The Crucifixion Not Friday

[Kokavkrystallos]

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)

 

[HTacianas]

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)

The "three nights" is an emendation to the text. It was added later. The entirety of "three days and three nights" may also be an emendation.

But by the way, it's only called "Easter" in the Western, primarily English-speaking, world. The majority of Christians refer to it as Pasca, meaning Passover.

 

[GodBeMercifulToMeASinner]

easter’ itself is the emendation.

“But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.”
—1 Peter 1:25

“The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.”
—Isaiah 40:8

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
—John 1:1

“Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.”
—Mark 7:13

 

[BobRyan]

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

The Jews used inclusive reckoning, so then "any part" of the included would then be accounted as all of it. So three days and nights would be different than 56 hours.

Proof of this can be seen in Luke 24. That chapter says this is Sunday - the first day of the week - it also says it is "the third day".

And they said to Him, “Those about Jesus the Nazarene, who proved to be a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, 20 and how the chief priests and our rulers handed Him over to be sentenced to death, and crucified Him. 21 But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel. Indeed, besides all this, it is now the third day since these things happened.

Saturday afternoon would be the first day "since" that Friday afternoon event without inclusive reckoning, but with inclusive reckoning then Friday is day 1 and Saturday is day 2. That makes Sunday (the first day of the week according to Luke 24) -- the 3rd day.

1 Cor 15:4 says He was raised "on the third day" which agrees with what we find in Luke 24.



And it is near/at evening on the first day of the week when they said that.

 

[JSRG]

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.

While the opening post was mostly about the date of the Resurrection (I hold to the Friday date but don't care too much if people think it's on a Wednesday or Friday), I wish to respond to this.

While I have no quarrel with the argument Passover should have been used in Acts 12:4, this claim Easter has nothing to do with Passover is nonsense. They're the same word in some languages, like Greek (both are pascha). This is not even limited to Greek; some other languages have them be the same word, and others at least have them be similar. English is actually the odd one. Regrettably, this obscures their relationship less obvious in English. I wish English used "Pascha" for Easter to make the relationship more obvious as it is in so may other languages, but that's the way the language worked out.

Easter's timing is also based on that of Passover. To explain it quickly without getting into too many convoluted details, the time of Passover is supposed to be the first full moon after the spring equinox. Easter is meant to be the Sunday after that (Sunday chosen because it was the day of the Resurrection), so it's set to be the first Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox.

Why, then, do we sometimes see Passover celebrated noticeably later than Easter, if Easter's supposed to be the Sunday after? After all, this year Easter is on March 31 (in most churches, some Orthodox churches have it on May 5 due to calculating it based on the Julian calendar), but Passover is on April 22. The reason for this divergence is that there's a current defect with the Jewish calendar which is causing it to drift forward very gradually. For our purposes this means that, due to sometimes putting in an extra month needlessly (the Gregorian/Julian calendar adds an extra day in a leap year, the Jewish calendar adds in a full month), Passover is pushed a month later than it should be. If left unchecked, given enough time, Passover will drift forward more until it becomes celebrated in summer, though it'll take thousands of years before it gets that bad. Anyway, the date of Passover nowadays is off, not the date of Easter.

So it's pretty ridiculous to claim that Easter has "nothing to do with Passover."

 

[BPPLEE]

The "three nights" is an emendation to the text. It was added later. The entirety of "three days and three nights" may also be an emendation.

But by the way, it's only called "Easter" in the Western, primarily English-speaking, world. The majority of Christians refer to it as Pasca, meaning Passover.

Was Jonah’s time an emendation?
Mat 12:40 - For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly;so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

 

[HTacianas]

Was Jonah’s time an emendation?
Mat 12:40 - For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly;so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

For as Jonas was in the whale's belly so shall the Son of man be in the heart of the earth.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

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)

I have read somewhere that there were special sabbath days, apparently there a second sabbath day during the time when Christ was crucified, what is your opinion on this? I do not know enough of Jewish customs to know if this is correct or not.

Peace.

 

[Kokavkrystallos]

I have read somewhere that there were special sabbath days, apparently there a second sabbath day during the time when Christ was crucified, what is your opinion on this? I do not know enough of Jewish customs to know if this is correct or not.

Peace.

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.

 

[JSRG]

I have read somewhere that there were special sabbath days, apparently there a second sabbath day during the time when Christ was crucified, what is your opinion on this? I do not know enough of Jewish customs to know if this is correct or not.

Peace.

This is a claim I've often seen people make, but I've never seen anyone point to an early Jewish source attesting that such days were actually referred to as "Sabbaths".

 

[Kokavkrystallos]

This is a claim I've often seen people make, but I've never seen anyone point to an early Jewish source attesting that such days were actually referred to as "Sabbaths".

High Sabbaths, in most Christian and Messianic Jewish usage, are seven annual biblical festivals and rest days, recorded in the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. This is an extension of the term "high day" found in the King James Version at John 19:31.

The seven festivals do not necessarily occur on weekly Shabbat (seventh-day Sabbath) and are called by the name miqra ("called assembly") in Hebrew (Lev. 23). They are observed by Jews and a minority of Christians. Two of the shabbath (holy assemblies) occur in spring on the first and last day of the Feast of unleavened bread (Matzot). One occurs in the summer, this is the Feast of Weeks (Shavuot). And four occur in the fall in the seventh month. Feast of Trumpets (Yom Teru'ah) on the first day of the seventh month; the second is the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur); and two during the Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot) on the first and last day. Sometimes the word shabbaton is extended to mean all seven festivals.[

High Sabbaths - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Kokavkrystallos]

​

The following comes from Midwestern baptist seminary, and is pretty much the conclusions reached by some Messianics.​

Jesus Was Crucified on the Day of Preparation for the Passover​

John also mentions that Jesus was crucified on “the day of Preparation” (John 19:31), that is, the Friday before the Sabbath of Passover week (Mark 15:42). The night before, on Thursday evening, Jesus ate a Passover meal with the Twelve (Mark 14:12), his “Last Supper.”

In the Pharisaic-rabbinic calendar commonly used in Jesus’s day, Passover always falls on the fifteenth day of Nisan (Exodus 12:6), which begins Thursday after sundown and ends Friday at sundown. In the year a.d. 33, the most likely year of Jesus’s crucifixion, Nisan 15 fell on April 3, yielding April 3, a.d. 33, as the most likely date for the crucifixion. In The Final Days of Jesus, we therefore constructed the following chart to show the dates for Jesus’s final week in a.d. 33:

April 2	Nissan 14	Thursday (Wednesday nightfall to Thursday nightfall)	Day of Passover preparation	Last Supper
April 3	Nissan 15	Friday (Thursday nightfall to Friday nightfall)	Passover; Feast of Unleavened Bread, begins	Crucifixion
April 4	Nissan 16	Saturday (Friday nightfall to Saturday nightfall)	Sabbath
April 5	Nissan 17	Sunday (Saturday nightfall to Sunday nightfall)	First day of the week	Resurrection

Conclusion​

The above calculations may appear complicated, but in a nutshell the argument runs like this:

HISTORICAL INFORMATION	YEAR
Beginning of Tiberius’s reign	AD 14
Fifteenth year of Tiberius’s reign: Beginning of John the Baptist’s ministry	AD 28
A few months later: Beginning of Jesus’s ministry	AD 29
Minimum three-year duration of Jesus’ ministry: Most likely date of Jesus’s crucifixion	AD 33 (April 3)

While this is in our judgment the most likely scenario, it should be acknowledged that many believe Jesus was crucified in the year AD 30, not 33. However, if the beginning of Tiberius’s reign is placed in the year AD 14, it is virtually impossible to accommodate fifteen years of Tiberius’s reign and three years of Jesus’ ministry between AD 14 and 30. For this reason, some have postulated a co-regency (joint rule) of Tiberius and Augustus during the last few years of Augustus’s reign. However, there is no reliable ancient historical evidence for such co-regency.

We conclude that Jesus was most likely crucified on April 3, AD 33. While other dates are possible, believers can take great assurance from the fact that the most important historical events in Jesus’s life, such as the crucifixion, are firmly anchored in human history. As we celebrate Easter, and as we walk with Jesus every day of the year, we can therefore be confident that our faith is based not only on subjective personal assurance but on reliable historical data, which makes ours an eminently reasonable faith.

April 3, AD 33: Why We Believe We Can Know the Exact Date Jesus Died - The Center for Biblical Studies

In our book, The Final Days of Jesus: The Most Important Week of the Most Important Person Who Ever Lived, Justin Taylor and I assume but do not argue for a precise date of Jesus’s crucifixion. Virtually all scholars believe, for various reasons, that Jesus was crucified in the spring of either...

cbs.mbts.edu

 

[JSRG]

The Passover Feast was the High Sabbath that is mentioned.

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.

In an intervening message between the one I'm replying to and this reply you're reading, you appealed to the Wikipedia page for "High Sabbaths" as evidence. But the article never claims that itself, it opens up with saying "High Sabbaths, in most Christian and Messianic Jewish usage, are seven annual biblical festivals and rest days, recorded in the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. This is an extension of the term "high day" found in the King James Version at John 19:31." Notice it doesn't say this was any kind of Jewish term for the Passover, nor that it went back to the NT period. Interestingly, it even notes "The King James Version may thus be the origin of naming the annual rest days "High Sabbaths" in English" which would indicate that the term is only from the 17th century.

Do the sources on the page back up the idea that the Passover was referred to as a Sabbath in the NT period? Do they offer evidence that Passover was called a Sabbath back then? Having looked at them, while some make that claim, I see no evidence offered whatsoever. They simply proclaim it counted as a "High Sabbath" as their way of explaining how the Crucifixion wasn't on a Friday despite the Bible saying the next day was the Sabbath. But no evidence is offered that anyone applied the word Sabbath to the Passover back then. And that's been my constant experience: People claim that the Passover was counted as a Sabbath or High Sabbath, but no evidence is ever offered that this term was used to refer to it as such.

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

The Easter Bunny first shows up in recorded history in the 17th century, as is even admitted by your linked article. It comes far too late for claims of pagan connection to things over a thousand years ago to make any sense.

Personally I'm not fond of the Easter Bunny myself, as I think it distracts from the actual purpose of Easter--but the "pagan origin" idea just doesn't make sense due to the timing. Further, the Easter Bunny isn't even universally a major association with Easter. Many (most?) countries actually have little association with rabbits from Easter. The Easter Bunny was originally a creation of German Protestants in the 17th century, and from what I can tell it spread to countries like the UK or United States in the 19th century due a lot of German immigrants heading to those countries. It then spread to some other countries even later due to the influence of those countries. But in countries that haven't been affected by that kind of influence, the Easter Bunny isn't really a thing at all, like in Italy ("If you're lucky enough to be in Italy for Easter, you won't see the famous bunny or go for an Easter egg hunt") or Spain ("There are no Easter egg hunts or giant bunnies – and not much chocolate either.")

The bottom line is that trying to find some pagan origin for Easter with the Easter Bunny doesn't work. Even if there was (despite the timing not working), it'd mean nothing against Easter, just against that specific practice of it (and I'd be fine with getting rid of the practice anyway, so no problems there).

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.

I discussed this in my prior post, but I'll do it in more detail. Easter is set up to be the Sunday after when the Jewish Passover should fall. It's quite explicitly based on it. Passover is--or is supposed to be--the full moon that occurs on or after the spring equinox, and Easter takes that and makes it the Sunday after (the day of the Resurrection). So again, yes it's totally based on Passover, or rather, when Passover should be. The problem is that Passover isn't always when it should be.

Passover falls on the 15th of the Hebrew Month of Abib/Nisan. The Hebrew calendar months are lunar, meaning they're the length of the time it takes the moon to change from a new moon to a full moon and back again. This takes roughly 29.5 days, so their months are 29 or 30 days. This means the full moon falls in the middle of each month, and a new moon at the start. Thus, Passover (in the middle of the month) falls under a full moon, or at least adjacent to one.

However, when you have 12 months of 29-30 days, you come up short for the solar year. In order to keep the calendar matched up with the solar year, they have leap years. Unlike the Julian/Gregorian calendar, where you add an extra day in some years, the Hebrew calendar adds an extra month. Now, Passover is supposed to be a spring festival, and thus falling on or after the spring equinox. In the past, on a year-by-year basis they'd see if Passover would be before the spring equinox, and if yes, they'd add in the extra month. This page from a Jewish site explains it.

So while the calculations were done through the Hebrew calendar, functionally Passover was set to be the full moon after the spring equinox. Easter is the Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox, clearly basing itself on that.

So, why do their dates occasionally differ markedly nowadays? Well, originally, Christians just took the date the Jews celebrated and then had Easter the Sunday afterwards. But opposition to this grew based on two factors. The first is that there was dislike of, when setting the date for such a major Christian celebration, basing it off the calculations of people who explicitly rejected Jesus. The second were accusations that the Jews were doing their calculations wrong and actually putting their Passover before the spring equinox, and that Christians should do their own calculations so they'd be correct. And so Easter was set to be the Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox, which (as noted) works out to be the Sunday after when Passover is supposed to be.

Earlier I noted how the Jews chose whether to do the leap year on a year-by-year basis. This worked when they had a strong central authority in the Sanhedrin, but when that waned, to keep consistency across the world it was replaced by a 19-year cycle, in which years 3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, and 19 had the extra month added. This persists to today. However, the problem is that this calculation is slightly off, and the Hebrew year on average moves forward about several minutes each year. This is a slow process, but starts adding up over centuries. An extremely in-depth article here discusses it; for those who want a shorter one, see here. It means that Passover will, under the current calculations, actually be celebrated in the summer eventually if this doesn't get fixed (admittedly, it'll take thousands of years for it to get that extreme). But in terms of things that are affecting us now, it means in some years, an extra month gets added in needlessly. Much like this year. There was no need to have the extra month this year, because Passover would've fallen after the spring equinox without it! But because of the calendar drift, an extra month got added in anyway, needlessly pushing Passover to being after Easter.

So it's incorrect to claim that the dates are unrelated. They're very related, and while some years they're not particularly close to each other, that's because the current Jewish calendar is off and sometimes puts it a month later than it needs to be.

 

[Kokavkrystallos]

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.

In an intervening message between the one I'm replying to and this reply you're reading, you appealed to the Wikipedia page for "High Sabbaths" as evidence. But the article never claims that itself, it opens up with saying "High Sabbaths, in most Christian and Messianic Jewish usage, are seven annual biblical festivals and rest days, recorded in the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. This is an extension of the term "high day" found in the King James Version at John 19:31." Notice it doesn't say this was any kind of Jewish term for the Passover, nor that it went back to the NT period. Interestingly, it even notes "The King James Version may thus be the origin of naming the annual rest days "High Sabbaths" in English" which would indicate that the term is only from the 17th century.

Do the sources on the page back up the idea that the Passover was referred to as a Sabbath in the NT period? Do they offer evidence that Passover was called a Sabbath back then? Having looked at them, while some make that claim, I see no evidence offered whatsoever. They simply proclaim it counted as a "High Sabbath" as their way of explaining how the Crucifixion wasn't on a Friday despite the Bible saying the next day was the Sabbath. But no evidence is offered that anyone applied the word Sabbath to the Passover back then. And that's been my constant experience: People claim that the Passover was counted as a Sabbath or High Sabbath, but no evidence is ever offered that this term was used to refer to it as such.



The Easter Bunny first shows up in recorded history in the 17th century, as is even admitted by your linked article. It comes far too late for claims of pagan connection to things over a thousand years ago to make any sense.

Personally I'm not fond of the Easter Bunny myself, as I think it distracts from the actual purpose of Easter--but the "pagan origin" idea just doesn't make sense due to the timing. Further, the Easter Bunny isn't even universally a major association with Easter. Many (most?) countries actually have little association with rabbits from Easter. The Easter Bunny was originally a creation of German Protestants in the 17th century, and from what I can tell it spread to countries like the UK or United States in the 19th century due a lot of German immigrants heading to those countries. It then spread to some other countries even later due to the influence of those countries. But in countries that haven't been affected by that kind of influence, the Easter Bunny isn't really a thing at all, like in Italy ("If you're lucky enough to be in Italy for Easter, you won't see the famous bunny or go for an Easter egg hunt") or Spain ("There are no Easter egg hunts or giant bunnies – and not much chocolate either.")

The bottom line is that trying to find some pagan origin for Easter with the Easter Bunny doesn't work. Even if there was (despite the timing not working), it'd mean nothing against Easter, just against that specific practice of it (and I'd be fine with getting rid of the practice anyway, so no problems there).



I discussed this in my prior post, but I'll do it in more detail. Easter is set up to be the Sunday after when the Jewish Passover should fall. It's quite explicitly based on it. Passover is--or is supposed to be--the full moon that occurs on or after the spring equinox, and Easter takes that and makes it the Sunday after (the day of the Resurrection). So again, yes it's totally based on Passover, or rather, when Passover should be. The problem is that Passover isn't always when it should be.

Passover falls on the 15th of the Hebrew Month of Abib/Nisan. The Hebrew calendar months are lunar, meaning they're the length of the time it takes the moon to change from a new moon to a full moon and back again. This takes roughly 29.5 days, so their months are 29 or 30 days. This means the full moon falls in the middle of each month, and a new moon at the start. Thus, Passover (in the middle of the month) falls under a full moon, or at least adjacent to one.

However, when you have 12 months of 29-30 days, you come up short for the solar year. In order to keep the calendar matched up with the solar year, they have leap years. Unlike the Julian/Gregorian calendar, where you add an extra day in some years, the Hebrew calendar adds an extra month. Now, Passover is supposed to be a spring festival, and thus falling on or after the spring equinox. In the past, on a year-by-year basis they'd see if Passover would be before the spring equinox, and if yes, they'd add in the extra month. This page from a Jewish site explains it.

So while the calculations were done through the Hebrew calendar, functionally Passover was set to be the full moon after the spring equinox. Easter is the Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox, clearly basing itself on that.

So, why do their dates occasionally differ markedly nowadays? Well, originally, Christians just took the date the Jews celebrated and then had Easter the Sunday afterwards. But opposition to this grew based on two factors. The first is that there was dislike of, when setting the date for such a major Christian celebration, basing it off the calculations of people who explicitly rejected Jesus. The second were accusations that the Jews were doing their calculations wrong and actually putting their Passover before the spring equinox, and that Christians should do their own calculations so they'd be correct. And so Easter was set to be the Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox, which (as noted) works out to be the Sunday after when Passover is supposed to be.

Earlier I noted how the Jews chose whether to do the leap year on a year-by-year basis. This worked when they had a strong central authority in the Sanhedrin, but when that waned, to keep consistency across the world it was replaced by a 19-year cycle, in which years 3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, and 19 had the extra month added. This persists to today. However, the problem is that this calculation is slightly off, and the Hebrew year on average moves forward about several minutes each year. This is a slow process, but starts adding up over centuries. An extremely in-depth article here discusses it; for those who want a shorter one, see here. It means that Passover will, under the current calculations, actually be celebrated in the summer eventually if this doesn't get fixed (admittedly, it'll take thousands of years for it to get that extreme). But in terms of things that are affecting us now, it means in some years, an extra month gets added in needlessly. Much like this year. There was no need to have the extra month this year, because Passover would've fallen after the spring equinox without it! But because of the calendar drift, an extra month got added in anyway, needlessly pushing Passover to being after Easter.

So it's incorrect to claim that the dates are unrelated. They're very related, and while some years they're not particularly close to each other, that's because the current Jewish calendar is off and sometimes puts it a month later than it needs to be.

"To make all of these events fit, we can count backwards from the weekly Sabbath and figure out what evening Y’shua and the disciples had the Passover meal and what day He was crucified. The timeline of events would look like this:

Tuesday night – Passover Seder (meal), prayer in Gethsemane, arrested, brought before the Jews

Wednesday morning – before Pilate, on the cross by 9 a.m., dead by 3 p.m.²

Wednesday night – Y’shua in the tomb – first night, High Sabbath begins

Thursday – Y’shua in the tomb – first day, High Sabbath,

Thursday night – Y’shua in the tomb, second night, end of High Sabbath

Friday – Y’shua in the tomb, second day, spices bought & prepared

Friday night – Y’shua in the tomb, third night, weekly Sabbath begins

Saturday – Y’shua in the tomb third day, weekly Sabbath

Saturday Night – Y’shua NOT IN THE TOMB, End of weekly Sabbath"

The Two Sabbaths of Passover

As for Easter, this goes back a little further than 17th century & I learned this stuff many years ago: (I also was in the occult before I got saved and it was a matter of humor among us that we said "The Christians celebrate our holidays")

"In a Germanic language such as English, the festival of Easter (Ostern in German) derives from Eostre, a pagan goddess of the dawn and spring. The Old English word first is mentioned by the English monk Bede in De temporum ratione ("The Reckoning of Time"), written in AD 725, where he identified the month of April as Eosturmonath (§330).

"Eosturmonath has a name which is now translated 'Paschal month', and which was once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre, in whose honour feasts were celebrated in that month. Now they designate that Paschal season by her name, calling the joys of the new rite by the time-honoured name of the old observance" (§331).

In the Life of Charlemagne, written about a century later, the Frankish scholar Einhard relates that, among the reforms of Charles the Great, "He gave the months names in his own tongue, in place of the Latin and barbarous names by which they were formerly known among the Franks" (§29). April was called Ostaramonath, "Easter month," Ostara and Eostre being related to Eos, the Greek goddess of dawn, heralding the arrival of spring. Jacob Grimm (the elder of the Brothers Grimm) elaborates on the etymology in Teutonic Mythology, first published in 1835.

"This Ostara, like the AS. [Anglo-Saxon] Eastre, must in the heathen religion have denoted a higher being, whose worship was so firmly rooted, that the christian teachers tolerated the name, and applied it to one of their own grandest anniversaries....Ostara, Eastre seems therefore to have been the divinity of the radiant dawn, of upspringing light, a spectacle that brings joy and blessing, whose meaning could be easily adapted to the resurrection-day of the christian's God" (pp. 290–291).

Easter's name - The name Easter is never associated with the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ in the original Scriptures and is actually derived from the word "Eostre." Eostre was Queen Semiramis, the wife of Nimrod, Noah's evil but enterprising great grandson (Genesis 10:6-8).

Eostre's history - Nimrod built the major cities of Babel, Asshur, Nineveh, and Calah (Genesis 10:10-12), which were known for their evil and unimaginable worship practices and perversion. Remember the story of Jonah? After Nimrod's death, Queen Semiramis kept these evil practices alive by deifying Nimrod as the sun god. Later, Queen Semiramis gave birth to an illegitimate son, Tammuz. She convinced the people that this son was supernaturally conceived and the child promised by God in Genesis 3:15. The people worshipped Tammuz as the reincarnation of Nimrod, but more importantly, the people worshipped Queen Semiramis as the mother goddess. The horrible human sacrifice, idolatry, astrology, and satanic worship in these false religions -sun (Nimrod) and moon (Eostre) - continued until the time of the Tower of Babel. Because of their sin, God confused the people's language to disperse them throughout the world (Genesis 11:7).

As the people resettled in new lands, they took their pagan worship with them. Queen Semiramis came to be known as Ostera (an Anglo-Saxon goddess who symbolized the rebirth of the day and new life in the spring), Astarte (Phoenician goddess of the moon), Eastre, and Ashtaroth or Ashtoreth (the wife of Baal and the queen of heaven). Nimrod's other names were Baal, Baalim, Molech, the god of fire, and the great life giver. Any serious study of the Old Testament reveals God's hatred for this false worship, and Ezekiel 8:14 specifically mentions Tammuz in its condemnation.

Easter's origin - The beginning of Easter goes back to the springtime ritual begun by Queen Semiramis following the death of Tammuz. Legend has it that through her tears, Tammuz could be resurrected in the reincarnated form of new vegetation on Earth.

With the spread of Christianity many years later, it was a common practice to adapt the existing non-Christian festivals and assimilate them into Christian theology. Because Queen Semiramis (Eostre) was the goddess of spring and her symbolism dealt with renewal and rebirth, the Christian belief in the resurrection of Christ fit well with these themes.

Today, American history teaches us that Easter was dismissed as a pagan holiday by the nation's founding Puritans and did not begin to be observed widely until after the Civil War.

The Truth about Easter Traditions - AOP Homeschooling

The Truth about Easter Traditions

www.aop.com

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

This is a claim I've often seen people make, but I've never seen anyone point to an early Jewish source attesting that such days were actually referred to as "Sabbaths".

apparently there was a high sabbath link;

Jesus’ Death and Resurrection – Two Sabbaths | Truth in Scripture

truthinscripture.net

 

[JSRG]

"To make all of these events fit, we can count backwards from the weekly Sabbath and figure out what evening Y’shua and the disciples had the Passover meal and what day He was crucified. The timeline of events would look like this:

Tuesday night – Passover Seder (meal), prayer in Gethsemane, arrested, brought before the Jews

Wednesday morning – before Pilate, on the cross by 9 a.m., dead by 3 p.m.²

Wednesday night – Y’shua in the tomb – first night, High Sabbath begins

Thursday – Y’shua in the tomb – first day, High Sabbath,

Thursday night – Y’shua in the tomb, second night, end of High Sabbath

Friday – Y’shua in the tomb, second day, spices bought & prepared

Friday night – Y’shua in the tomb, third night, weekly Sabbath begins

Saturday – Y’shua in the tomb third day, weekly Sabbath

Saturday Night – Y’shua NOT IN THE TOMB, End of weekly Sabbath"

The Two Sabbaths of Passover

None of this addresses my question, which was to ask for evidence that Passover was referred to as a Sabbath in the New Testament period.

As for Easter, this goes back a little further than 17th century & I learned this stuff many years ago: (I also was in the occult before I got saved and it was a matter of humor among us that we said "The Christians celebrate our holidays")

"In a Germanic language such as English, the festival of Easter (Ostern in German) derives from Eostre, a pagan goddess of the dawn and spring. The Old English word first is mentioned by the English monk Bede in De temporum ratione ("The Reckoning of Time"), written in AD 725, where he identified the month of April as Eosturmonath (§330).

Our only source for Eostre, and the only real evidence that she was ever a goddess, is Bede's Reckoning of Time. Here is the entirety of what he says about her:

In olden time the English people -- for it did not seem fitting to me that I should speak of other people's observance of the year and yet be silent about my own nation's -- calculated their months according to the course of the moon. Hence, after the manner of the Greeks and the Romans (the months) take their name from the Moon, for the Moon is called mona and the month monath.

The first month, which the Latins call January, is Giuli; February is called Solmonath; March Hrethmonath; April, Eosturmonath; May, Thrimilchi; June, Litha; July, also Litha; August, Weodmonath; September, Halegmonath; October, Winterfilleth; November, Blodmonath; December, Giuli, the same name by which January is called. ...

Nor is it irrelevant if we take the time to translate the names of the other months. ... Hrethmonath is named for their goddess Hretha, to whom they sacrificed at this time. Eosturmonath has a name which is now translated "Paschal month", and which was once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre, in whose honour feasts were celebrated in that month. Now they designate that Paschal season by her name, calling the joys of the new rite by the time-honoured name of the old observance. Thrimilchi was so called because in that month the cattle were milked three times a day...

Source: Bede, on 'Eostre'​

The only information given about her is that:
1) She had feasts in Eosturmonath (roughly corresponding to April)
2) Eosturmonath was named after her
3) Easter's English name came from Eostre or Eosturmonath (depending on how one translates it)

And that's it. Nothing else (it's also arguable how accurate even that information is, which I'll get to later). If anyone sees anything else claimed about Eostre than the above points, it's at best speculation, and is usually just plain made up. We don't even know how long ago the feasts to Eostre happened in comparison to Bede (recently, or is this something that happened in the much more distant past and was abandoned well before Christianity became dominant in Britain?).

In regards to point #3, I should note that while the above translation says "Now they designate that Paschal season by her name", it could also be translated as "Now they designate that Paschal season by its name", referring to the month, as this post explains:

Easter: A translation error in Bede, De Ratione Temporum

The word “Easter” is used only in English for the Christian commemoration of the death and resurrection of Christ. In most languages the word is passover (pasch), or some version of it…

www.roger-pearse.com

In such a case, it's simply naming it after the month it would often occur in. Even if the month's name came from Eostre, that wouldn't make Easter any more associated with her name than "Fourth of July" is associated with Julius Caesar.

Finally, it should be noted that there is reason to be skeptical of Bede's assertion, as aside from him, we have no direct evidence that Eostre was ever a goddess, let alone the month was named after her. Thus our entire information about Eostre is a brief reference as an aside, and it's not clear how accurate his claims are--it should be noted that we have no direct evidence that there was ever a "Hretha" either.

So this really doesn't mean anything in regards to Easter origins. At most, it would mean that the name in English comes from Eostre, and even that's not clear.

In the Life of Charlemagne, written about a century later, the Frankish scholar Einhard relates that, among the reforms of Charles the Great, "He gave the months names in his own tongue, in place of the Latin and barbarous names by which they were formerly known among the Franks" (§29). April was called Ostaramonath, "Easter month," Ostara and Eostre being related to Eos, the Greek goddess of dawn, heralding the arrival of spring. Jacob Grimm (the elder of the Brothers Grimm) elaborates on the etymology in Teutonic Mythology, first published in 1835.

Teutonic Mythology is the first mention of Ostara. It was a conjecture Jacob Grimm made. Find a single source that refers to Ostara as a goddess prior to him. People can't, because it was a speculation. See, Grimm was fully aware that outside of Bede's brief reference, there's no mention of Eostre anywhere, and as part of his attempt at evidence he conjectured the possibility of an Ostara existing. (for more information, see here; scroll down to "Who Is Ostara?") Even if Grimm's speculation was totally correct and there was a Germanic Ostara, it's only further speculation to claim it's related to Eos.

Easter's name - The name Easter is never associated with the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ in the original Scriptures and is actually derived from the word "Eostre." Eostre was Queen Semiramis, the wife of Nimrod, Noah's evil but enterprising great grandson (Genesis 10:6-8).

Semiramis being the wife of Nimrod is nonsense that gets passed around the Internet. Semiramis is a legendary figure apparently based on the actual queen Shammuramat, who lived in the 9th century BC. But obviously Nimrod wouldn't have been around then, as he would've lived more than a thousand years earlier.

Even if Semiramis/Shammuramat hooked up with Nimrod through some kind of time travel shenanigans, there's no evidence she had anything to do with Eostre.

Eostre's history - Nimrod built the major cities of Babel, Asshur, Nineveh, and Calah (Genesis 10:10-12), which were known for their evil and unimaginable worship practices and perversion. Remember the story of Jonah? After Nimrod's death, Queen Semiramis kept these evil practices alive by deifying Nimrod as the sun god. Later, Queen Semiramis gave birth to an illegitimate son, Tammuz. She convinced the people that this son was supernaturally conceived and the child promised by God in Genesis 3:15. The people worshipped Tammuz as the reincarnation of Nimrod, but more importantly, the people worshipped Queen Semiramis as the mother goddess. The horrible human sacrifice, idolatry, astrology, and satanic worship in these false religions -sun (Nimrod) and moon (Eostre) - continued until the time of the Tower of Babel. Because of their sin, God confused the people's language to disperse them throughout the world (Genesis 11:7).

As the people resettled in new lands, they took their pagan worship with them. Queen Semiramis came to be known as Ostera (an Anglo-Saxon goddess who symbolized the rebirth of the day and new life in the spring), Astarte (Phoenician goddess of the moon), Eastre, and Ashtaroth or Ashtoreth (the wife of Baal and the queen of heaven). Nimrod's other names were Baal, Baalim, Molech, the god of fire, and the great life giver. Any serious study of the Old Testament reveals God's hatred for this false worship, and Ezekiel 8:14 specifically mentions Tammuz in its condemnation.

Easter's origin - The beginning of Easter goes back to the springtime ritual begun by Queen Semiramis following the death of Tammuz. Legend has it that through her tears, Tammuz could be resurrected in the reincarnated form of new vegetation on Earth.

With the spread of Christianity many years later, it was a common practice to adapt the existing non-Christian festivals and assimilate them into Christian theology. Because Queen Semiramis (Eostre) was the goddess of spring and her symbolism dealt with renewal and rebirth, the Christian belief in the resurrection of Christ fit well with these themes.

This is made up. Naturally, not a single source is given for any of these claims. Which makes sense, because... well, they're made up.

 

[JSRG]

apparently there was a high sabbath link;

Jesus’ Death and Resurrection – Two Sabbaths | Truth in Scripture

truthinscripture.net

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.

 

[Qubit]

The Passover Feast was the High Sabbath that is mentioned.

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!

 

[Kokavkrystallos]

None of this addresses my question, which was to ask for evidence that Passover was referred to as a Sabbath in the New Testament period.



Our only source for Eostre, and the only real evidence that she was ever a goddess, is Bede's Reckoning of Time. Here is the entirety of what he says about her:

In olden time the English people -- for it did not seem fitting to me that I should speak of other people's observance of the year and yet be silent about my own nation's -- calculated their months according to the course of the moon. Hence, after the manner of the Greeks and the Romans (the months) take their name from the Moon, for the Moon is called mona and the month monath.

The first month, which the Latins call January, is Giuli; February is called Solmonath; March Hrethmonath; April, Eosturmonath; May, Thrimilchi; June, Litha; July, also Litha; August, Weodmonath; September, Halegmonath; October, Winterfilleth; November, Blodmonath; December, Giuli, the same name by which January is called. ...

Nor is it irrelevant if we take the time to translate the names of the other months. ... Hrethmonath is named for their goddess Hretha, to whom they sacrificed at this time. Eosturmonath has a name which is now translated "Paschal month", and which was once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre, in whose honour feasts were celebrated in that month. Now they designate that Paschal season by her name, calling the joys of the new rite by the time-honoured name of the old observance. Thrimilchi was so called because in that month the cattle were milked three times a day...

Source: Bede, on 'Eostre'​

The only information given about her is that:
1) She had feasts in Eosturmonath (roughly corresponding to April)
2) Eosturmonath was named after her
3) Easter's English name came from Eostre or Eosturmonath (depending on how one translates it)

And that's it. Nothing else (it's also arguable how accurate even that information is, which I'll get to later). If anyone sees anything else claimed about Eostre than the above points, it's at best speculation, and is usually just plain made up. We don't even know how long ago the feasts to Eostre happened in comparison to Bede (recently, or is this something that happened in the much more distant past and was abandoned well before Christianity became dominant in Britain?).

In regards to point #3, I should note that while the above translation says "Now they designate that Paschal season by her name", it could also be translated as "Now they designate that Paschal season by its name", referring to the month, as this post explains:

Easter: A translation error in Bede, De Ratione Temporum

The word “Easter” is used only in English for the Christian commemoration of the death and resurrection of Christ. In most languages the word is passover (pasch), or some version of it…

www.roger-pearse.com

In such a case, it's simply naming it after the month it would often occur in. Even if the month's name came from Eostre, that wouldn't make Easter any more associated with her name than "Fourth of July" is associated with Julius Caesar.

Finally, it should be noted that there is reason to be skeptical of Bede's assertion, as aside from him, we have no direct evidence that Eostre was ever a goddess, let alone the month was named after her. Thus our entire information about Eostre is a brief reference as an aside, and it's not clear how accurate his claims are--it should be noted that we have no direct evidence that there was ever a "Hretha" either.

So this really doesn't mean anything in regards to Easter origins. At most, it would mean that the name in English comes from Eostre, and even that's not clear.



Teutonic Mythology is the first mention of Ostara. It was a conjecture Jacob Grimm made. Find a single source that refers to Ostara as a goddess prior to him. People can't, because it was a speculation. See, Grimm was fully aware that outside of Bede's brief reference, there's no mention of Eostre anywhere, and as part of his attempt at evidence he conjectured the possibility of an Ostara existing. (for more information, see here; scroll down to "Who Is Ostara?") Even if Grimm's speculation was totally correct and there was a Germanic Ostara, it's only further speculation to claim it's related to Eos.



Semiramis being the wife of Nimrod is nonsense that gets passed around the Internet. Semiramis is a legendary figure apparently based on the actual queen Shammuramat, who lived in the 9th century BC. But obviously Nimrod wouldn't have been around then, as he would've lived more than a thousand years earlier.

Even if Semiramis/Shammuramat hooked up with Nimrod through some kind of time travel shenanigans, there's no evidence she had anything to do with Eostre.


This is made up. Naturally, not a single source is given for any of these claims. Which makes sense, because... well, they're made up.

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

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

 

[BPPLEE]

For as Jonas was in the whale's belly so shall the Son of man be in the heart of the earth.

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.