The Crucifixion Not Friday

Kokavkrystallos said:

I read about Semiramis long before Internet existed. Early 80s.

Click to expand...

Of course Semiramis existed before the Internet (well, more accurately, Semiramis never existed at all, but she was known of before the Internet). Heck, even the goofy idea that Semiramis and Nimrod were married came from before the Internet existed, dreamed up by a guy named Alexander Hislop in the 19th century (which you refer to). But the Internet certainly helped spread the idea, as it does other silly ideas. That is what I was referring to.

Kokavkrystallos said:

Greek historian Diodorus wrote of her, though the connection with Nimrod does seem a more modern fancy? 1853 according to this.

"Despite a lack of supporting evidence in the Bible, the book The Two Babylons (1853), by the Christian minister Alexander Hislop, was particularly influential in characterizing her as the harlot of Babylon.[12] Hislop claimed that Semiramis invented polytheism and, with it, goddess worship.[43] He claimed that the head of the Catholic Church inherited and continued to propagate a millennia-old secret conspiracy founded by Semiramis and the Biblical king Nimrod to propagate the pagan religion of ancient Babylon.[44] Grabbe and others have rejected the allegations in this book as based on a flawed understanding of the texts,[44] but variations of them are accepted among some groups of evangelical Protestants.[44]

Hislop asserted that Semiramis was a queen consort and the mother of Nimrod, builder of the Bible's Tower of Babel. He said that Semiramis and Nimrod's incestuous male offspring was the Akkadian deity Tammuz, and that all divine pairings in religions were retellings of this story.[44] These claims are still circulated among some groups of evangelical Protestants,[44] in the form of Jack Chick tracts,[45] comic books, and related media."

Click to expand...

And the above, correctly, points out how it's all a bunch of nonsense. The fact nonsense goes back to 1853 doesn't make it not nonsense.

Kokavkrystallos said:

I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility, but the real Semiramis does appear in history :

"While the achievements of Semiramis are clearly in the realm of mythical Persian, Armenian, and Greek historiography, the historical Shammuramat certainly existed. After her husband's death, she might have served as regent for her son, Adad-nirari III.[11] Thus, during that time Shammuramat could have been in control of the vast Neo-Assyrian Empire (911-605 BC), which stretched from the Caucasus Mountains in the north to the Arabian Peninsula in the south, and from western Iran in the east to Cyprus in the west.[12]

In the city of Aššur on the Tigris, she had an obelisk built and inscribed that read, "Stele of Shammuramat, queen of Shamshi-Adad, King of the Universe, King of Assyria, Mother of Adad Nirari, King of the Universe, King of Assyria, Daughter-in-Law of Shalmaneser, King of the Four Regions of the World."[12]"

Semiramis - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Click to expand...

I never denied Shammuramat existed, I said Semiramis was a legendary figured based on the actual Shammuramat. But the quote you just offered also proves your claim wrong, because (as I noted) she and Nimrod would've lived more than a thousand years apart.

In fact, you've done such a great job dismissing your own claims I'm not sure what else to say. You mostly ignored my post, concentrating only on my criticism of Nimrod and Semiramis being married--and rather ironically, you just posted a bunch of evidence that the claim you offered of them being married was false, so even there all you really did was offer evidence I was correct.

Qubit said:

Hi @Kokavkrystallos . I have a quick question. Maybe @JSRG can add input as well.

Do you agree with these statements?

"Please note, the Passover is not a High Sabbath day, this important fact is often overlooked."

"We know that since the crucifixion was on the Passover, it was automatically the day before a sabbath, no matter what day it was on, because the High Sabbath day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread was the next day."

"Again, no matter what day Passover was on, the next day was automatically a sabbath."

Here is the link: The Three Days and the Three Nights - Study Resources

Thanks!

Click to expand...

First, I realize I was confusing with my previous phrasing erred in my previous phrasing--I was saying that people were claiming Passover was a Sabbath, but it's more accurate to say they said the day after the start of Passover, the Counting of the Omer, was (for some reason I was getting the terms mixed up). So I might have gotten people confused. My apologies on that, though I don't think it affects my point.

And my point remains that despite the claim that the day in question (however one refers to it) was considered a "High Sabbath", no one ever points to evidence this was the case at the time. They simply assert it. Let's look at your link. It says it was, but doesn't point to contemporary reference to it as such. The best it offers is:

"However, these are NOT the only sabbaths. Besides the weekly sabbaths there are the High Sabbaths related to the Hebrew Feasts (or Festivals), described in Leviticus 23:4-44."

And then it quotes Leviticus 23:4-8. Now, it is true that you do see things other than the weekly Sabbath referred to as a Sabbath in Leviticus 23, like Leviticus 23:23, applying to the first day of the seventh month. But we don't see that for the day we're talking about. Leviticus 23:7 says "On the first day hold a sacred assembly and do no regular work." But notice it doesn't refer to it as a Sabbath.

Now, given the similarity, I could see how people could take to calling it a Sabbath. However, that brings me again to my point: No one offers any evidence it was referred to as a Sabbath, such as for example Jewish documents from around the New Testament period doing so. Maybe there are some, but again the fact is I've never seen anyone offer them.

BPPLEE said:

Jon 1:17 - Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.

Click to expand...

That doesn't change anything.

HTacianas said:

That doesn't change anything.

Click to expand...

No it’s the same. Jesus was in the tomb 3 days and 3 nights

BPPLEE said:

No it’s the same. Jesus was in the tomb 3 days and 3 nights

Click to expand...

Jesus was not in the tomb for three days and three nights. The text was emended to match the wording of Jonah and it only led to a lot of confusion. If you study emendations to the new testament you'll find things like that. Someone at some time thought that "three days and three nights" more closely matched the wording of Jonah so it was changed to reflect Jonah. Only they didn't do the math. Another example of an emendation is also found in Matthew:

Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Notice that it says Zacharias son of Barachias. But Zacharias son of Barachias was not killed between the altar and the temple. Zacharias son of Iddo was. Now look at Luke:

Luk 11:51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.

You see that son of Barachias is not there. Matthew's account is an early emendation that has been known since the days of Origen. Origen called it "a mistake of the scribes". These things are nothing new.

JSRG said:

Except, yet again, it simply claims that the first day of Passover was a High Sabbath, but without any examples of it being referred to as such around the New Testament period.

Click to expand...

Jhn 19:31 (KJV) The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

link;

happy easter.

HTacianas said:

Jesus was not in the tomb for three days and three nights. The text was emended to match the wording of Jonah and it only led to a lot of confusion. If you study emendations to the new testament you'll find things like that. Someone at some time thought that "three days and three nights" more closely matched the wording of Jonah so it was changed to reflect Jonah. Only they didn't do the math. Another example of an emendation is also found in Matthew:

Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Notice that it says Zacharias son of Barachias. But Zacharias son of Barachias was not killed between the altar and the temple. Zacharias son of Iddo was. Now look at Luke:

Luk 11:51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.

You see that son of Barachias is not there. Matthew's account is an early emendation that has been known since the days of Origen. Origen called it "a mistake of the scribes". These things are nothing new.

Click to expand...

Not worth arguing about, makes no difference in someone’s salvation

JesusFollowerForever said:

Jhn 19:31 (KJV) The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

link;

The Passover Week and the Two Sabbaths

www.eaec.org

happy easter.

Click to expand...

That's just assuming the conclusion (that John isn't referring to the weekly Sabbath) and reading it into the text. You can't use this as an "example" of the day after Passover inherently being considered a Sabbath (whether or not it's on Saturday) because the very question at hand is whether that's what it's doing. John can just as easily be understood to mean that because this Sabbath (Saturday) also happened to fall on the day after Passover, it was of greater importance than a normal Sabbath, as you're getting two important holy days in one. And indeed, that was the common interpretation of it, that it was a "high day" because an important holy day happened to fall onto the Saturday Sabbath.

And that's the problem, once again. People claim the day after Passover was referred to as a Sabbath or high Sabbath, but examples of such aren't provided, aside from John 19:31 which is of no help because that's the exact verse whose interpretation is in question.

Kokavkrystallos said:

I know it's "Good Friday" and many celebrate the crucifixion as being on a Friday, but it really couldn't have been because of the 3 days and 3 nights just wouldn't fit. You'd have 2 days and 2 nights only. Part of Friday before sundown could count as a day, then the night = 1 day, 1 night. Then Sabbath day and Sabbath night = 2 days, 2 nights, but then Jesus is already gone when the women get to the tomb on the first day of the week (Sunday) at or before dawn.
Even Matthew 28:1 shows it may have even been earlier than that: "In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week"
Since the end of the Sabbath would be sundown on Saturday, some have made the supposition that they went to the tomb

"“as it began to dusk and come toward the first day of the week.” This event, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary coming to view the tomb, is not recorded in any Gospel but Matthew.

Click to expand...

The fervent prayers of Mary have anticipated My Resurrection by some time.

I had said: 'The Son of man is about to be killed, but on the third day He will rise from the dead.' I died at three o'clock in the afternoon of Friday. Whether you count the days by their names, or you count them by their hours, it was not the dawn on Sunday that was to see Me rise. With regard to the hours, they were only thirty-eight instead of seventy-two, in which My Body had remained lifeless. With regard to the days, it should have been the evening of the third day to say that I had been in the sepulchre three days.

But Mary anticipated the miracle. As when with Her prayers She opened the Heavens a few years in advance of the predetermined time, to give the world its Salvation, so now She obtains some hours in advance to give comfort to Her dying heart.

And I, at the beginning of dawn on the third day, descended like the sun and with My brightness I broke the human seals, so useless before the power of a God, with My power I prized open and overthrew the stone watched over in vain, with My apparition like lightning I knocked down the utterly useless guards placed as guardians of a death that was Life, that no human power could prevent from being such.

By far more powerful than your electric current, My Spirit entered like a sword of divine Fire to warm the cold remains of My Corpse, and in the new Adam the Spirit of God breathed life, saying to Itself: 'Live. I want it.'

Click to expand...

Kokavkrystallos said:

I know it's "Good Friday" and many celebrate the crucifixion as being on a Friday, but it really couldn't have been because of the 3 days and 3 nights just wouldn't fit. You'd have 2 days and 2 nights only. Part of Friday before sundown could count as a day, then the night = 1 day, 1 night. Then Sabbath day and Sabbath night = 2 days, 2 nights, but then Jesus is already gone when the women get to the tomb on the first day of the week (Sunday) at or before dawn.
Even Matthew 28:1 shows it may have even been earlier than that: "In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week"
Since the end of the Sabbath would be sundown on Saturday, some have made the supposition that they went to the tomb

"“as it began to dusk and come toward the first day of the week.” This event, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary coming to view the tomb, is not recorded in any Gospel but Matthew.

The translations differ about this verse, so to properly understand it we must pay strict attention to the Greek text, the Jewish customs, and the event itself. This event occurred on Saturday, Nisan 17, in the late evening, just as the Jewish day Sunday was “dawning,” i.e., starting, that is just before the Saturday Sabbath ended at sunset and Sunday, the first day of the week, began. The fact that Matthew records that the Sabbath was just ending at sunset tells us that Matthew is written from the point of view of Jewish timing, not Roman timing. The Jews began their new day at sunset, while the Romans began their new day at midnight (like Westerners still do). This verse is not speaking about Sunday morning when the sun came up, as many people believe.

Although many translations have the word “dawn,” in this verse, we must not confuse that with the Western view of “dawn,” i.e., when the sun comes up. To the Jews, a new day “dawned,” or started, at sunset. The Greek text reads in a way that seems very difficult when translated literally, which is due to the idioms involved. A very literal rendering of the Greek text is: “Now late of the [on the] Sabbaths, at the dawn toward the first of the Sabbaths.” This is a very difficult sentence, and to understand it we need to know two things: the first thing is that “Sabbaths” (the plural of Sabbath) was the regular Jewish idiom for a week. The second thing is that the word “dawned” is the Greek word epiphōskō (#2020 ἐπιφώσκω; pronounced eh-pee-'phōs-kō), which literally means, “to grow light,” and it was used of the “dawn” or “beginning” of something. In the United States, we have the same basic idiom and use “dawn” for the beginning of something. When something brand new is coming that will make significant changes, someone might say, “A new day is dawning,” even though it is technically not either a new “day,” nor is it “dawn.”

[For more on epiphōskō, see " style="color: rgb(45, 123, 255); text-decoration: none; cursor: pointer; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); font-family: inherit;">commentary on Luke 23:54.]

According to Jewish reckoning of time, the new day was beginning, or “dawning,” at sunset on the weekly Sabbath. Thus, sunset on Saturday started Sunday and the new week. Many English versions read “dawn” in this verse, but to understand the verse, we must realize that the sun is going down and the new day is starting; the verse is not saying that the sun is coming up. About this verse, Robertson writes: “This careful chronological statement according to Jewish days clearly means that before the Sabbath was over, that is before six PM, this visit by the women was made ‘to see the sepulcher.’”a Robertson is correct that this is a “careful chronological statement,” and not paying attention to it is one of the reasons people wrongly think the Bible contradicts itself in the timing of some of the events that occurred after the death of Jesus.

If we read the verse in an amplified form with notes included, we get: “Now late of the [on the] Sabbaths [the week, i.e., as the week was ending on Saturday night], at the dawn [the ‘beginning’] toward the first of the Sabbaths [i.e., at the beginning of the next week, which started at sunset Saturday night when Sunday, the next week began].”

Matthew 28, REV Bible and Commentary

Matthew 28 REV - Now late on the Sabbath day, as it began to dusk and come toward the first day of the week - Bible verse

www.revisedenglishversion.com

There is this that supports a Thursday crucifixion, however, she does not take into consideration the "dawn" being Saturday at sundown:

"The Passover Sabbath
The Feast of Unleavened Bread, also known as the Feast of the Passover, was celebrated in remembrance of the Israelites being delivered from Egyptian bondage. This feast is set on Nisan 15 (Leviticus 23:6) and could fall on any day of the week. This feast day, preceded by a day of preparation, is a High Sabbath (a day of rest). It’s also called a High Day.

John 19:31 Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

John 19:31 says that Jesus was crucified on the Preparation Day before the High Day Sabbath of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. This places the date of Jesus’ crucifixion on Nisan 14. Since the Passover feast is set according to a specific date on the calendar, the question becomes, on what day of the week was the feast day that year?

Three Reasons for a Thursday Crucifixion​

I (Shari Abbott, Reasons for Hope* Jesus) hold to a Thursday crucifixion, and I will share three reasons and biblical support for this. I will also explain why a Wednesday or Friday crucifixion day does not fit with what the Bible reveals."

Was Jesus Crucified on Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday?

Was Jesus crucified on a Friday? Did He die on Wednesday or Thursday? What does the Bible reveal? It might surprise you.

reasonsforhopejesus.com

And here is the Wednesday crucifixion, which I personally tend to believe is the likely one.
"The Bible indicates that Jesus had to be crucified on Wednesday and arose sometime in the Saturday evening hours before the end of the Sabbath, contrary to the popular belief that He was crucified on Friday. This is further supported by the fact that the Jewish day begins and ends at 6 P.M. (sunset), with the daytime hours beginning at the “First hour” from dawn until 8 A.M. and lasting through the “Twelfth hour” of 6 P.M. to sunset. Additionally, the six days of Passover were being observed, culminating with the yearly High Sabbath (Leviticus 23), a three-day feast beginning on Wednesday sunset."

Was Jesus Crucified on Friday or Wednesday?

Scripture trumps tradition when it comes to Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection. The Bible states Jesus was crucified on Wednesday and arose Saturday.

mesabiblestudy.com

Wednesday is also taught in many Messianic assemblies.
Keep in mind also this:
Easter has nothing to do with Passover nor does Easter have anything to do with any of the Jewish festivals. Pesach or Passover is the word that should have been used in Acts 12:4.

But, bottom line with all this is the Gospel, that Jesus died on the cross, was buried, and rose from the dead on the third day. His death on the cross redeems us, His blood cleanses our sin; His resurrection justifies us (Romans 4:25)

Click to expand...

This table indicates that Jesus died on Good Friday; that was day one. In total, day one includes the day and the previous night, even though Jesus died in the day. So, although only part of Friday was left, that was the first day and night to be counted. Saturday was day two. Jesus rose in the morning of the Sunday. That was day three. Thus, by Jewish counting, we have three days and nights, yet Jesus rose on the third day. The Jews reckoned any part of a "day" as a day.

JSRG said:

Can you show us any early sources that attest to it being referred to as a High Sabbath or Sabbath? Because those who reject the Friday crucifixion always claim that there's an extra Sabbath in the middle due to the Passover counting as such (a "High Sabbath"), but never point to any evidence that that Sabbath was used to refer to the Passover back then.

Click to expand...

Lev 23 refers to the annual feast days as Sabbaths.



"high Sabbath" may indicate that both the Annual Sabbath (Passover) and the weekly Sabbath fell on the same day - the 7th day ... so then a Friday crucifixion with the passover lamb sacrificed at the time Christ was crucified.

Kokavkrystallos said:

The Passover Feast was the High Sabbath that is mentioned.

As far as Easter, it has pagan origins. The fact it sometimes coincides with Passover or is close to it does not negate its pagan roots

The Ancient Origins of the Easter Bunny

A scholar traces the folk figure's history from the Neolithic era to today

www.smithsonianmag.com

Also, how to calculate Easter is not the same as Passover:
The simple standard definition of Easter is that it is the first Sunday after the full Moon that occurs on or after the spring equinox. If the full Moon falls on a Sunday then Easter is the next Sunday. (This is based on Solar reckoning, and is of pagan origins, dealing with fertility)

The difference in the dates of Passover and Easter is based on one being a specific calendar day and the other being determined by the solar cycle. For the Jews, Passover always begins on the 15th day of their month of Abib and runs for 8 days.

Click to expand...

good point.

For Jews the Passover lamb was always to be eaten on Nissan 14, the first day of the feast of unleavened bread was always a annual/ceremonial Sabbath -- was always Nissan 15.

High Sabbath happened when two Sabbaths landed on the same day.

So in this case Saturday was the weekly, seventh-day Sabbath and it was also Nissan 15 - the first day of the Feast of Unleavened bread - an annual Sabbath of "Holy convocation" where no secular work could be done for the entire day.

eleos1954 said:

Day One	Day Two	Day Three
Night	Day	Night	Day	Night	Day
FRI starts at sundown on Thursday	FRI ends at sundown	SAT starts at sundown on Friday	SAT ends at sundown	SUN starts at sundown on Saturday	SUN ends at sundown
Crucifixion	Sabbath	Resurrection

This table indicates that Jesus died on Good Friday; that was day one. In total, day one includes the day and the previous night, even though Jesus died in the day. So, although only part of Friday was left, that was the first day and night to be counted. Saturday was day two. Jesus rose in the morning of the Sunday. That was day three. Thus, by Jewish counting, we have three days and nights, yet Jesus rose on the third day. The Jews reckoned any part of a "day" as a day.

Click to expand...

True - because it is stated in Luke 24 near evening on Sunday "today is the third day since all these things happened". That only works with inclusive reckoning since the chapter makes it clear that Jesus had be resurrected by early morning on that day.

Soulx3 said:

On February 21st, 1944, Jesus dictated to Maria Valtorta His commentary on His Resurrection. A year later, on April 1st, 1945, Maria received from Jesus a vision of the scene of His Resurrection, which she described in writing in excessive detail as a first-hand witness.
Below is an excerpt from Jesus's comment:

Jesus says:



Maria's writings were compiled into a multi-volume book entitled, "The Gospels As They Were Revealed To Me," or "The Poem of the Man-God." You can read the scene of Jesus's resurrection and His commentary on it, as well as other scenes from His public life, etc., in full for free here.​

Click to expand...

Interesting --

Desire of Ages: Page 779

"The night of the first day of the week had worn slowly away. The darkest hour, just before daybreak, had come. Christ was still a prisoner in His narrow tomb. The great stone was in its place; the Roman seal was unbroken; the Roman guards were keeping their watch. And there were unseen watchers. Hosts of evil angels were gathered about the place. Had it been possible, the prince of darkness with his apostate army would have kept forever sealed the tomb that held the Son of God. But a heavenly host surrounded the sepulcher. Angels that excel in strength were guarding the tomb, and waiting to welcome the Prince of life.


"And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven." Clothed with the panoply of God, this angel left the heavenly courts. The bright beams of God's glory went before him, and illuminated his pathway. "His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: and for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men."


Now, priests and rulers, where is the power of your guard? Brave soldiers that have never been afraid of human power are now as captives taken without sword or spear. The face they look upon is not the face

Begin page [780]

of mortal warrior; it is the face of the mightiest of the Lord's host. This messenger is he who fills the position from which Satan fell. It is he who on the hills of Bethlehem proclaimed Christ's birth. The earth trembles at his approach, the hosts of darkness flee, and as he rolls away the stone, heaven seems to come down to the earth. The soldiers see him removing the stone as he would a pebble, and hear him cry, Son of God, come forth; Thy Father calls Thee. They see Jesus come forth from the grave, and hear Him proclaim over the rent sepulcher, "I am the resurrection, and the life." As He comes forth in majesty and glory, the angel host bow low in adoration before the Redeemer, and welcome Him with songs of praise.


An earthquake marked the hour when Christ laid down His life, and another earthquake witnessed the moment when He took it up in triumph. He who had vanquished death and the grave came forth from the tomb with the tread of a conqueror, amid the reeling of the earth, the flashing of lightning, and the roaring of thunder. When He shall come to the earth again, He will shake "not the earth only, but also heaven." "The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage." "The heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll;" "the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up." But "the Lord will be the hope of His people, and the strength of the children of Israel." Hebrews 12:26; Isaiah 24:20; 34:4; 2 Peter 3:10; Joel 3:16.


At the death of Jesus the soldiers had beheld the earth wrapped in darkness at midday; but at the resurrection they saw the brightness of the angels illuminate the night, and heard the inhabitants of heaven singing with great joy and triumph: Thou hast vanquished Satan and the powers of darkness; Thou hast swallowed up death in victory!


Christ came forth from the tomb glorified, and the Roman guard beheld Him. Their eyes were riveted upon the face of Him whom they had so recently mocked and derided. In this glorified Being they beheld the prisoner whom they had seen in the judgment hall, the one for whom they had plaited a crown of thorns. This was the One who had stood unresisting before Pilate and Herod, His form lacerated by the cruel scourge. This was He who had been nailed to the cross, at whom the priests and rulers, full of self-satisfaction, had wagged their heads, saying, "He saved others; Himself He cannot save." Matthew 27:42. This was He who had been laid in Joseph's new tomb. The decree of heaven had

Begin Page [781]

loosed the captive. Mountains piled upon mountains over His sepulcher could not have prevented Him from coming forth.

At sight of the angels and the glorified Saviour the Roman guard had fainted and become as dead men. When the heavenly train was hidden from their view, they arose to their feet, and as quickly as their trembling limbs could carry them, made their way to the gate of the garden. Staggering like drunken men, they hurried on to the city, telling those whom they met the wonderful news. They were making their way to Pilate, but their report had been carried to the Jewish authorities, and the chief priests and rulers sent for them to be brought first into their presence. A strange appearance those soldiers presented. Trembling with fear, their faces colorless, they bore testimony to the resurrection of Christ. The soldiers told all, just as they had seen it; they had not had time to think or speak anything but the truth. With painful utterance they said, It was the Son of God who was crucified; we have heard an angel proclaiming Him as the Majesty of heaven, the King of glory.


The faces of the priests were as those of the dead. Caiaphas tried to speak. His lips moved, but they uttered no sound. The soldiers were about to leave the council room, when a voice stayed them. Caiaphas had at last found speech. Wait, wait, he said. Tell no one the things you have seen.


A lying report was then given to the soldiers. "Say ye," said the priests, "His disciples came by night, and stole Him away while we

Begin page [782]

slept." Here the priests overreached themselves. How could the soldiers say that the disciples had stolen the body while they slept? If they were asleep, how could they know? And if the disciples had been proved guilty of stealing Christ's body, would not the priests have been first to condemn them? Or if the sentinels had slept at the tomb, would not the priests have been foremost in accusing them to Pilate?


The soldiers were horrified at the thought of bringing upon themselves the charge of sleeping at their post. This was an offense punishable with death. Should they bear false witness, deceiving the people, and placing their own lives in peril? Had they not kept their weary watch with sleepless vigilance? How could they stand the trial, even for the sake of money, if they perjured themselves?


In order to silence the testimony they feared, the priests promised to secure the safety of the guard, saying that Pilate would not desire to have such a report circulated any more than they did. The Roman soldiers sold their integrity to the Jews for money. They came in before the priests burdened with a most startling message of truth; they went out with a burden of money, and on their tongues a lying report which had been framed for them by the priests.


Meanwhile the report of Christ's resurrection had been carried to Pilate. Though Pilate was responsible for having given Christ up to die, he had been comparatively unconcerned. While he had condemned the Saviour unwillingly, and with a feeling of pity, he had felt no real compunction until now. In terror he now shut himself within his house, determined to see no one. But the priests made their way into his presence, told the story which they had invented, and urged him to overlook the sentinels' neglect of duty. Before consenting to this, he himself privately questioned the guard. They, fearing for their own safety, dared not conceal anything, and Pilate drew from them an account of all that had taken place. He did not prosecute the matter further, but from that time there was no peace for him.


When Jesus was laid in the grave, Satan triumphed. He dared to hope that the Saviour would not take up His life again. He claimed the Lord's body, and set his guard about the tomb, seeking to hold Christ a prisoner. He was bitterly angry when his angels fled at the approach of the heavenly messenger. When he saw Christ come forth in triumph, he knew that his kingdom would have an end, and that he must finally die.

Begin Page [785]


The priests, in putting Christ to death, had made themselves the tools of Satan. Now they were entirely in his power. They were entangled in a snare from which they saw no escape but in continuing their warfare against Christ. When they heard the report of His resurrection, they feared the wrath of the people. They felt that their own lives were in danger. The only hope for them was to prove Christ an impostor by denying that He had risen. They bribed the soldiers, and secured Pilate's silence. They spread their lying reports far and near. But there were witnesses whom they could not silence. Many had heard of the soldiers' testimony to Christ's resurrection. And certain of the dead who came forth with Christ appeared to many, and declared that He had risen. Reports were brought to the priests of persons who had seen these risen ones, and heard their testimony. The priests and rulers were in continual dread, lest in walking the streets, or within the privacy of their own homes, they should come face to face with Christ. They felt that there was no safety for them. Bolts and bars were but poor protection against the Son of God. By day and by night that awful scene in the judgment hall, when they had cried, "His blood be on us, and on our children," was before them. Matthew 27:25. Nevermore would the memory of that scene fade from their minds. Nevermore would peaceful sleep come to their pillows.


When the voice of the mighty angel was heard at Christ's tomb, saying, Thy Father calls Thee, the Saviour came forth from the grave by the life that was in Himself. Now was proved the truth of His words, "I lay down My life, that I might take it again. . . . I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again." Now was fulfilled the prophecy He had spoken to the priests and rulers, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." John 10:17, 18; 2:19.


Over the rent sepulcher of Joseph, Christ had proclaimed in triumph, "I am the resurrection, and the life." These words could be spoken only by the Deity. All created beings live by the will and power of God. They are dependent recipients of the life of God. From the highest seraph to the humblest animate being, all are replenished from the Source of life. Only He who is one with God could say, I have power to lay down My life, and I have power to take it again. In His divinity, Christ possessed the power to break the bonds of death."

================ end of quoted section

Found on the internet - The Desire of Ages, by Ellen G. White. Chapter 81: \"The Lord Is Risen\"

eleos1954 said:

Day One	Day Two	Day Three
Night	Day	Night	Day	Night	Day
FRI starts at sundown on Thursday	FRI ends at sundown	SAT starts at sundown on Friday	SAT ends at sundown	SUN starts at sundown on Saturday	SUN ends at sundown
Crucifixion	Sabbath	Resurrection

This table indicates that Jesus died on Good Friday; that was day one. In total, day one includes the day and the previous night, even though Jesus died in the day. So, although only part of Friday was left, that was the first day and night to be counted. Saturday was day two. Jesus rose in the morning of the Sunday. That was day three. Thus, by Jewish counting, we have three days and nights, yet Jesus rose on the third day. The Jews reckoned any part of a "day" as a day.

Click to expand...

How or where did you make that table?

JSRG said:

That's just assuming the conclusion (that John isn't referring to the weekly Sabbath) and reading it into the text. You can't use this as an "example" of the day after Passover inherently being considered a Sabbath (whether or not it's on Saturday) because the very question at hand is whether that's what it's doing. John can just as easily be understood to mean that because this Sabbath (Saturday) also happened to fall on the day after Passover, it was of greater importance than a normal Sabbath, as you're getting two important holy days in one. And indeed, that was the common interpretation of it, that it was a "high day" because an important holy day happened to fall onto the Saturday Sabbath.

Click to expand...

John 19:31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

JSRG said:

And that's the problem, once again. People claim the day after Passover was referred to as a Sabbath or high Sabbath, but examples of such aren't provided, aside from John 19:31 which is of no help because that's the exact verse whose interpretation is in question.

Click to expand...

Lev 23 makes it clear that it is a day of holy convocation and a day without secular labor (a rest day) -- which is exactly what the 7th day Sabbath is in Lev 23:3.

IN vs 3 - the weekly Sabbath is a day of holy convocation, and a day of rest - no secular work.

In Lev 23:7 7 In the first day ye shall have an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein.

So then the first day of the feast of Unleavened bread is the same as the weekly Sabbath in its observance as a "day of holy convocation" where no secular work may be done on the entire day.

When the two coincide - then it is a "High Sabbath" --

But out of curiosity - what is wrong with this? Does such a scenario create "a problem"??

BobRyan said:

John 19:31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

Lev 23 makes it clear that it is a day of holy convocation and a day without secular labor (a rest day) -- which is exactly what the 7th day Sabbath is in Lev 23:3.

IN vs 3 - the weekly Sabbath is a day of holy convocation, and a day of rest - no secular work.

In Lev 23:7 7 In the first day ye shall have an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein.

So then the first day of the feast of Unleavened bread is the same as the weekly Sabbath in its observance as a "day of holy convocation" where no secular work may be done on the entire day.

When the two coincide - then it is a "High Sabbath" --

But out of curiosity - what is wrong with this? Does such a scenario create "a problem"??

Click to expand...

It doesn't create a problem at all; I think you may have misunderstood me. What you offer is what I described as the standard interpretation of it, that it was regarded as a high day (or in less literal translations, a particularly important Sabbath) because the important first day of Unleavened Bread fell on the Sabbath.

The claim some make, however, is that when it says "high day" it refers not to that the first day of Unleavened Bread falling upon a Sabbath (thereby making it a particularly important Sabbath), but that the first day of Unleavened Bread counts as a Sabbath even if it doesn't fall on Saturday. This claim is necessary for the idea that the Crucifixion took place on Thursday or Wednesday to work, because the Bible is very explicit the next day was a Sabbath. And the claim is therefore that the Sabbath it refers to in the Gospels (and specifically as a high day in John) is not the weekly Sabbath on Saturday, but rather the first day of Unleavened Bread which was on Thursday or Friday.

The issue is that I've never seen anyone offer evidence that the first day of Unleavened Bread was considered or referred to as a Sabbath irrespective of the day of the week it's on at the time the New Testament was written. Leviticus 23:7 commands people to do no servile work, which is similar to the Sabbath, but never refers to it as a Sabbath, even though multiple other holidays are explicitly referred to as Sabbaths in that very chapter (see Leviticus 23:24, Leviticus 23:32, and Leviticus 23:39).

It is of course possible that, even if the Bible doesn't refer to the first day of Unleavened Bread as a Sabbath, people took to calling it such due to the command of not doing servile work. The problem is that despite people confidently claiming that it was called a Sabbath, no evidence is ever offered of anyone referring to it as such outside of the speculative claim that's what John 19:31 refers to. So I've been asking if anyone can point to definite examples of it being referred to as such back then.

JSRG said:

It doesn't create a problem at all; I think you may have misunderstood me. What you offer is what I described as the standard interpretation of it, that it was regarded as a high day (or in less literal translations, a particularly important Sabbath) because the important first day of Unleavened Bread fell on the Sabbath.

The claim some make, however, is that when it says "high day" it refers not to that the first day of Unleavened Bread falling upon a Sabbath (thereby making it a particularly important Sabbath), but that the first day of Unleavened Bread counts as a Sabbath even if it doesn't fall on Saturday.

Click to expand...

Well I agree with both except I don't think there is any reference to the annual Sabbaths being called "a high Sabbath" in the OT.

Some were called Sabbath and they were called "a day of holy convocation, with no secular work" - but I don't recall them referred to as a "high Sabbath".

But in the gospels we have "Passover" and "Feast of unleavened bread" and "the Sabbath" which sounds to me like the authors are specifically distinguishing between the weekly Sabbath and the Passover and the Feast. Even if they occur on the same day it appears that the distinction is being made by the NT Gospel writers.

JSRG said:

This claim is necessary for the idea that the Crucifixion took place on Thursday or Wednesday to work, because the Bible is very explicit the next day was a Sabbath. And the claim is therefore that the Sabbath it refers to in the Gospels (and specifically as a high day in John) is not the weekly Sabbath on Saturday, but rather the first day of Unleavened Bread which was on Thursday or Friday.

Click to expand...

The problem I see with a non-Friday crucifixion is that if Christ were crucified on Wednesday then why not go to the Tomb on Friday ? Why wait until Sunday?

JSRG said:

The issue is that I've never seen anyone offer evidence that the first day of Unleavened Bread was considered or referred to as a Sabbath

Click to expand...

Well Lev 23 gives it the two distinctives for a Sabbath as follows - but as noted above the NT gospel writers seem to be addressing each piece explicitly rather than "all of it as Sabbath"

So then in the annual feast day 1 is
1. A day of holy convocation, solemn assembly
2. A day of rest where no secular work could be done.

yet we also have reference to "THE Sabbath" as a reference to the weekly Sabbath . Ex 20:10 "THE seventh day is THE Sabbath of the Lord.. He blessed THE Sabbath day and made it holy".

Unlike the others THE Sabbath is not called "The 7th day Sabbath" or "the Sabbath of Creation week" -- it is just "THE Sabbath".

Interesting that Deut 5:22 says God spoke the TEN from Sinai "and added no more". Such that only the TEN are kept inside the Ark, meaning only one Sabbath - the weekly Sabbath is kept inside the Ark.

In any case - I agree with the Friday crucifixion.

JSRG said:

irrespective of the day of the week it's on at the time the New Testament was written. Leviticus 23:7 commands people to do no servile work, which is similar to the Sabbath, but never refers to it as a Sabbath, even though multiple other holidays are explicitly referred to as Sabbaths

Click to expand...

Agreed.

I just don't know "what other thing" one might do on the first day of Unleavened Bread -- to make it a "Sabbath" that was not already said about it being a day of holy convocation, and a day of rest - with no secular work.

Kokavkrystallos said:

I know it's "Good Friday" and many celebrate the crucifixion as being on a Friday, but it really couldn't have been because of the 3 days and 3 nights just wouldn't fit. You'd have 2 days and 2 nights only. Part of Friday before sundown could count as a day, then the night = 1 day, 1 night. Then Sabbath day and Sabbath night = 2 days, 2 nights, but then Jesus is already gone when the women get to the tomb on the first day of the week (Sunday) at or before dawn.
Even Matthew 28:1 shows it may have even been earlier than that: "In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week"
Since the end of the Sabbath would be sundown on Saturday, some have made the supposition that they went to the tomb

"“as it began to dusk and come toward the first day of the week.” This event, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary coming to view the tomb, is not recorded in any Gospel but Matthew.

The translations differ about this verse, so to properly understand it we must pay strict attention to the Greek text, the Jewish customs, and the event itself. This event occurred on Saturday, Nisan 17, in the late evening, just as the Jewish day Sunday was “dawning,” i.e., starting, that is just before the Saturday Sabbath ended at sunset and Sunday, the first day of the week, began. The fact that Matthew records that the Sabbath was just ending at sunset tells us that Matthew is written from the point of view of Jewish timing, not Roman timing. The Jews began their new day at sunset, while the Romans began their new day at midnight (like Westerners still do). This verse is not speaking about Sunday morning when the sun came up, as many people believe.

Although many translations have the word “dawn,” in this verse, we must not confuse that with the Western view of “dawn,” i.e., when the sun comes up. To the Jews, a new day “dawned,” or started, at sunset. The Greek text reads in a way that seems very difficult when translated literally, which is due to the idioms involved. A very literal rendering of the Greek text is: “Now late of the [on the] Sabbaths, at the dawn toward the first of the Sabbaths.” This is a very difficult sentence, and to understand it we need to know two things: the first thing is that “Sabbaths” (the plural of Sabbath) was the regular Jewish idiom for a week. The second thing is that the word “dawned” is the Greek word epiphōskō (#2020 ἐπιφώσκω; pronounced eh-pee-'phōs-kō), which literally means, “to grow light,” and it was used of the “dawn” or “beginning” of something. In the United States, we have the same basic idiom and use “dawn” for the beginning of something. When something brand new is coming that will make significant changes, someone might say, “A new day is dawning,” even though it is technically not either a new “day,” nor is it “dawn.”

[For more on epiphōskō, see " style="color: rgb(45, 123, 255); text-decoration: none; cursor: pointer; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); font-family: inherit;">commentary on Luke 23:54.]

According to Jewish reckoning of time, the new day was beginning, or “dawning,” at sunset on the weekly Sabbath. Thus, sunset on Saturday started Sunday and the new week. Many English versions read “dawn” in this verse, but to understand the verse, we must realize that the sun is going down and the new day is starting; the verse is not saying that the sun is coming up. About this verse, Robertson writes: “This careful chronological statement according to Jewish days clearly means that before the Sabbath was over, that is before six PM, this visit by the women was made ‘to see the sepulcher.’”a Robertson is correct that this is a “careful chronological statement,” and not paying attention to it is one of the reasons people wrongly think the Bible contradicts itself in the timing of some of the events that occurred after the death of Jesus.

If we read the verse in an amplified form with notes included, we get: “Now late of the [on the] Sabbaths [the week, i.e., as the week was ending on Saturday night], at the dawn [the ‘beginning’] toward the first of the Sabbaths [i.e., at the beginning of the next week, which started at sunset Saturday night when Sunday, the next week began].”

Matthew 28, REV Bible and Commentary

Matthew 28 REV - Now late on the Sabbath day, as it began to dusk and come toward the first day of the week - Bible verse

www.revisedenglishversion.com

There is this that supports a Thursday crucifixion, however, she does not take into consideration the "dawn" being Saturday at sundown:

"The Passover Sabbath
The Feast of Unleavened Bread, also known as the Feast of the Passover, was celebrated in remembrance of the Israelites being delivered from Egyptian bondage. This feast is set on Nisan 15 (Leviticus 23:6) and could fall on any day of the week. This feast day, preceded by a day of preparation, is a High Sabbath (a day of rest). It’s also called a High Day.

John 19:31 Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

John 19:31 says that Jesus was crucified on the Preparation Day before the High Day Sabbath of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. This places the date of Jesus’ crucifixion on Nisan 14. Since the Passover feast is set according to a specific date on the calendar, the question becomes, on what day of the week was the feast day that year?

Three Reasons for a Thursday Crucifixion​

I (Shari Abbott, Reasons for Hope* Jesus) hold to a Thursday crucifixion, and I will share three reasons and biblical support for this. I will also explain why a Wednesday or Friday crucifixion day does not fit with what the Bible reveals."

Was Jesus Crucified on Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday?

Was Jesus crucified on a Friday? Did He die on Wednesday or Thursday? What does the Bible reveal? It might surprise you.

reasonsforhopejesus.com

And here is the Wednesday crucifixion, which I personally tend to believe is the likely one.
"The Bible indicates that Jesus had to be crucified on Wednesday and arose sometime in the Saturday evening hours before the end of the Sabbath, contrary to the popular belief that He was crucified on Friday. This is further supported by the fact that the Jewish day begins and ends at 6 P.M. (sunset), with the daytime hours beginning at the “First hour” from dawn until 8 A.M. and lasting through the “Twelfth hour” of 6 P.M. to sunset. Additionally, the six days of Passover were being observed, culminating with the yearly High Sabbath (Leviticus 23), a three-day feast beginning on Wednesday sunset."

Was Jesus Crucified on Friday or Wednesday?

Scripture trumps tradition when it comes to Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection. The Bible states Jesus was crucified on Wednesday and arose Saturday.

mesabiblestudy.com

Wednesday is also taught in many Messianic assemblies.
Keep in mind also this:
Easter has nothing to do with Passover nor does Easter have anything to do with any of the Jewish festivals. Pesach or Passover is the word that should have been used in Acts 12:4.

But, bottom line with all this is the Gospel, that Jesus died on the cross, was buried, and rose from the dead on the third day. His death on the cross redeems us, His blood cleanses our sin; His resurrection justifies us (Romans 4:25)

Click to expand...

Response to the "Sign of Jonah."

(Kudos to JSRG for your contribution to this discussion)

Jesus never said he would be dead for 3 days and 3 nights. That is the popular assumption based on the “sign” he gave to the Jewish authorities. But Jesus always spoke to the Scribes and Pharisees in parables, because it was not given to them to understand his coming and his ministry. That includes the parable of Jonah in the belly of the fish.

But he spoke plainly to the disciples. And there is nothing in the Scriptures which state that Jesus would be dead and buried for three days and three nights. But there are numerous passages where Jesus told his disciples and others (such as the two on the road to Emmaus) that he would be arrested, beaten, rejected by the Jewish elders, would be handed over to the Romans and would be crucified, suffering in agony for six long hours, and be killed, and on the third day after suffering ALL THESE THINGS he would rise, not the third day after being placed in the tomb. Go back and read again Matthew 16:21, Mark 8:31, Luke 9:22

Perhaps clearest of all is the testimony of those two men on the road to Emmaus whom Jesus appeared to them on that first Easter Sunday. Remember? Jesus asked them what they were talking about that made them so sad? After suggesting that he must be a stranger in Jerusalem if he had not heard all about this, Cleopas says:

"Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him, but we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done." Luke 24:17-21

The third day since what things were done? They didn’t even mention the hours Jesus lay dead in the tomb. It was the third day since Jesus was arrested and rejected by the chief priests and rulers (Thursday night) and delivered to the Romans and beaten (Friday morning early) and crucified (9:00 A.M. Friday morning) and died (3:00 P.M. Friday afternoon). These men were speaking to Jesus on the very day Jesus was resurrected, and it was the third day since ALL THESE THINGS had been done, not the third day since he was buried.

And Jesus too, in the very last words he spoke to his disciples before his ascension, told them, "Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day." Luke 24:46 Jesus’ suffering began Thursday night when he was betrayed with a kiss by one of his own, was arrested, bound, accused, struck across the face, spat on, and rejected by the elders of his own countrymen, all that on Thursday night. And then Friday morning, beaten, and then crucified, suffering six long hours. Once he was buried on Friday evening, his suffering was over.

To explain what Jesus meant about being in “the heart of the earth,” he was referring to the prophecy in Psalm 74:12: “For God is my King of old, working salvation in the midst (Hebrew qereb-heart) of the earth. The “heart of the earth” was the capital city of the Holy Land … Jerusalem. Surely Jesus being beaten even before he was crucified was “working salvation,” since it is “by his stripes” that “we are healed,” and it is by the “shedding of his blood” on the cross that we are “saved.” ALL THESE THINGS he suffered was Jesus "working salvation in the heart of the earth."

So I would ask that you reconsider all this, starting with the possibly incorrect assumption about what events would take place during the three days and three nights before Jesus’ resurrection on Easter Sunday.

In Christ,
Deborah

"Από τότε ήρξατο ο Ιησούς δεικνύειν τοις μαθηταίς αυτού, ότι δει αυτόν απελθείν εις Ιεροσόλυμα και πολλά παθείν από των πρεσβυτέρων και αρχιερέων και γραμματέων και αποκτανθήναι και ΤΗ ΤΡΙΤΗ ΗΜΕΡΑ εγερθήναι"

"From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and ON THE THIRD DAY be raised." Matthew 16:21

Jesus was raised on the first day of the week (Sunday) so the crucifixion was indeed on a Friday which agrees with Luke 23:54, Mark 15:42 and Matthew 27:62 that the following day was a Sabbath (Saturday)

Kokavkrystallos said:

"The Passover Sabbath
The Feast of Unleavened Bread, also known as the Feast of the Passover, was celebrated in remembrance of the Israelites being delivered from Egyptian bondage. This feast is set on Nisan 15 (Leviticus 23:6) and could fall on any day of the week. This feast day, preceded by a day of preparation, is a High Sabbath (a day of rest). It’s also called a High Day.

Click to expand...

Response to the "High Sabbath" and "the Preparation"

Festival sabbaths were not “high” sabbaths. The festival sabbaths were “smaller” or “lesser” sabbaths, meaning, they were not as strict as the weekly sabbath. On the festival sabbaths the Jews were allowed to do all the work that was necessary in order to observe the feast; carrying the sacrifice to and from the temple, lighting a fire, carrying water, cooking, setting out the food and dishes to eat, etc. Even the shops that sold those things necessary to prepare the feast were allowed to be open on festivals sabbaths, including the markets and money changers in the Temple. There were many thousands of pilgrims from distant lands who had to purchase each day everything they needed for the feast that day.

The festival sabbaths being “smaller” or “lesser” (fewer restrictions) actually goes all the way back to the institution of the Passover: "And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and you shall keep it a feast to the Lord throughout your generations; you shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever. Seven days shall you eat unleavened bread; even the first day you shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eats leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day shall be cut off from Israel. And in the first day there shall be an holy convocation, and in the seventh day there shall be an holy convocation to you; no manner of work shall be done in them, save that which every man must eat, that only may be done of you." Exodus 12:14-16

So the first days of the festivals were sabbaths, as well as the seventh days of the week-long festivals, but they were “lesser” or “smaller” sabbaths that allowed that work to be done that was necessary to keep the feast (which was after all a meal, in which they ate of the sacrifices that were required to be offered up each day).

There was always a weekly sabbath that would fall on one of the feast days of Unleavened Bread and of Tabernacles. Those festivals lasted seven days, so a Saturday Sabbath would always fall on one of those seven days. Also, any of the other festival days could fall in any particular year on the weekly Sabbath. So there were commandments that governed those occasions and gave rise to the Sabbath being a “high” or “greater.”

If it happened that a feast day fell on the weekly Sabbath, then the weekly Sabbath commandments superseded the festival commandments, and no work of any kind could be done on that day at all, not even the work necessary to prepare the feast. This is what made the weekly Sabbath a “high” day, that the weekly Sabbath commandments were “higher” than the festival commandments. So the food for the feast had to be prepared the day before, on “the Preparation,” the name for the day of the week we call Friday, and the only day that was ever called “the Preparation.” The days before feasts were never called “the preparation,” they were always called the “eve” of Passover or the “eve” of Tabernacles, etc. It wasn’t necessary to have a “preparation day” for the festivals, not even for the festival sabbaths because the Law allowed all the work necessary to prepare the feast to be made on that day, even on festival sabbaths.
The “high” day John spoke of was the weekly Sabbath, Saturday, that would begin at sunset when no work of any kind could be done, not even the work necessary to observe the feast. So in the year of the Lord’s Passion, preparations for the 2nd day of unleavened bread which fell on the weekly Sabbath had to be made on Friday and the people had to rest from any work of any kind the following day. Which is why the women could not tend to the body of Jesus until Sunday morning, and would have done so as soon as it was light enough to see, had they not found the tomb empty. Both Mark and Luke make it clear that it was “very early in the morning” of “the first day of the week” (very early Sunday morning) when the women came to the tomb, and John also says they came “while it was yet dark,” and Mark adds “when the sabbath was past,” all of which means it was before daybreak on Sunday morning, not Saturday evening before sunset while it was still daylight.

In Christ,
Deborah