that in the year of Jesus' crucifixion, Nisan 15 fell on a Saturday, making it a double Sabbath.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

A high day is one of the annual Jewish holidays in the Jewish Calendar. They call it a High Day; we call our "high" days Holidays. So, if a Sabbath is called a High Day, it simply means the weekly Sabbath coincides with an annual holiday.

Yes that is what I said

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

That's not actually correct. The 15th of the first month was considered a holiday sabbath. A great debate between the Pharisees and the Sadducees resulted in the interpretation of Leviticus 23:15 recognizing the 15th as the sabbath from which the count to Pentecost should commence (Schol. to Meg Ta'an.). This is a confirmed tradition by Josephus, who was a Phariseee and a priest during the first century (Joseph. AJ 3.250–252), and also by the Talmud (bRosh. Hash. 6b). The count to Pentecost commenced on the 16th, which was the "morrow after the sabbath."

An additional piece of corroborating evidence is Matthew's circumlocutive statement that the day after the crucifixion was the day following the day of preparation. Rather than calling it the sabbath, which is the day following the day of preparation, he referred to the sabbath deliberately as the day following the day of preparation rather than just calling it the sabbath, because the week contained two sabbaths with the holiday sabbath on the 15th, and to call the day after the crucifixion the "sabbath" might have resulted in confusion as to the day of the week.

During Jesus's life on earth the Sadducees controlled the Temple worship ceremonies and the order of the holy days. Under the Sadducean reckoning, Nisan 15 was not reckoned as a Sabbath at that time. It was a semi-holiday and a holy convocation, a high day, but not a Sabbath. The Pharisee reckoning, which prevailed before the Sadducees gained control of the Temple, was that Nisan 15 should be reckoned as a Sabbath. When the Sadducees gained control sometime late in the second century BCE or early in the first century BCE, they made it where Nisan 15 was a holy convocation per Leviticus and that lasted until Rabbi Yohannon ben Zakkai became Nasi of the Sanhedrin on or after the mid first century. Some historians claim this did not happen until AFTER the destruction of the Temple but I am not so sure that is what happened.

I cover this on page 5 of this thread, posts #81 and #82 and on page 10 posts #181 through #185.
.

 

[JSRG]

That's not actually correct. The 15th of the first month was considered a holiday sabbath. A great debate between the Pharisees and the Sadducees resulted in the interpretation of Leviticus 23:15 recognizing the 15th as the sabbath from which the count to Pentecost should commence (Schol. to Meg Ta'an.). This is a confirmed tradition by Josephus, who was a Phariseee and a priest during the first century (Joseph. AJ 3.250–252), and also by the Talmud (bRosh. Hash. 6b). The count to Pentecost commenced on the 16th, which was the "morrow after the sabbath."

It would have been preferable had you given a clearer citation for Antiquities of the Jews; the "250-252" appears to refer to line numbers of some kind, which various translations of Antiquities of the Jews do not mention at all. A better way would be to mention the book, chapter, and section, as those are found in all translations (in this case, book 3, chapter 10, section 5), or if someone wanted to be really specific mention those and the numbers.

However, while Josephus refers to the tradition of counting from the 15th, he never actually uses the word Sabbath in this passage (available here, for the record--the first translation I consulted did not have the line numbers, but this one did, or at least lists some of them). I am not aware of people in Greek using the word Sabbath for this meaning. (it is also possible this idea only developed after the writing of the New Testament, as I do not think we have direct evidence of it before Josephus)

An additional piece of corroborating evidence is Matthew's circumlocutive statement that the day after the crucifixion was the day following the day of preparation. Rather than calling it the sabbath, which is the day following the day of preparation, he referred to the sabbath deliberately as the day following the day of preparation rather than just calling it the sabbath, because the week contained two sabbaths with the holiday sabbath on the 15th, and to call the day after the crucifixion the "sabbath" might have resulted in confusion as to the day of the week.

The problem with this assertion is that if it was to avoid confusion, it didn't at all. Every writing I am aware of we have from the earlier centuries interpreted this Sabbath (the day after the crucifixion) as occurring on Saturday.

A major issue I have with the idea that the Sabbath referred to was not Saturday and was a separate day from the weekly Sabbath is that it would seem very odd for the Gospels to not clearly specify this fact, such as adding "this was not the weekly Sabbath, but Nisan 15, which counts as a Sabbath". Surely they knew there were non-Jewish people reading it who would simply associate the Sabbath with Saturday. The Gospels at various points go out of their way to explain some things for the benefit of an audience that does not know Jewish holidays very well, such as when Luke presumed enough ignorance of Jewish festivals on the part of his reader that he felt the need to say "the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is called the Passover" (Luke 22:1) for the benefit of his audience. It would seem odd to me that a writer who felt the reader could be ignorant enough of Jewish festivals that they'd need to be told what the Passover even was would also think those readers would know enough about Jewish festivals that they'd be aware of the fact that Nisan 15 could be referred to as a Sabbath and figure out that it was separate that week from the Saturday Sabbath.

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

It would have been preferable had you given a clearer citation for Antiquities of the Jews; the "250-252" appears to refer to line numbers of some kind, which various translations of Antiquities of the Jews do not mention at all. A better way would be to mention the book, chapter, and section, as those are found in all translations (in this case, book 3, chapter 10, section 5), or if someone wanted to be really specific mention those and the numbers.

However, while Josephus refers to the tradition of counting from the 15th, he never actually uses the word Sabbath in this passage (available here, for the record--the first translation I consulted did not have the line numbers, but this one did, or at least lists some of them). I am not aware of people in Greek using the word Sabbath for this meaning. (it is also possible this idea only developed after the writing of the New Testament, as I do not think we have direct evidence of it before Josephus)


The problem with this assertion is that if it was to avoid confusion, it didn't at all. Every writing I am aware of we have from the earlier centuries interpreted this Sabbath (the day after the crucifixion) as occurring on Saturday.

A major issue I have with the idea that the Sabbath referred to was not Saturday and was a separate day from the weekly Sabbath is that it would seem very odd for the Gospels to not clearly specify this fact, such as adding "this was not the weekly Sabbath, but Nisan 15, which counts as a Sabbath". Surely they knew there were non-Jewish people reading it who would simply associate the Sabbath with Saturday. The Gospels at various points go out of their way to explain some things for the benefit of an audience that does not know Jewish holidays very well, such as when Luke presumed enough ignorance of Jewish festivals on the part of his reader that he felt the need to say "the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is called the Passover" (Luke 22:1) for the benefit of his audience. It would seem odd to me that a writer who felt the reader could be ignorant enough of Jewish festivals that they'd need to be told what the Passover even was would also think those readers would know enough about Jewish festivals that they'd be aware of the fact that Nisan 15 could be referred to as a Sabbath and figure out that it was separate that week from the Saturday Sabbath.

Luke was considered a top-notch historian in the first century CE, yet when he wrote his gospel, he appeared to have no knowledge of two Sabbaths occurring the week Jesus died. Luke 23:54-56 through Luke 24:1-2. Luke calls it the Sabbath according to the commandment (i.e., the weekly Sabbath). He doesn't mention an annual Sabbath, and this is gross negligence for a reputable scholar to make. The fact that the historian fails to mention the difference between the two alleged Sabbaths is noteworthy.

LUKE 23
54 And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on.

The Sabbath was drawing on. Was this the weekly Sabbath or was it an annual Sabbath?

LUKE 23

55 And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid.

56 And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.

The women beheld how the body was laid and returned and...rested the seventh day according to the commandment.

Therefore, the Sabbath that was drawing on was not an annual Sabbath, but the weekly Sabbath. They beheld the body, prepared the spices and the ointments and then rested on the Sabbath, the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. For Luke to skip over the "first" Sabbath (the annual) and go directly to the second Sabbath (the weekly) in this passage seems unlikely.

 

[AFrazier]

However, while Josephus refers to the tradition of counting from the 15th, he never actually uses the word Sabbath in this passage . . .

I did read your response, but this sentence here is the only one that is relevant. The count to Pentecost began on the "morrow after the Sabbath." If the count began every year on the 16th of Nisan, which would be varying weekdays from year to year, then the 15th, by default of that practice, was considered the "sabbath," the morrow after which is the 16th. He doesn't have to mention the word "Sabbath" to convey the message.

 

[AFrazier]

During Jesus's life on earth the Sadducees controlled the Temple worship ceremonies and the order of the holy days. Under the Sadducean reckoning, Nisan 15 was not reckoned as a Sabbath at that time. It was a semi-holiday and a holy convocation, a high day, but not a Sabbath. The Pharisee reckoning, which prevailed before the Sadducees gained control of the Temple, was that Nisan 15 should be reckoned as a Sabbath. When the Sadducees gained control sometime late in the second century BCE or early in the first century BCE, they made it where Nisan 15 was a holy convocation per Leviticus and that lasted until Rabbi Yohannon ben Zakkai became Nasi of the Sanhedrin on or after the mid first century. Some historians claim this did not happen until AFTER the destruction of the Temple but I am not so sure that is what happened.

I cover this on page 5 of this thread, posts #81 and #82 and on page 10 posts #181 through #185.
.

I gave the proof of what I said. If you disagree, feel free to supply primary source evidence to the contrary. Josephus wrote his history in the 90s CE. He was a priest, a Pharisee, and of the course of Jehoiareb. He lived, and served in the temple as a priest, in the first century. He said that the count to Pentecost began on the 16th. The Talmudic tradition that I cited gives the evidence that the practice continued well beyond the temple period.

 

[AFrazier]

The 15th of Nisan is the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and according to Leviticus 23:6-7, it is a day of holy convocation when no ordinary work is to be done. Some sources suggest that Pharisees and later Rabbis referred to it as a Sabbath, based on the interpretation of Leviticus 23:15. However, in Koine Greek, the term "Sabbath" typically refers to the weekly Sabbath rather than an annual festival.


In John 19:31, the phrase "for that Sabbath was a high day" has led to discussions about whether Nisan 15 was considered a High Sabbath, meaning it coincided with both the weekly Sabbath and an annual feast day. Some theologians argue that in the year of Jesus' crucifixion, Nisan 15 fell on a Saturday, making it a double Sabbath.

I appreciate your efforts here, but I wasn't making a semantic argument. I was demonstrating, with primary source material, what the actual practice was in the first century. The count to Pentecost was to begin the day after the Sabbath. And the actual practice was to begin the count to Pentecost on the 16th, making the 15th the Sabbath by default, despite the varying weekday on which these two dates occurred each year.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I appreciate your efforts here, but I wasn't making a semantic argument. I was demonstrating, with primary source material, what the actual practice was in the first century. The count to Pentecost was to begin the day after the Sabbath. And the actual practice was to begin the count to Pentecost on the 16th, making the 15th the Sabbath by default, despite the varying weekday on which these two dates occurred each year.

My post was not a response to anything written by you.

 

[AFrazier]

My post was not a response to anything written by you.

You quoted me in post #344.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

You quoted me in post #344.

So I did! Humble apologies.

 

[AFrazier]

It would have been preferable had you given a clearer citation for Antiquities of the Jews; the "250-252" appears to refer to line numbers of some kind, which various translations of Antiquities of the Jews do not mention at all. A better way would be to mention the book, chapter, and section, as those are found in all translations (in this case, book 3, chapter 10, section 5), or if someone wanted to be really specific mention those and the numbers.

On this, the standard citation for Josephus is book/index, not book/chapter/verse. The abbreviation is Joseph. and the works are AJ (Antiquitates Judaicae – or Antiquities of the Jews), BJ (Bellum Judaicum – or Wars of the Jews), Ap. (Contra Apionem – or Against Apion), and Vit. (Vita – or Life [of Josephus]). Some editions lack the index. The ones of significance do not; Loeb and Whiston editions for example.

However, while Josephus refers to the tradition of counting from the 15th, he never actually uses the word Sabbath in this passage (available here, for the record--the first translation I consulted did not have the line numbers, but this one did, or at least lists some of them). I am not aware of people in Greek using the word Sabbath for this meaning. (it is also possible this idea only developed after the writing of the New Testament, as I do not think we have direct evidence of it before Josephus)

This is because he's not referencing the Sabbath. He's referring to the count to Pentecost, which begins on the 16th.

But on the second day of unleavened bread, which is the sixteenth day of the month, they first partake of the fruits of the earth, for before that day they do not touch them. And while they suppose it proper to honor God, from whom they obtain this plentiful provision, in the first place, they offer the first-fruits of their barley, and that in the manner following: They take a handful of the ears, and dry them, then beat them small, and purge the barley from the bran; they then bring one tenth deal to the altar, to God; and, casting one handful of it upon the fire, they leave the rest for the use of the priest. [ . . . ] When a week of weeks has passed over after this sacrifice, (which weeks contain forty and nine days), on the fiftieth day, which is Pentecost, but is called by the Hebrews Asartha, which signifies Pentecost, they bring to God a loaf, made of wheat flour, of two tenth deals, with leaven; and for sacrifices they bring two lambs; and when they have only presented them to God, they are made ready for supper for the priests; nor is it permitted to leave any thing of them till the day following. (Joseph. AJ 3.250–253 or Book 3, Chapter 10, 5–6).

The "idea" goes back to before the Hasmonean period. From the 8th of Nisan to the close of the festival, mourning was not permitted. According to the Scholiast to the Megallit Ta'anit, this was to commemorate the Pharisaic victory over the Saduccees concerning the start of the Pentecost count (i.e. whether the count should be from the day after the holy convocation, considered a holiday Sabbath, or whether the count should be from the day following the weekly Sabbath). The Pharisees won, and the count was codified as beginning on the 16th, which Josephus, an actual first century priest, confirms, as noted above (Schol. Meg Ta'an. 1b).

The problem with this assertion is that if it was to avoid confusion, it didn't at all. Every writing I am aware of we have from the earlier centuries interpreted this Sabbath (the day after the crucifixion) as occurring on Saturday.

Precisely! No one ever got it confused, until modern-ish times when people started trying to finesse the text of the gospels to support an erroneous Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion. When Matthew says that the next day was the day that followed the preparation, no one ever got it confused throughout the centuries. Everyone agreed that he meant Saturday.

So, I would have to disagree with you that it failed in its goal to avoid confusion.

A major issue I have with the idea that the Sabbath referred to was not Saturday and was a separate day from the weekly Sabbath is that it would seem very odd for the Gospels to not clearly specify this fact, such as adding "this was not the weekly Sabbath, but Nisan 15, which counts as a Sabbath". Surely they knew there were non-Jewish people reading it who would simply associate the Sabbath with Saturday.

It's worth pointing out in this instance that we are discussing Pentecost. The Gospels are in no way unclear that the Sabbath following the crucifixion was Saturday. The point of confusion we're discussing is the count to Pentecost, which began on the 16th. The confusion that has been interjected into this scenario is that some are trying to suggest a Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion. To do that, there has to be a Sabbath on the day following, and the only way to satisfy this requirement of the narrative is to suggest that the 15th was the Sabbath intended.

As you say, if that is what they meant, surely there would be some explanation. But the Gospel accounts aren't trying to educate us on the particulars of the Pentecost tradition of the first century. They are telling us that Jesus died on the day of preparation, and the day after was the Sabbath. There's absolutely no reason for any of them to step back and break down the a-b-cs of how the Pentecost count was carried out.

 

[JSRG]

Precisely! No one ever got it confused, until modern-ish times when people started trying to finesse the text of the gospels to support an erroneous Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion. When Matthew says that the next day was the day that followed the preparation, no one ever got it confused throughout the centuries. Everyone agreed that he meant Saturday.

So, I would have to disagree with you that it failed in its goal to avoid confusion.

Okay, now I'm confused. I thought the position you were holding was that Jesus was not crucified on Friday, and that it was an earlier day of the week, and were promoting the standard explanation of there being two "Sabbaths" in between it and Sunday, one of them being the weekly and that the day after Passover counted as a separate Sabbath independent of what day of the week it fell on. My prior post was written with the belief you were advocating that. Here, however, you are saying that a Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion is erroneous. Did I completely misunderstand what your position was?

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

a Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion is erroneous.

Because it is...

 

[AFrazier]

Okay, now I'm confused. I thought the position you were holding was that Jesus was not crucified on Friday, and that it was an earlier day of the week, and were promoting the standard explanation of there being two "Sabbaths" in between it and Sunday, one of them being the weekly and that the day after Passover counted as a separate Sabbath independent of what day of the week it fell on. My prior post was written with the belief you were advocating that. Here, however, you are saying that a Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion is erroneous. Did I completely misunderstand what your position was?

I think you did. I DO advocate for the fact that, historically, the 15th was considered a Sabbath of the holiday variety separate from the regular weekly Sabbath. That's why the count to Pentecost began on the 16th, per the evidence already provided. But I do not advocate for the crucifixion on any day other than Friday. That's the point I was making with Matthew. Because there were two days in that week that could be understood generically as "the Sabbath," he deliberately said the day circumlocutively (he said it in a round about way) so the days couldn't be unintentionally conflated.

Personally, in my earlier years of research and reading, it never really made sense to me why Matthew wouldn't just say, "the next day, on the Sabbath." Instead he gives us this descriptor to tell us it was Saturday, saying, "the next day, on the day that followed the day of the preparation." It always seemed like an unnecessary mouthful. But there is method to the madness if you realize there were two days that could be called the Sabbath.

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

I think you did. I DO advocate for the fact that, historically, the 15th was considered a Sabbath of the holiday variety separate from the regular weekly Sabbath. That's why the count to Pentecost began on the 16th, per the evidence already provided. But I do not advocate for the crucifixion on any day other than Friday. That's the point I was making with Matthew. Because there were two days in that week that could be understood generically as "the Sabbath," he deliberately said the day circumlocutively (he said it in a round about way) so the days couldn't be unintentionally conflated.

Personally, in my earlier years of research and reading, it never really made sense to me why Matthew wouldn't just say, "the next day, on the Sabbath." Instead he gives us this descriptor to tell us it was Saturday, saying, "the next day, on the day that followed the day of the preparation." It always seemed like an unnecessary mouthful. But there is method to the madness if you realize there were two days that could be called the Sabbath.

Nisan 15 was not worshipped as a Sabbath when Jesus was alive. When Jesus was alive, the waving of the Omer happened on the day after the weekly Sabbath, not a Festival Sabbath. The Sadducees controlled Temple worship while Jesus was alive and the waving of the Omer was switched back to Nisan 16 sometime after 50 CE when Rabbi Yohannan ben Zakkai became Nasi of the Sanhedrin and was able to change the calendar to make Nisan 15 THE Festival Sabbath of Passover week. The Sadducees gained power in Israel sometime during the late second century BCE or early first century BCE and established the weekly Sabbath as the day to wave the Omer. The Nisan 15 Sabbath was not used again as a Sabbath until 20 or more years after Jesus died. It's anachronistic to use Nisan 15 as a Sabbath when Jesus had his ministry. It's interesting that the Jews did not call Nisan 21 a Sabbath, even though it was a festival holy convocation. They did not call Shavuot a Sabbath either. Three of the four remaining annual holy convocation high days were not called Sabbaths either until the second century CE in the Talmuds.

For more information, read posts # 81 and # 82 on page 5 of this thread.

The Crucifixion Not Friday

According to the Hebrew Scriptures (Masoretic Text), Nisan 15 was never designated as a Sabbath. There were three types of Sabbaths: 1) the weekly Sabbath, 2) the land Sabbath where the land had to lay unused every seventh year 3) the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), an annual Sabbath that fell in...

www.christianforums.com

 

[AFrazier]

Nisan 15 was not worshipped as a Sabbath when Jesus was alive. When Jesus was alive, the waving of the Omer happened on the day after the weekly Sabbath, not a Festival Sabbath. The Sadducees controlled Temple worship while Jesus was alive and the waving of the Omer was switched back to Nisan 16 sometime after 50 CE when Rabbi Yohannan ben Zakkai became Nasi of the Sanhedrin and was able to change the calendar to make Nisan 15 THE Festival Sabbath of Passover week. The Sadducees gained power in Israel sometime during the late second century BCE or early first century BCE and established the weekly Sabbath as the day to wave the Omer. The Nisan 15 Sabbath was not used again as a Sabbath until 20 or more years after Jesus died. It's anachronistic to use Nisan 15 as a Sabbath when Jesus had his ministry. It's interesting that the Jews did not call Nisan 21 a Sabbath, even though it was a festival holy convocation. They did not call Shavuot a Sabbath either. Three of the four remaining annual holy convocation high days were not called Sabbaths either until the second century CE in the Talmuds.

For more information, read posts # 81 and # 82 on page 5 of this thread.

The Crucifixion Not Friday

According to the Hebrew Scriptures (Masoretic Text), Nisan 15 was never designated as a Sabbath. There were three types of Sabbaths: 1) the weekly Sabbath, 2) the land Sabbath where the land had to lay unused every seventh year 3) the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), an annual Sabbath that fell in...

www.christianforums.com

Okay, I went and read those two posts. Let me say for you up front . . . I'm a man of facts. If you say something and expect me to believe it, you need to show proof. Cite the source. And I prefer primary source material. I will change my perspective on something if you prove it to me. But, presently, I have facts that say the 16th is the bringing of the omer and the beginning of the count to Pentecost. If you're going to convince me otherwise, you'll have to prove it with more than arguments and interpretations.

1) You did not show proof of any change in the religious practice established in the pre-Hasmonean period concerning the fixed date for the count to Pentecost. I know you think you did, but none of what you posted or cited says any such thing. Even if the Saduccees were in charge during Jesus' day, you haven't provided any source evidence that they changed the practice that had been in use for hundreds of years at that point.

2) You cite bTa'an 17b, but that doesn't prove what you're saying. The Scholiast to the Megallit Ta'anit on 1b says it commemorates the victory of the Pharisees over the Saduccees in the debate. bTa'an 17b says the same thing. And bMenah. 65a–66a reiterates the same argument, and then expounds upon it significantly to show that the day after the festival is the day for bringing the omer and beginning the count of weeks.

In post #81 you also stated, "Nisan 15 was a non-Sabbath holy convocation until the Jews went into Babylonian captivity and for seventy years, they were in Babylon they observed their Nisan 15 as a Sabbath because Nisan 15 was a Sabbath to the Babylonians."

I research and study Assyrian and Babylonian history and calendrics. I know of no such practice. If you have proof of this in Babylonian culture, please provide it. And to say so, if the Jews began this practice during the Babylonian captivity, which can't be proved, it is not relevant to the practices of the first century CE, which practiced the count to Pentecost as already discussed.