The Hebrew Idiom Behind The Resurrection Day

[Daniel Gregg]

The Hebrew Idiom Behind The Resurrection Day [1] The passages translated ‘first day of the week’ in the four Evangelists, Acts, and 1Corinthians, are traditional mistranslations whose design is to suppress the fact that the resurrection of Yeshua (Jesus) was on the seventh day Sabbath. Anyone who can read Greek knows that they say, ‘one day of the Sabbaths’ ...... Finish reading here: The Hebrew Idiom Behind The Resurrection Day Then come back here and comment!

 

[visionary]

"Day one of the sabbaths" [sabbaton] is the start of the count of Omer which is also the day of the wave sheaf or first fruits [an annual sabbath]. The phrase “first day of the week” is derived from the Greek phrase “mia ton Sabbaton” which literally means “one of the Sabbaths.” Since the Jews have no names for the weekdays, they designated them with reference to the Sabbath.

Consider Luke 18:12, a parable in which a Pharisee said, “I fast twice a week…” The italicized phrase is derived from the Greek dis tou sabbatou. Yeshua was not saying that the Pharisee fasted twice on the Sabbath day, but that he fasted twice a week.

Matthew 28:1 says, “In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week.” The italicized phrase is again derived from the Greek “mia ton Sabbaton,” which literally means “one of the Sabbaths.” We all know that Yeshua was raised on the first day of the week, or Saturday night when the Sabbath ends, so clearly, this could not be referring to the Sabbath. Mark 16:1 says, “And when the Sabbath was past,” and then in verse 9, “Now when Yeshua was risen early the first day of the week.” We know that the earliest part of the first day of the week according to Jewish reckoning is just after sunset. But we all know that it wasn't til morning that Luke 24:1 says “Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning,” indicating that even the disciples do not know when Yeshua resurrected but that they know it was sometime before dawn.

 

[Daniel Gregg]

You shouldn't be mentioning the Luke 18:12 because you know it is not relevant.

 

[AbbaLove]

To be sure there is an enormous degree of religious opposition to these points, because the Church has a tradition to defend. The Jews rejected Messiah because of their traditions on who could be the Messiah and who could not be the Messiah. If tradition deceived the Jews, then tradition can deceive anyone. The Church has a tradition that the Torah was abolished. For this reason, the Church married itself to Sunday, in order to divorce the Sabbath. ( The Hebrew Idiom Behind The Resurrection Day )

Is the following questionable translation (if in fact) an example of a true Hebrew (Rabbinic Judaism) idiom?

Mark 16:1 says, “And when the Sabbath was past,” and then in verse 9, “Now when Yeshua was risen early the first day of the week.” We know that the earliest part of the first day of the week according to Jewish reckoning is just after sunset. But we all know that it wasn't til morning that Luke 24:1 says “Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning,” indicating that even the disciples do not know when Yeshua resurrected but that they know it was sometime before dawn.

Not only sometime before dawn, but we presume sometime between sunset and early in the morning (for example, 12 hours into a 24 hour Jewish day) of the first day of the week. Is the so-called Hebrew 'idiom' article suggesting that Mark 16:1 and Luke 24:1 was so purposely mistranslated by the Church in order to distance itself from Judaism?

The question still remains whether or not these two verses are possibly a purposeful mistranslation or a reliably accurate translation of an actual event.

 

[jamie2014]

Not only sometime before dawn, but we presume sometime between sunset and early in the morning (for example, 12 hours into a 24 hour Jewish day) of the first day of the week. Is the so-called Hebrew 'idiom' article suggesting that Mark 16:1 and Luke 24:1 was so purposely mistranslated by the Church in order to distance itself from Judaism?

The NT was written by Jews from a Jewish perspective but it seems most "Christians" try to understand the NT from a Roman perspective. That just does not work and so-called Christianity is the result of a different gospel than what Jesus preached to the Jews of his day.

Luke says that as Jesus' body was laid in the tomb the Sabbath began. This Sabbath was not the weekly Sabbath, it was Nisan 15.

Mark says that when the Sabbath was past the women bought spices to anoint the body.

Luke goes on to say the women prepared their spices and rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment.

Three nights and three days later from his burial Jesus was raised from the dead as the first day of the weeks began.

Not to get into a debate on Sivan 6, this fulfilled the law regarding the Sheaf of the wave offering. On the next day after seven weeks from Jesus' resurrection was Pentecost.

 

[pshun2404]

The "first day of the weeks" (the counting of the omer), begins on "firstfruits" which is always the week day following the 7th day Sabbath in Unleavened Bread.

 

[BukiRob]

The NT was written by Jews from a Jewish perspective but it seems most "Christians" try to understand the NT from a Roman perspective. That just does not work and so-called Christianity is the result of a different gospel than what Jesus preached to the Jews of his day.

Luke says that as Jesus' body was laid in the tomb the Sabbath began. This Sabbath was not the weekly Sabbath, it was Nisan 15.

Mark says that when the Sabbath was past the women bought spices to anoint the body.

Luke goes on to say the women prepared their spices and rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment.

Three nights and three days later from his burial Jesus was raised from the dead as the first day of the weeks began.

Not to get into a debate on Sivan 6, this fulfilled the law regarding the Sheaf of the wave offering. On the next day after seven weeks from Jesus' resurrection was Pentecost.

AMEN! Messiah IS the ETERNAL Passover sacrifice. He was not crucified on a Friday as many are taught and we know this to be CERTAIN because Messiah proclaim to the scribes and pharisee's that since they are wicked they only sign they will get is the sign of Jonah (who was in the belly of the fish for 3 FULL days and 3 FULL nights) anything short of a full day does not count. Jews consider any part of the day prior to sunset to be a full day. Following the scriptural decree a Friday weekly sabbath Crucifixion has Yeshua rising on a Monday and we KNOW that is not the case!

Yeshua was in the grave for 3 full days and 3 full nights. A Friday Crucifixion has him rising on Monday and THAT is impossible. Any part of the day prior to sunset can be counted as a full day. Yeshua with a Friday Crucifixion is in the grave Friday (day1) Friday (night start of Saturday Shabbat 1) All day Saturday 2, Sat Night (start of Sunday 2) All day Sunday3 and all night Sunday (start of Monday3)

We KNOW for certain that the women rose on the 1st day of the week BEFORE sunrise which would have been Sunday morning before sunrise and he had ALREADY RISEN.

Wednesday Crucifixion has him in the grave before sunset Thurs (prior to sunset)day 1/ Thurs night 1,---> Since this is the start of Nissan 15 it is a SABBATH. Friday day2/ Friday night 2(Passover Sabbath ends at sunset but the weekly Sabbath starts at sunset so the women STILL can not go to the tomb ) Saturday day 3/ Saturday night (Weekly Sabbath ENDS at sunset they STILL cant go to the tomb since it is dark.) They rise BEFORE sunrise on Sunday and run to the tomb only to discover Yeshua has already risen!

We find one of the women Mary finds Yeshua in the "garden" What is he doing there?? The wave offering of First Fruits in whom Yeshua IS the First Fruit!!!!

 

[ROEH]

Agreed, He rose Sabbath eve.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Agreed, He rose Sabbath eve.

i know what i think you mean, (He rose at the end of Sabbath/beginning of first day --- 7th day at sunset)

but in english , for bad example new years eve is the eve BEFORE new years
and thanksgiving eve (would be) the eve BEFORE thanksgiving
so (again, in english usage) Sabbath eve may be ascertained to mean the evening of 6th day(the eve before Sabbath).

i hate english, and the greek abominations that got into and sometimes took over the original Hebrew Truth,
but for now i'm stuck with english most of the time. (and thankfully not stuck with the greek errors predominant throughout christendom in the world)......

 

[bhug]

The record according to Mark ended with Christ dead and in the tomb, the resurection was added decades later to bring it into alignment with the other synoptics.
Mk 16:8 "And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid."
(at that time no one knew that the resurrection would be part of the kerygma, also a woman speaking publicly to a man not her husband, unbidden, was a social gaffe in conservative Judaea.)
The next 12 verses, written many decades later, have the women going right away and saying something to the Disciples, so the Record of Mark was redacted and repaired so vss 9-20 were added (c150) to bring Mark into like with the other two Records;
1 Cor 15 shows that resurrection appearances were part of the earliest Paulian dogma. Especially for those who date Mark later than 1 Corinthians (c70 vs. 50-55)

The nicea creed (4th century AD) has Iesous suffers death, was buried and rose again on the third day in accordance with the scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
No 40 days there.

Prior to the ascension none of the Disciples well understood the ministry, Yeshua did not want to be worshiped there, no temple built for him.
In post-exilic prophetic literature the hope in a Messiah is found only in the first two prophets of the post-exilic community, Haggai and Zechariah, and in Deutero-Zechariah, ch. 9, which, probably, dates from the time of the Seleucids. Haggai and Zechariah see in Zerubbabel the promised "sprout of David"; but they state merely that he will rebuild the Temple and attain great eminence as a ruler (Hag. 2: 23; Zech. 3: 8, 6: 12).

The future Messiah from a Jewish pov is not the same as that espoused in gentile Christanity.


The nt (New Testament) is NOT thematically identical to 'the Way,' Yeshua's interpetation of the Kingdom of G, (the Way was about getting the Hebrews back to a proper worship of the G of Abraham. Not the "salvation" of their souls through belief in him as the Son of G.)
The nt is the source for modern exegetical (i.e. text analysis) and homiletical (i.e. preaching) commentaries about Christ, the church-state's rcc version of a midrash.


Baptism as practise by John was about rebirth NOT a washing away of the stain of hereditary sin.

 

[BukiRob]

The record according to Mark ended with Christ dead and in the tomb, the resurrection was added decades later to bring it into alignment with the other synoptic's.
Mk 16:8 "And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid."
(at that time no one knew that the resurrection would be part of the kerygma, also a woman speaking publicly to a man not her husband, unbidden, was a social gaffe in conservative Judaea.)
The next 12 verses, written many decades later, have the women going right away and saying something to the Disciples, so the Record of Mark was redacted and repaired so vss 9-20 were added (c150) to bring Mark into like with the other two Records;
1 Cor 15 shows that resurrection appearances were part of the earliest Paulian dogma. Especially for those who date Mark later than 1 Corinthians (c70 vs. 50-55)

The nicea creed (4th century AD) has Iesous suffers death, was buried and rose again on the third day in accordance with the scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
No 40 days there.

Prior to the ascension none of the Disciples well understood the ministry, Yeshua did not want to be worshiped there, no temple built for him.
In post-exilic prophetic literature the hope in a Messiah is found only in the first two prophets of the post-exilic community, Haggai and Zechariah, and in Deutero-Zechariah, ch. 9, which, probably, dates from the time of the Seleucids. Haggai and Zechariah see in Zerubbabel the promised "sprout of David"; but they state merely that he will rebuild the Temple and attain great eminence as a ruler (Hag. 2: 23; Zech. 3: 8, 6: 12).

The future Messiah from a Jewish pov is not the same as that espoused in gentile Christanity.


The nt (New Testament) is NOT thematically identical to 'the Way,' Yeshua's interpretation of the Kingdom of G, (the Way was about getting the Hebrews back to a proper worship of the G of Abraham. Not the "salvation" of their souls through belief in him as the Son of G.)
The nt is the source for modern exegetical (i.e. text analysis) and homiletic (i.e. preaching) commentaries about Christ, the church-state's rcc version of a midrash.


Baptism as practiced by John was about rebirth NOT a washing away of the stain of hereditary sin.

Mark is regarded as the earliest of the 4 gospels. I frankly do not see much of any real issue that you seem to be implying. The gospel of John has the resurrection account and is widely accepted as having been written by John the apostle and in John it makes reference to the writer being an "eye witness" to the things told in the gospel.

I do agree that "christianity" has in many ways missed the mark especially in those area's where it has separated itself from FIRST CENTURY JUDAISM. Which of course, is rather and distinctly different from modern rabbinical Judaism.

I completely disagree with the assertion that the gospels were re written to conform to a Paulian doctrine as taught by the gentile church.

Paul as taught in the vast majority of the gentile church is a perversion of what Paul was actually teaching and scripture itself sheds like that even during Paul's ministry that there were those teaching this Gentile version of Paul that is in error. We see evidence of this in Acts and 2nd Peter.

What Paul actually taught was in perfect union/harmony with Yeshua who walked and spoke of the deeper INTENT of the Law and in NO WAY did either advocate or preach Torah done away with....

 

[bhug]

141019

The evangelistic/(gnostic, describes Iesous as the incarnation of the divine Logos) Record of the Gospel according to John (c120ad) was written over 30 years after LukeActs and Matthew (c70ad). Synoptic elements such as parables and exorcisms are not found in John.
The Disciple John Ἰωάννης or יוחנן (son of Zebedee and Salome, his brother James was another of the Twelve Disciples) died ~100ad (68 years after Christ's murder) after being exiled to the island Patmos by Roman Emperor (81-96ad) Domitian and the only Disciple not to die a "martyr's death."

The authorship of some Johannine literature has been debated since about the year 200; the notion of "John the Evangelist" exists, but may not be the same as the Disciple John.
ref: 1. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History Book vi. Chapter xxv.
2. newadvent.org/cathen/01594b.htm 'But from tradition...'

Rumor has it John the Disciple wrote five scrolls in the nt (New Testament) cannon, the Record of the Gospel according to John, the three epistles that bear his name, and the Book of Revelation.
Polemicist Eusebius (260-340ad) mentions that 4th century consensus was that the second and third epistle were not his (Disciple John), but of some other John. Eusebius also goes to some length to establish with the reader that there was no general consensus regarding the Revelation of John.
ref: Thomas Patrick Halton, On illustrious men, Volume 100 of The Fathers of the Church, CUA Press, 1999. P. 19.
Many modern scholars claim the Disciple John was not the author of any of these five books.
ref: "Although ancient traditions attributed to the Apostle John the Fourth Gospel, the Book of Revelation, and the three Epistles of John, modern scholars believe that he wrote none of them." Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible (Palo Alto: Mayfield, 1985) p. 355


"do not see much of any real issue that you seem to be implying"
"in John it makes reference to the writer being an "eye witness" to the things told in the gospel"

A. The later ANONYMOUS synoptic records of the Gospel (the redacted Matthew and Luke [after it was separated from Luke-acts]) were largely cut/paste from Mark. About half the content of each comes from the decades earlier Mark.
There were basically two accounts of Christ: Mark c50-60ad and John c100-120ad; (most all hebrew followers of Yeshua rejected the manmade dogma of saul/paul, a Torah apostate.) The now lost 'sayings of matthew' (Q document) was redacted into the Record of the Gospel according to Mathew, it was intended for Hebrew speaking followers of Yeshua, the greek Luke was intended for gentiles.
(after the romans destroyed Yerushalayim and the Temple [66-73ad, המרד הגדול‎ ha-Mered Ha-Gadol] and slaughtered the FEW remaining eye and ear witnesses to Christ from 40 years earlier [over half the world population of Hebrews was exterminated])
By 73ad the romans went out of their way to destroy EVERYTHING of Judaism they could, hence why it was important for others to get the history down in writing for future generations about Yeshua (even burying those and other prized writings to be found centuries, millenium later), also why the later catholics over the next six centuries, went out of their way do destroy any conflicting 'gospels' and documentation about Iesu that conflicted with their fabricated cannon.
The "Issue" is there was an ongoing redaction of 'scripture' to fit the dogma approved by the Byzantine-greek and later Roman-latin 'orthodox' church-governments.
B. John 21 states that it derives from the testimony of the "disciple whom Iesous loved," not, that it was actually written by John the Disciple. It is only early church tradition identified him as John the Disciple.
John like the other three synoptic records of the (SINGLE) Gospel were/are all anonymous!

The FACT remains, Yeshua still EXISTS, and except that gentile christians are cut off from Him and the Father, it would be a simple matter to get DIRECT confirmation what is and what is NOT actual "scripture."
Since that can not/has not happened, all christians can do is cling to their 'inerrant/infallible' nt.

I point out that Yeshua was NOT a christian, his religion was Torah Judaism, his non-hebrew followers converted to Judaism; completely, including circumcision and the many other dictats found in Torah.

Since it was good enough for Yeshua, it should be good enough for his followers. Christ told those that asked him the 1st and greatest commandment in the Law was "Thou shalt love the Lord thy G with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind" Mat 22:37 (Love the Lord your G with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. Dt 6:5, [Dt 4:29, 10:12, 11:1, Jos 22:5, 1Sa 12:24])
Hear, O Yisrael: The LORD our G, the LORD is one. Dt 6:4 אֱלֹהֵינוּ אדני אֶחָד:שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל אדני Sh'ma Yisra'el Adonai Eloheinu Adonai Eḥad

"What Paul actually taught was in perfect union/harmony with Yeshua"
Not to hyjack this thread, if you like we can take this to a seperate thread where i can show much if not most of the manmade dogma of saul/paul directly contradicts the Teachings of Christ. Saul/paul was the patriach of the catholic church, many pretend he was their first pope. Much of the catholic bible (the CCC, aka Catechism of the Catholic Church) is based on that manmade dogma of their apostle/pope/saint Paul.

 

[BukiRob]

141019

The evangelistic/(gnostic, describes Iesous as the incarnation of the divine Logos) Record of the Gospel according to John (c120ad) was written over 30 years after LukeActs and Matthew (c70ad). Synoptic elements such as parables and exorcisms are not found in John.
The Disciple John Ἰωάννης or יוחנן (son of Zebedee and Salome, his brother James was another of the Twelve Disciples) died ~100ad (68 years after Christ's murder) after being exiled to the island Patmos by Roman Emperor (81-96ad) Domitian and the only Disciple not to die a "martyr's death."

The authorship of some Johannine literature has been debated since about the year 200; the notion of "John the Evangelist" exists, but may not be the same as the Disciple John.
ref: 1. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History Book vi. Chapter xxv.
2. newadvent.org/cathen/01594b.htm 'But from tradition...'

Rumor has it John the Disciple wrote five scrolls in the nt (New Testament) cannon, the Record of the Gospel according to John, the three epistles that bear his name, and the Book of Revelation.
Polemicist Eusebius (260-340ad) mentions that 4th century consensus was that the second and third epistle were not his (Disciple John), but of some other John. Eusebius also goes to some length to establish with the reader that there was no general consensus regarding the Revelation of John.
ref: Thomas Patrick Halton, On illustrious men, Volume 100 of The Fathers of the Church, CUA Press, 1999. P. 19.
Many modern scholars claim the Disciple John was not the author of any of these five books.
ref: "Although ancient traditions attributed to the Apostle John the Fourth Gospel, the Book of Revelation, and the three Epistles of John, modern scholars believe that he wrote none of them." Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible (Palo Alto: Mayfield, 1985) p. 355


"do not see much of any real issue that you seem to be implying"
"in John it makes reference to the writer being an "eye witness" to the things told in the gospel"

A. The later ANONYMOUS synoptic records of the Gospel (the redacted Matthew and Luke [after it was separated from Luke-acts]) were largely cut/paste from Mark. About half the content of each comes from the decades earlier Mark.
There were basically two accounts of Christ: Mark c50-60ad and John c100-120ad; (most all hebrew followers of Yeshua rejected the manmade dogma of saul/paul, a Torah apostate.) The now lost 'sayings of matthew' (Q document) was redacted into the Record of the Gospel according to Mathew, it was intended for Hebrew speaking followers of Yeshua, the greek Luke was intended for gentiles.
(after the romans destroyed Yerushalayim and the Temple [66-73ad, המרד הגדול‎ ha-Mered Ha-Gadol] and slaughtered the FEW remaining eye and ear witnesses to Christ from 40 years earlier [over half the world population of Hebrews was exterminated])
By 73ad the romans went out of their way to destroy EVERYTHING of Judaism they could, hence why it was important for others to get the history down in writing for future generations about Yeshua (even burying those and other prized writings to be found centuries, millenium later), also why the later catholics over the next six centuries, went out of their way do destroy any conflicting 'gospels' and documentation about Iesu that conflicted with their fabricated cannon.
The "Issue" is there was an ongoing redaction of 'scripture' to fit the dogma approved by the Byzantine-greek and later Roman-latin 'orthodox' church-governments.
B. John 21 states that it derives from the testimony of the "disciple whom Iesous loved," not, that it was actually written by John the Disciple. It is only early church tradition identified him as John the Disciple.
John like the other three synoptic records of the (SINGLE) Gospel were/are all anonymous!

The FACT remains, Yeshua still EXISTS, and except that gentile christians are cut off from Him and the Father, it would be a simple matter to get DIRECT confirmation what is and what is NOT actual "scripture."
Since that can not/has not happened, all christians can do is cling to their 'inerrant/infallible' nt.

I point out that Yeshua was NOT a christian, his religion was Torah Judaism, his non-hebrew followers converted to Judaism; completely, including circumcision and the many other dictats found in Torah.

Since it was good enough for Yeshua, it should be good enough for his followers. Christ told those that asked him the 1st and greatest commandment in the Law was "Thou shalt love the Lord thy G with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind" Mat 22:37 (Love the Lord your G with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. Dt 6:5, [Dt 4:29, 10:12, 11:1, Jos 22:5, 1Sa 12:24])
Hear, O Yisrael: The LORD our G, the LORD is one. Dt 6:4 אֱלֹהֵינוּ אדני אֶחָד:שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל אדני Sh'ma Yisra'el Adonai Eloheinu Adonai Eḥad

"What Paul actually taught was in perfect union/harmony with Yeshua"
Not to hyjack this thread, if you like we can take this to a seperate thread where i can show much if not most of the manmade dogma of saul/paul directly contradicts the Teachings of Christ. Saul/paul was the patriach of the catholic church, many pretend he was their first pope. Much of the catholic bible (the CCC, aka Catechism of the Catholic Church) is based on that manmade dogma of their apostle/pope/saint Paul.

Your view on John is not consistent at all with mainstream thinking regarding the date of the gospel of John. The major scholarly opinion is that the gospel of John was probably written between 90-100 AD.

P52 is generally dated between 80-150 AD with a mean late date of 125 AD

Comfort-Barrett 100-125
Jaros 80-125
Nestle-Aland: 100-150
Orsine-Clarysse: 125-175

The gentile church has largely misunderstood and perverted Paul's teachings. Most of it is unintentional some of it is due to importing pagan traditions and rituals and "Christianizeing" them.

But when you read Paul's teaching from a Jewish understanding of Torah as the foundation from which Paul is teaching you see no conflict, no error and no misunderstanding of truth

 

[AbbaLove]

The NT was written by Jews from a Jewish perspective but it seems most "Christians" try to understand the NT from a Roman perspective. That just does not work and so-called Christianity is the result of a different gospel than what Jesus preached to the Jews of his day.

Luke says that as Jesus' body was laid in the tomb the Sabbath began. This Sabbath was not the weekly Sabbath, it was Nisan 15.

Mark says that when the Sabbath was past the women bought spices to anoint the body.

Luke goes on to say the women prepared their spices and rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment.

Three nights and three days later from his burial Jesus was raised from the dead as the first day of the weeks began.

So are you all in agreement with my previous suggestion that Mark and Luke's account has been intentionally misinterpreted/mistranslated by the early Church Fathers (321-364 AD)?

Is the so-called Hebrew 'idiom' article suggesting that Mark 16:1 and Luke 24:1 was so purposely mistranslated by the Church in order to distance itself from Judaism?

This would not be a stretch considering the following post by BukiRob in another thread ...

In 321 AD Constantine passed the Sunday Law. In 330 Constantine moved his capital from Rome to Constantinople (Istanbul) so that the Roman Pope would rule the Roman Empire after his death. In 364 AD the Church outlawed Sabbath keeping in the Council of Laodicea when they decreed 59 Canon laws. The following is the relevant Canon law: Canon XXIX: “Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honoring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.”

Is there enough empirical evidence (NASA dating, scripture and other early accounts) to prove that Christ arose on the seventh day of the week instead of the first day of the week or eight days from the Sabbath just before Passover?

My one and only reluctance to embrace a Sabbath resurrection is that a Jewish circumcision took place on the eighth day from birth. This could have a deeper spiritual meaning to what some could refer to as the born again circumcision of the heart ~ a new beginning. From a purely physical standpoint would a circumcision a day earlier (on the seventh day) be a cause for concern when many gentile babies are circumcised within 48 hours after birth.

Most doctors recommend that circumcision be done within a few days from the delivery of the baby. Some doctors recommend waiting two or three weeks. When the birth occurs in a hospital, circumcision is usually done within 48 hours. If the baby was born in a birth center or if it was a home birth, circumcision can wait up to two weeks and can be performed either in your pediatricians office or with a Jewish Mohel.

 

[Ronald]

Daniel Gregg,
To imply that Jesus did not rise on the first day of the week is like climbing up Mt. Everest with no clothes on. Brilliant scholars (50-100 at a time) over the centuries exegete scriptures, formulated hundreds of New Testament translations from the Greek and have never questioned that day ... and you are? Going up against historical facts led by the Holy Spirit, discerned and confirmed by the body and laid down as a foundation is a waste of your time and ours. In the end of your quest, YOU'LL LOSE. And then, your credibility will be shot concerning anything else you say. Discrepancies might exist concerning non essentials but not HISTORICAL FACTS concerning the most significant day in history.

 

[pshun2404]

Besides, as already noted, first fruits always falls on a 1st day following the 7th day Sabbath in the feast of Unleavened bread. It is the first day of the (Counting of) the weeks....case closed!

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

so ?

 

[visionary]

Besides, as already noted, first fruits always falls on a 1st day following the 7th day Sabbath in the feast of Unleavened bread. It is the first day of the (Counting of) the weeks....case closed!

which starts on the saturday evening and therefore know in the Roman calendar as Saturday night and not the 1st day of the week Sunday, not that it doesn't continue on Sunday, the first day of the week on the Roman Calendar. In fact, most of the first fruits ceremonies were performed in the morning of the first day in the Temple. The gathering of the Wave Sheaf was done with great ceremony.

As the believers were heading home from celebrating the seventh-day Shabbat in the temple built by Herod, a group of specially assigned Levites would be exiting the Eastern Gate and crossing over the "Way of the Red Heifer" to the Mount of Olives. There in the "Field of Red Heifer Ashes" they selected sheaves of barley to be harvested after sundown on the evening after the Shabbat (the weekly Sabbath).

The parade to the Temple waving the First fruits Wave sheaf lead by the High Priest and His fellow priests with all of Jerusalem gathered at the road side celebrating it.

John 20:1 Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. The disciples who walked with Yeshua on the road to Emmaus did so on the “same day” of His resurrection.

Yom HaBikkurim (Day of the First Fruits) starts that evening. As the sun was setting in the western sky making the end of the weekly Shabbat, the Levites in the field could hear the cry from the temple, “Has the sun set?” The reply, “Yes, the sun has set.” Then from the temple came the cry, “Would you harvest the barley?”, Answer “Yes, we will harvest the barley.” At least that is the understanding from some recently discovered 1st century documents.

Once the barley is brought to the Temple Courtyard, priests beat, roast, grind, and sift the grain. A handful of the resulting flour is burned on the altar. The remainder is eaten by the priests.[bless and do not curse]– The Temple Institute

There is a connection between Passover/First Fruits and Pentecost. On Passover/First Fruits we were physically redeemed from sin and death by the death and resurrection of Yeshua. On Pentecost our physical redemption was spiritually empowered with the coming of the Holy Spirit.

Understanding the details of the Festival of Fruit Fruits leadsone to suspect that the ]resurrection of Yeshua was actually just after the evening sunset of the weekly seventh-day Sabbath. The great energizing power of the Divine quickened the body of Yeshua and brought him forth from the grave and in his glorified body. Many tombs were opened at the time of the earthquake at Yeshua's death.

Matthew 27:52-53 “Many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared too many people.

So the evidence of the harvesting of the first fruits for the Festival of First Fruits very well gives us clues as to the timing of the resurrection of Yeshua and those saints which arose with him, the latter as the “first fruits of they that slept.”

Exodus 16:30 Omer Counting the Omer also gets its name because the counting must begin "from the day you brought the sheaf." Sheaf refers to a bundle of grain stocks with its heads. The word in Hebrew for "sheaf" is omer,so the period between Passover and Pentecost has become known as the omer and the "countdown" is known as "counting the omer". The Omer offering is the offering of a measure of barley. An omer measurement is one tenth of an ephah (Ex.16:36), which usually is considered to be slightly more than two quarts. In the days of the second temple, an omer (sheaf) of barley would be brought as an offering and was waived in all directions. Barley was used because it was the earliest of cereal crops to be harvested. This symbolic act started the official recognition of the counting of the Omer. Israel would then begin to count the days to the Feast of Shavuot.

 

[AbbaLove]

Besides, as already noted, first fruits always falls on a 1st day following the 7th day Sabbath in the feast of Unleavened bread. It is the first day of the (Counting of) the weeks....case closed!

which starts on the saturday evening and therefore known in the Roman calendar as Saturday night and not the 1st day of the week Sunday, not that it doesn't continue on Sunday, the first day of the week on the Roman Calendar.

So now we’re going by the Roman Calendar

The 7th day of the week begins during twilight (Friday evening) in Israel/Jerusalem. The 1st day of the week begins during twilight (Saturday evening) in Israel/Jerusalem. This "twilight period" lasts approximately thirty minutes from sunset until three stars are visible in the sky (Halakha).

It's possible that before the world wide flood (Noah) a day was exactly 24 hours, a month 28 days and a year 336 days. A solar cycle is 365.8 days and a day is 23 hours, 56 minutes and 4.1 seconds. Assuming there were once 336 days in a year would suggest that the earth is now farther from the sun and spinning 3 minutes and 55.9 seconds slower per day than before the world wide deluge.

 

[Daniel Gregg]

Basically and argument that the majority cannot be deceived, and and argument that tradition is never wrong. Both the majority and tradition are wrong on the essentials, the Christmas, Easter, the meaning of faith, the meaning of the Torah and its application, the nature of God vs. Calvinsim, etc.

Daniel Gregg,
To imply that Jesus did not rise on the first day of the week is like climbing up Mt. Everest with no clothes on. Brilliant scholars (50-100 at a time) over the centuries exegete scriptures, formulated hundreds of New Testament translations from the Greek and have never questioned that day ... and you are? Going up against historical facts led by the Holy Spirit, discerned and confirmed by the body and laid down as a foundation is a waste of your time and ours. In the end of your quest, YOU'LL LOSE. And then, your credibility will be shot concerning anything else you say. Discrepancies might exist concerning non essentials but not HISTORICAL FACTS concerning the most significant day in history.