Does Pentecost always fall on a Sunday?

There's been an ongoing debate among the Jews and also among Christians for centuries on the timing of the Feast of Firstfruits. I agree with the Karaite Jews that according to Lev 23 and other texts, Firstfruits and Pentecost are always on Sunday, that Sunday was observed before the temple was destroyed but that some knowledge of the proper timing of the Feasts was lost afterwards. I looked into this a few years ago and I put my thoughts down in a couple of my ebooks.

On writing that First Fruits was on the 16th of the First month, Ellen White may have been influenced by the writings of Josephus. According to the Bible, however, this does not seem to be the case.

OK - so Rosangela says EGW is wrong. . . . If EGW is wrong on this point, where else is she wrong?

I think Roseangela's saying Ellen White is probably right. The same thought - EGW may have been influenced by someone such as Josephus - crossed my mind as well, but I don't think that she was mislead.

I think Roseangela's saying Ellen White is probably right. The same thought - EGW may have been influenced by someone such as Josephus - crossed my mind as well, but I don't think that she was mislead.

On writing that First Fruits was on the 16th of the First month, Ellen White may have been influenced by the writings of Josephus. According to the Bible, however, this does not seem to be the case.

OK - so Rosangela says EGW is wrong. Do you also believe that Passover was always the same day of the week? If not, what happens when Passover happened on the 7th-day Sabbath? Passover was on the 14th day of the month, Leviticus 23:5. The next day began the feast of unleavened bread, the 15th of the month, a Sunday. If Passover was a 7th-day Sabbath, then the first day of unleaven bread would be an annual Sabbath, the next day was the presentation of the Wave Sheaf, on the 16th of the month, so in the scenario, this would be on what we now call Monday. The count to Pentecost begins, after the annual Sabbath. But Rosangela, are you suggesting that they needed to wait another week before beginning the count to Pentecost? That IS what you are saying. If EGW is wrong on this point, where else is she wrong?

You see Mark, Rosangela does think EGW had it wrong. But I do not think so. Nor do other Adventist writers in EGW's time.

As Levitus 23:15, seven weeks complete. v16, "seven sabbaths", or "week of weeks", then end being 50 days.

The 15th was a ceremonial Sabbath, Leviticus 23:4-7. The 16th fits with EGW. In the scenario I gave above, with Passover, the 14th being on a 7th-day Sabbath, would you have us believe that first fruits would not happen until 8-9 days later (depending on if you could inclusive not)?

You see Mark, Rosangela does think EGW had it wrong. But I do not think so. Nor do other Adventist writers in EGW's time.

By the way, indeed the year 31 A.D. does not admit, astronomically, a Nisan 14 as the day for Christ’s death, only a Nisan 15.

Please pay attention to the following statement: “He knew that His hour was come; He himself was the true paschal lamb, and on the day the Passover was eaten He was to be sacrificed” {DA, 642}

How "astronomically" was the New Moon determined? By sighting of the new cresent, not mathematically calculated. So I have no idea on what you base this comment.

As to the types of the feasts, it is clear that Christ, the type of the First Fruits, would rise on the 3rd day. Passover, start of the feast of Unleaven Bread, Wave Sheaf. Christ the firstfruit, rose on the 3rd day. This was always true for the feasts and the type of Christ and it was understood when Christ would rise again: Matthew 16:21; Matthew 17:23; Matthew 20:19; Mark 9:31; Mark 10:34; Luke 9:22; Luke 13:32; Luke 18:33; Luke 24:7; Luke 24:21; Luke 24:26; Acts 10:40; 1 Corinthians 15:4.

Your quote of Cristler only says that EG White did not explain all scripture. It does not say that what she said was wrong. You are saying she was flat out wrong. That is a strong claim.

Or is there a Hebrew idiom that needs to be understood?

Are there any feasts of the Lord which specify the day of the week on which they are to take place? No, not one. The only the 7th-day Sabbath is specified for a particular day.

Please pay attention to the following statement: EGW quoting Luke 22:15: As they were gathered about the table, He said in tones of touching sadness, "With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer...

This argument does not make sense. Christ indeed said He would rise on the 3d day. What He didn't say was that He would die on Nisan 14.

A Hebrew idiom? Sabbath = seven days? As to Deuteronomy 16:9, 10, as I said previously, week = Sunday to Sabbath.

Is there any feast to which a date is not attached in the Bible? Just one - Pentecost. Why?

There was a contradiction between two statements of hers, and this contradiction hasn't been solved.

The type was He would rise on the 3rd day. This was true every year in the type, no matter when the New Moon occurred. This would not be true if the Wave Sheaf was to be on a specific day of the week, it does not work.

You are saying both Pentecost and the Wave Sheaf were tied to specific days. You have not proven this and as stated, you are in contradiction to the clear statement of Ellen White. The SDABC which you should be intimately knowledgeable of also states that the Wave Sheaf was on the 16th of Nisan.

Did you just ignore what the Bible said and I quoted above?

Was the whole nation wrong? When did the nation eat the Passover?

Again, see EGW quote I provided you and you seemed to have ignored or not understood.

Rosangela and Mark,

It seems from your comments you are implying that the new moon, resets the weekly cycle. Am I correct?

That is otherwise there are problems from what you are suggesting: If Passover can fall on any day of the week, and if the first fruits start on the 15th, and there 50 days between and the 50th day is on a Sunday, then the assumption that Passover can fall on any day of the week cannot be true.

No, the type was that He would rise on the day of the Firstfruits offering, and the type was that He would rise on a Sunday, after He had rested from His completed work of salvation on the Sabbath. That's very simple.

I'm just using the Bible, and interpreting the word Sabbath as Sabbath, not as "seven days."

I didn't see any Bible quote you provided which solved the problem.

Note 1

All four Gospels agree that Jesus and His disciples celebrated the Last Supper on the night preceding the crucifixion, that He lay in the tomb over Sabbath, and that He arose early Sunday morning. The Synoptics, however, call the Last Supper, the night preceding the crucifixion, “the Passover,” whereas according to John, the Jews celebrated the Passover supper on the night following the crucifixion. The statements of John and the Synoptics thus appear to be in conflict.

Most critical commentators dismiss this apparent conflict with the casual observation that, obviously, either John or the synoptic writers were mistaken. But those who believe in the inspiration of the Scriptures reject such an explanation and propose, instead, one of various possible solutions to the problem. In order to evaluate intelligently these solutions it is necessary, first, to review Biblical and secular data relating to the time and typical significance of the Passover, and to time factors connected with the Last Supper and the crucifixion.

Time of the Passover.—The paschal lamb was slain in the late afternoon of Nisan 14, following the regular evening sacrifice, and eaten, with unleavened bread, after sunset that same night, during the early hours of Nisan 15 (Exodus 12:6-14; Exodus 12:29; Exodus 12:33; Exodus 12:42; Exodus 12:51; Exodus 13:3-7; Numbers 9:1-5; Numbers 33:3; Deuteronomy 16:1-7; Josephus Antiquities ii. 14. 6; iii. 10. 5; xi. 4. 8 [311, 312; 248, 249; 109, 110]; War v. 3. 1 [98, 99]; vi. 9. 3 [423]; Philo De septenario, sec. 18; Mishnah Pesaḥim 5. 1, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 287). Nisan 15, a ceremonial sabbath, also marked the beginning of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Exodus 12:8; Exodus 12:18; Exodus 12:34; Exodus 12:39; Leviticus 23:5-6; Numbers 28:16-17; Deuteronomy 16:3-4; Deuteronomy 16:8; Antiquities iii. 10. 5 [249]; cf. ii. 15. 2 [318]). On Nisan 16, the second day of this feast, the wave sheaf of the first fruits was presented in the Temple (see Leviticus 23:10-14; Antiquities iii. 10. 5 [250, 251]). The term “Passover” was originally applied to Nisan 14 only, but in the time of Christ it was sometimes used of the Feast of Unleavened Bread as well (Antiquities ii. 14. 6; xi. 4. 8; xiv. 2. 1 [311–313; 109–111; 21]; xvii. 9. 3; War ii. 1. 3; v. 3. 1 [10; 99]). Apparently, also, the term Feast of Unleavened Bread was similarly used to include the Passover (Luke 22:7; Acts 12:3-4; cf. Matthew 20:6).

Tables that purport to give the Christian Era dates for each paschal full moon during the ministry of our Lord are of no real help in this problem for all such tables are based on modern Jewish methods of computing the time of the Passover. How the Jews of Christ’s time coordinated their lunar calendar with the solar year is not known today, all supposedly learned statements to the contrary notwithstanding. It is therefore impossible to determine with absolute certainty the day of the week or even, always, the month in which the Passover of any year of our Lord’s ministry may have occurred. For a discussion of this problem see Vol. II, pp. 100-105; Vol. V. pp. 250-264.

A notable perversion of Biblical data regarding the time of the Last Supper is the Wednesday crucifixion theory, which assumes: (1) that the Christian Era date of the paschal full moon of the crucifixion year can be determined with absolute accuracy (see p. 258), (2) that the Hebrew idiomatic expression “three days and three nights” indicates a period of 72 full hours (see Vol. I, p. 182; Vol. II, pp. 136, 137; Vol. V, pp. 248-251), and (3) that the Greek of Matthew 28:1 (see comment there) assigns the resurrection to Sabbath afternoon. This theory does not bear the marks of sound scholarship and is utterly at variance with Biblical meanings of terms. Therefore it is untenable.

Some have assumed that the expression “in the evening,” of Exodus 12:6, literally, “between the two evenings,” denotes the moment of sunset beginning Nisan 14, or the period between sunset and dark. Although some modern commentators have adopted this theory, a careful examination of other Biblical passages, of the writings of Josephus and Philo, and of the tractate Pesaḥim (see Mishnah Pesaḥim, 4. 1, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 243; 5. 1, 10, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, pp. 287, 325; Talmud Pesaḥim 58a, Soncino ed., pp. 287–290; and other references cited above) provide no clear evidence in support of it. See p. 265.

Typical Significance of the Passover.—The paschal lamb prefigured Christ, “the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29), “Christ our passover,” who was to be “sacrificed for us” (1 Corinthians 5:7). Similarly, the wave sheaf of the Feast of Unleavened Bread typified “Christ risen from the dead, … the first-fruits of them that slept” (1 Corinthians 15:20; 1 Corinthians 15:23).

The Last Supper and the Crucifixion.—The following chronological statements appear to be either explicit or implicit in the Gospel narrative and are rather generally accepted by Bible students:

a. The crucifixion took place on “the preparation [eve] of the passover,” that is, on Nisan 14 (John 19:14; cf. Talmud Pesaḥim 58a, Soncino ed., p. 288; Sanhedrin 43a, Soncino ed., p. 281; Exodus 12:6; cf. GC-399).

b. The death of Christ took place on a Friday afternoon (Mark 15:42 to Mark 16:2; Luke 23:54 to Luke 24:1; John 19:31; John 19:42; John 20:1), about the time of the evening sacrifice (DA-756; DA-757; cf. GC-399).

c. Accordingly, in the year of the crucifixion, Nisan 14, the day appointed for slaying the paschal lambs, fell on a Friday; the preparation for (or eve of) the Passover coincided with the preparation for (or eve of) the weekly Sabbath (John 19:14; cf. Matthew 26:31; Matthew 26:42; Matthew 20:1). The first ceremonial sabbath of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, Nisan 15, thus coincided with the weekly Sabbath (Leviticus 23:6-8; cf. Mark 15:42 to Mark 16:2; Luke 23:5 to Luke 24:1).

d. The Last Supper took place the night preceding the crucifixion (Matthew 26:17; Matthew 26:20; Matthew 26:26; Matthew 26:34; Matthew 26:47; Mark 14:12; Mark 14:16-17; Luke 22:7-8; Luke 22:13-15; John 13:2; John 13:4; John 13:30; John 14:31; John 18:1-3; John 18:28; John 19:16; cf. DA-642; GC-399), that is, during the early hours of Nisan 14 (see Vol. II, p. 101) and thus on a Thursday night.

e. The synoptic accounts call the Last Supper a Passover supper (Matthew 26:17; Matthew 26:20; Mark 14:12; Mark 14:16-17; Luke 22:7-8; Luke 22:13-15; cf. DA-642; DA-652; GC-399).

f. John’s account places the official Jewish celebration of the Passover supper 24 hours later than the Last Supper, and thus on Friday night following the crucifixion, during the early hours of the weekly Sabbath (John 18:28; John 19:14; John 19:31; cf. DA-774), which would be Nisan 15.

g. At the time of the Last Supper (John 13:1), during the course of the trial (Matthew 26:5; Mark 14:2; John 18:28; John 19:14; cf. DA-703; DA-723), and on the way to Calvary (cf. DA-742), the official celebration of the Passover was apparently yet future.

h. Jesus lay in the tomb over the Sabbath (Matthew 27:59 to Matthew 28:1; Mark 15:43 to Mark 16:1; Luke 23:54 to Luke 24:1; John 19:38 to John 20:1), which would be Nisan 15.

i. Jesus arose from the tomb early Sunday morning, Nisan 16 (Matthew 28:1-6; Mark 16:1-6; Luke 24:1-6; John 20:1-16; see on Mark 15:42; Mark 15:46; cf. GC-399; DA-785; DA-786).

Proposed Solutions of the Problem.—In the light of the foregoing let us examine the problem of the time of the Passover in the crucifixion year. Conservative commentators have generally sought to solve the problem on the basis of one of the four following assumptions:

a. That when referring to the Last Supper, the synoptic writers describe, not the Passover meal, but a ceremonial meal that preceded it by 24 hours. According to this assumption Nisan 14 fell on Friday in the year of the crucifixion and the Passover of John was the official Passover meal.

b. That “the passover” to which John refers was not the Passover meal, but a ceremonial meal connected with the Feast of Unleavened Bread. According to this assumption Friday was Nisan 15, and the Last Supper the preceding night was a celebration of the official Passover meal, at the regular time. This explanation is the reverse of the preceding one.

c. That the Last Supper was a true Passover meal, as in the Synoptics, even though celebrated only by Jesus and His disciples, 24 hours in advance of the official Passover meal referred to by John, and thus of the time other Jews celebrated it. According to this assumption Friday was Nisan 14.

d. That in the time of Christ sectarian differences with respect to calendrical reckoning, as to whether Nisan 14 and 16 should be correlated with certain days of the week, had led, in actual practice, to a celebration of the Passover on two successive days, that is, a double celebration. According to this assumption one religious faction (the Pharisees and other conservatives) would have considered that Nisan 14 fell on Thursday in the crucifixion year, and the other (the Boethusian Sadducees and other liberals), that it fell on Friday. Christ and the disciples thus, presumably, celebrated the Passover with the first group—the “passover” of the Synoptics—and the Jewish leaders celebrated it the following night—the “passover” of John. This assumption differs from the preceding one in that here Christ and the disciples were not alone in their celebration of the Passover.

For a more detailed discussion of the various attempts that have been made to harmonize the statements of John and the Synoptics with regard to the time of the Last Supper in relation to the Passover, over, the reader is referred to the following: Grace Amadon, “Ancient Jewish Calendation,” Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 61, part 4, 1942, pp. 227-280; C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John, pp. 38–41; J. H. Bernard, International Critical Commentary, on St. John, vol. 1, pp. cvi-cviii; D. Chwolson, Das Letzte Passamahl Christi und der Tag Seines Todes; The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, art. “Chronology of the New Testament”; J. K; Klausner, Jesus of Nazareth, tr. Herbert Danby, pp. 326–329; A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, on Matthew 26:17; John 18:28; H. L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament, vol. 2, pp. 812, 813. (See bibliographical notes on pp. 82, 102, 265.) For a full discussion of the calendrical problems involved see pp. 248-264.

Evaluation of Proposed Solutions.—These four proposed solutions to the problem may be evaluated as follows:

a. The view that the Last Supper was a preliminary ceremonial meal in advance of the regular Passover meal assumes that the Synoptics use the word “passover” in an accommodated sense. While it may be granted that the word “passover” could have been used in this sense (see p. 533), available evidence is strongly against such an accommodated use: (1) This view rests on the conjecture that such a preliminary ceremonial meal may have been celebrated in the days of Christ. (2) The more natural and obvious reading of these passages in their context (see references listed on p. 534, par. e) points to the conclusion that the synoptic writers consistently and repeatedly speak of the Last Supper as “the passover.” (3) The comment of both Mark (Matthew 14:12) and Luke (Matthew 22:7), that the day preceding the Last Supper was “the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover” (see Mark 14:12), would seem to preclude any possibility that the “passover” of the Synoptics could have been anything but a true Passover meal (cf. DA-642; DA-646; DA-652; DA-653; EW-165: GC-399). The disciples apparently took for granted that Thursday was the day of preparation for the Passover, that is, the day on which the paschal lamb should be slain and roasted (see p. 533).

b. The view that “the passover” of John 18:28; John 19:14 was a ceremonial meal connected with the Feast of Unleavened Bread, 24 hours after the official Passover supper, which was on Nisan 15, assumes that John uses the word “passover” in an accommodated sense. In favor of this view, it may be noted that common usage in NT times, as reflected, for instance, by Josephus (see p. 533), commonly applied the term Passover to the combined celebration of the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread. But although it may be granted that John could have used the word “passover” in this accommodated sense (see p. 533), available evidence is strongly against his so doing in the passages cited: (1) There is no clear use of the word “passover” in this sense anywhere in the NT. (2) The more natural and obvious reading of John’s statements in their context points to the conclusion that the Passover meal to which the apostle refers was the official celebration of the Passover, at least the one generally recognized by the Jewish leaders. (3) The anxiety of the Jewish leaders to conclude the trial and execution of Jesus immediately, before the feast, in order to avoid delaying the case until after the feast, would appear to preclude any possibility that the feast had already begun (Matthew 26:3-5; Mark 14:1-2, cf. DA-703). (4) Jewish law, as later codified in the Mishnah and the Talmud, prohibited the trial on a feast day of a case involving the death penalty (Mishnah Beẓah 5. 2, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 185; Sanhedrin 4. 1, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 185), or purchases such as that of the linen shroud and possibly also of spices for embalming the body of Jesus (Mark 15:46; Luke 23:56; however, see Mishnah Shabbath 23. 5, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 771). The violation of these regulations—if they were in force in earlier times, as seems probable, and if, indeed, heed was given to them, which, however, cannot be established (see Note 2)—would appear to rule out the possibility that the arrest, trial, and crucifixion took place on Nisan 15, the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread and a ceremonial sabbath. (5) Preparations for embalming the body of Jesus (Luke 23:54 to Luke 24:1), such as the women made on the day of the crucifixion, were considered labor, and as such would seem to be inappropriate even for a ceremonial sabbath (Leviticus 23:7; however, see Mishnah Shabbath 23. 5, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 771). (6) At sunset of the crucifixion day the women “rested the sabbath day according to the commandment” (Luke 23:56), obviously a reference to the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. (7) If, as this view assumes, the crucifixion fell on Nisan 15, the first day of unleavened bread, then the resurrection fell on Nisan 17, or the third day. But the offering of the first fruits, a type of the resurrection of our Lord, took place on the second day, or Nisan 16 (see Leviticus 23:10-14; 1 Corinthians 15:20; 1 Corinthians 15:23; GC-399; DA-785; DA-786). According to this view, then, the resurrection did not occur at the time called for by the ceremonial type of the wave sheaf. (8) In Jewish literature “the preparation of the passover” (John 19:14) is consistently applied to Nisan 14, never to Nisan 15, as this view would require (see Mishnah Pesaḥim 4. 1, 5, 6, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, pp. 243, 268, 271). (9) “The Passover was observed [by the Jews generally] as it had been for centuries [in other words, during the early hours of Nisan 15 (see p. 533)], while He to whom it pointed had been slain by wicked hands [late on Nisan 14], and lay in Joseph’s tomb” (DA-774; cf. GC-399).

c. The view that the Last Supper, although a true paschal meal, took place 24 hours prior to the time when the Jews, generally, celebrated it assumes that such a practice was possible. This view, unlike the preceding one, does take into account the fact that the crucifixion occurred in fulfillment of the type provided by the slaying of the paschal lamb on Nisan 14. It was, admittedly, impossible for Christ to eat the paschal lamb at the usual time, and also, as Himself the true paschal Lamb, to be slain at the usual time for the slaying of the Passover lambs. It would seem more important that His death should synchronize with the death of the Passover lambs than that His eating of the Passover should synchronize with the official time for eating that meal (pp. 533, 534; GC-399). Accordingly, His eating of the Passover would take place earlier than the time regularly set for it if the types of the slaying of the lamb and the offering of the first fruits were to be fulfilled “not only as to the event, but as to the time” (GC-399). However, this view is also confronted with difficulties. It is difficult to see how Jesus and the disciples, as sole exceptions to the rule, could have celebrated the Passover a day in advance of the usual time. Note that: (1) There is no historical evidence of anyone else having ever eaten the Passover early. The Passover lambs were to be slain at the Temple (Mishnah Pesaḥim 5. 5–7, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, pp. 323, 324) at a specified time (see p. 533), and, consistently as far as the record goes, there was no provision for slaying them at any other time than the late afternoon of Nisan 14 (for an exception see Numbers 9:6-11). (2) The disciples apparently recognized Thursday as the day on which preparations for the Passover should properly be made, in the crucifixion year (see Matthew 26:17; Luke 22:7), and seemed to take for granted that Thursday night was the proper time for eating the paschal meal. Whether the subject had been under discussion and Jesus had informed them that the time of celebration would be an exception and come on Thursday rather than Friday night, or whether they considered that Thursday night was a normal time for the celebration, we are not informed. The synoptic writers are silent as to anything out of the ordinary about the eating of the Passover on Thursday night by Jesus and the disciples.

d. The view that there was a double celebration of the Passover is based on one or another of various conjectures. What is perhaps the most plausible of these conjectures assumes that the “passover” of the Synoptics was the one celebrated by the Pharisees and other conservative Jews, whereas that of John was the one observed by the more liberal Boethusian Sadducees and others sympathetic with their interpretation of Scripture. (The Boethusian Sadducees of Christ’s day are known to have contended that the “sabbath” of Leviticus 23:11 referred to a weekly Sabbath instead of a ceremonial sabbath.) Those who set forth this view conjecture that in a year like a.d. 31, when, they assume, Nisan 16 would normally have fallen on the weekly Sabbath, the Sadducees would advocate the adjustment of the Jewish lunar calendar to make Nisan 16 fall, instead, on the first day of the week. This could, it is granted, have given rise to a double celebration of the Passover, but there is no evidence that, in actual practice, it ever did so. However, in that it makes the “passover” of the Synoptics and that of John both valid occasions for the celebration of the Passover, theory offers a possible solution of the apparently contradictory statements of the various gospel writers.

Conclusions.—We have here one more instance where our present-day ignorance of ancient Jewish practices appears to be the cause of our inability clearly to harmonize the seemingly conflicting statements of John and the Synoptics. However, on the basis of all available evidence, but without accepting any one of these four proposed explanations, this commentary suggests the possibility of the following sequence of events connected with the Last Supper, the crucifixion, and the Passover:

a. That in the year of the crucifixion, whether as a result of controversy between liberal and conservative elements of Judaism, or because of other circumstances now unknown, there may have been a double celebration of the Passover.

b. That, with other conservative Jews, Christ and the disciples celebrated the Last Supper on Thursday night, during the early hours of what was officially Nisan 14, and that the Last Supper was a true celebration of the Passover.

c. That Jesus died on the cross about the time of the evening sacrifice and the slaying of the paschal lambs, on Friday, Nisan 14.

d. That, in the year of the crucifixion, the official celebration of the Passover came on Friday night, after the crucifixion.

e. That Jesus rested in the tomb over the weekly Sabbath, which, in that year, coincided with the ceremonial, or annual, sabbath, Nisan 15, the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread.

f. That Jesus arose from the tomb early on Sunday morning, Nisan 16, the day when the wave sheaf, which typified the resurrection, was presented in the Temple.

Happily, it is not necessary to solve this problem in order to avail ourselves of salvation through “Christ our passover,” who was “sacrificed for us” (1 Corinthians 5:7)

Anyway, a Nisan 14 on a Friday is impossible in A.D. 31, and sooner or later the SDABC will have to deal with that.

Based on mathematical calculations of the moon? You can't use the mathematical calculations.

The Passover was eaten - Christ and His disciples ate the Passover Thursday evening. He was crucified on Friday afternoon. In the Hebrew calendar, this was the very same day.

You link the 7th-day Sabbath to the Feast of Weeks but ignore the fact that the first day of the feast was Unleavened Bread was a ceremonial Sabbath it was the commemoration of the Passover lamb dying for sin, not the 7th-day Sabbath. It was this Sabbath that Leviticus is talking about for the Wave Sheaf and the 50 days to Pentecost.

There is a question a discrepancy between the synoptics and John, and I posted a discussion on that.

No! By no means, kland.


No, the 50 days don't begin on the 15th, but on the day of the wave sheaf offering (first fruits), which is described, not as being on the 16th, but as being on "the morrow after the Sabbath."

Repeating: even if we considered the word "Sabbath" as referring to a ceremonial sabbath, there aren't 7 ceremonial sabbaths between the 16th of Nisan and Pentecost. In order to avoid this, you must attribute to the word "Sabbath" the meaning of "seven days" (a meaning it has never had) and say that the word has two completely different meanings in the same verse - "ceremonial sabbath" and "seven days."

So then you would be saying the wave sheaf could at times be almost a week later than Passover?

"a meaning it has never had" - - Interesting how ignorant the Adventist Pioneers were? What else were they wrong about? How it is it we are so much smarter than they were? As they attributed the very meaning you say it never had? See the comments above by AT Jones, and the comments in the SDABC I posted above which you seem to have missed, which also included the discussion about the discrepancy between the synoptics and the book of John.

And again you completely deny the type of Christ rising on the 3rd day? Why? Do you not believe that it is in the type?

You are reading "after the Sabbath" and believe it is the 7th-day Sabbath, yet the first day of the feast was a sabbath

Yet, on all points you are in conflict with Ellen White's writings as the Wave Sheaf is type and Christ the anti-type

And in PP 539 she is clear and that on the second day of the feast, the day after the ceremonial sabbath, the wave sheaf was presented

So, "after the Sabbath" means "after the first ceremonial Sabbath of the feast" (by the way, why not the second ceremonial Sabbath of the feast?). And "after the seventh Sabbath," in the following verse, means what? Don't you see this is inconsistent?

And in GC 642 [sic] she is clear that Christ should be sacrificed on the day the Passover was eaten, that is, Nisan 15.

Rosangela - why did Ellen White not see the so clear inconsistency as you say? Why in Adventist publications of her time did they not see it? Is it because they understood the terminology different than you?

So to state your position clearly, you are saying Ellen White was wrong. And not only in Desire of Ages (642), but in Great Controversy

These types were fulfilled, not only as to the event, but as to the time. On the fourteenth day of the first Jewish month, the very day and month on which for fifteen long centuries the Passover lamb had been slain, Christ, having eaten the Passover with His disciples, instituted that feast which was to commemorate His own death as "the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." That same night He was taken by wicked hands to be crucified and slain. And as the antitype of the wave sheaf our Lord was raised from the dead on the third day, "the first fruits of them that slept," a sample of all the resurrected just, whose "vile body" shall be changed, and "fashioned like unto His glorious body." 1 Corinthians 15:20; Philippians 3:21. {GC 399.3}

Ah - Nissan 15, we it a ceremonial Sabbath day or not? If it was not, then you have a bigger problem in that by your reconning, the first day of unleavened bread would have been the Sunday and the wave sheaf would have occurred AFTER the week of unleavened bread, contradiction Ellen White even more. I'll stick with Ellen's assessment, and the same reconning that is used with respect to Jonah. You seem to ignore that fact that what you espouse, we not believed by the Adventist pioneers nor Ellen White.

And what you seem to ignore is that, astronomically, the death of Christ in A.D. 31 cannot have happened on a Nisan 14. By insisting that it must have happened on a Nisan 14, you are disqualifying the year 31 A.D. as the year for Christ's death.

Of course Nisan 15 was a ceremonial Sabbath.

Did you not read the link above which talks about astronomical data?

First, autumn new moon crescents take longer to be spotted than spring new moon crescents, but this was a spring new moon.

Second, I don't know what the expression "3.5 days" means, as it should have been expressed in terms of hours, not of days, but certainly a lunar month won't start at the fourth sunset after conjunction. In the book The Chronology of Ezra 7, pages 154-155, Horn and Wood say:

In the Near East it takes 16.5 to 42 hours after conjunction _ depending on whether her movements in relation to her distance from the earth are fast or slow _ before the moon becomes visible again in the form of a thin crescent, waxing larger and larger until the time of full moon.

Third, a month was the twenty-nine or thirty days between the first appearance of a crescent moon at sunset and the first appearance of the next crescent moon. In a year, about half of the months had 29 and half of them had 30 days. A month couldn't have 28 or 31 days. The preceding month had started on March 13/14, sunset to sunset. Using all the thirty days possible in a month, we arrive at April 12/13, sunset to sunset.

I found the following SDA commentators which discuss the day of Pentecost, and calculated astronomical data.
http://biblelight.net/pentecost.htm
http://clearbibleanswers.org/ad-31-and-the-friday-crucifixion.html

Anyway, a Nisan 14 on a Friday is impossible in A.D. 31, and sooner or later the SDABC will have to deal with that.

There was also "preperation" or "cleansing" offerings that took place before any of the 3 feasts(Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles). These were peace offerings and were known as the Chagigah which literally means a “festival offering” . A third went to the Lord, a third to the priest, and a third to the one that made the peace offering. The offerer had to eat it in a rejoicing festive manner with friends & family and all needed to be eaten by the 3rd day and burn the remaining.(Lev 4 and Lev 7) Whereas the Passover needed to be eaten at night (after sunset --the beginning of Nisan 15th) and finished before the next morning. So they only had 12 hours max to eat the passover during the night hours.

So interpretating that Jesus ate the Passover sacrifice on the night after the 14th and died on the 15th are erronous and conflicts with fulfilling the passover on the appointed time and suggest that He broke the law of eating the passover by going outside to sing hyms with His disciples afterward by which was forbidden to do by the law.

Elle, I disagree with your argument for a number of reasons.
First, a chagigah was eaten during the feasts, not before it.

Second, the three Synoptics say that the disciples prepared the meal for Jesus on the first day of Unleavened Bread (Matt. 26:17, Mark 14:12. Luke 22:7), which could apply to Nisan 14 but, obviously, not to Nisan 13.

Third, Luke says: “And he said to them, ‘I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God’ (Luke 22:15, 16). What is ludicrous is to think that Jesus is referring to the Chagigah with these words, and not to the Seder (the Passover meal), and that Jesus instituted a ceremony so important as to symbolize His blood and His flesh given for us at a Chagigah and not at a Seder.

Fourth, Calvary is the antitype of all the sacrifices of the OT. As such, it fulfilled the sacrificial aspect of all of them, not only of the Passover. And Christ died at the hour of the evening sacrifice.

Fifth, As Geldenhuys says,
The slaughtering of the lambs was indeed not the most important part of the Passover, but merely preparatory; it was the paschal repast itself that was of most importance. Why then was it necessary that Jesus, in order to be the true Paschal Lamb, should die just at the very hour when the paschal lambs were slaughtered, and should already be in His grave when the paschal repast commenced?
No, it was far more fitting that, when the paschal lambs were eaten, Jesus Himself as also Lord of the Passover (as He is Lord of the Sabbath) should be present at the paschal repast and should by the institution of the Holy Communion represent Himself as the Sacrificial Lamb of God who in a spiritual sense gives His flesh and blood to us, and should then, after having thus instituted the sing and seal of the New Dispensation, enter upon the way of suffering in order to complete everything.

Sorry, this argument is not valid. After the Passover lamb was eaten, singing hymns and going outside are, obviously, not forbidden by law.

The law does not say specifically when the peace offering was offered. It only says to bring your peace offerings to the 3 feasts times. So this leaves it wide open for private interpretation.

I believe Matthew, Mark, and Luke was referring to the night of Nisan 13th when Nisan 14th began at sunset.

Preparation day started by removing all the leaven in the house, preparing the eating area and the lamb was to be killed the next day on Nisan 14th between the two evenings. So while they started to make preparation for the Passover meal, they had the last supper together. But this was not the passover meal.

This goes in harmony with the account of the gospel of John that refer to the last supper by saying it was “before the feast of the Passover”(John 13:1)-- meaning that meal when Judas betrayed Jesus occur before the evening of the 14th-15th when is the time to eat the passover meal.

Before Judas took off, and the disciple was trying to figure out what Jesus meant with His words toward Judas and thought that because Judas had the money bag Jesus was instructing him to "Buy those things we need for the Feast,"(Jn 13:29). This text points that they had not finish the preparation of the Passover during that meal.

After that last supper, on that same night that's when Jesus was seized by the Jewish leaders and brought to be judged. When the early morning came JOHN 18:28 says “Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the Praetorium, and it was early morning. But they themselves did not go into the Praetorium, lest they should be defiled, but that they mighteat the Passover. (NKJV)” (see also Luke 18:28) These texts shows that the leaders had not eaten the Passover yet either by early morning.

Different translation can give different spin to a text. Many had translated Luke 22:15,16 to say Jesus was telling them that he desired but He won’t be eating of the coming Passover with them until the Kingdom is fulfilled. Here’s a few translation : (Note that “(coming)” before Passover is my addition because see John Synopsis above) “

Concerning the first part, the Paschal sacrifice was the only sacrifice made into a feast that represented our Justification which focused on the death work of Christ by spilling His blood for us which is the foundation of all other rituals that represents other aspects of our salvation process including our sanctification and cleansing.

Concerning the second part, I don’t understand your argument with the timing of “the evening sacrifice”. Jesus was crucified(put on the cross) on the 3rd hour(9AM), but He died on the 9th hours(3PM)(Mk 15:25,34; Mat 27:46;). According to the Law the Paschal lamb was to be sacrificed between the two evenings(after Noon and before Sunset(5PM)).

This reasoning is severely in conflicts with many scriptures that I have given just a few above but there’s more. Who is this Geldenhuys guy(or gal)? I tried to find him and this quote but none came up on the internet. Is he an SDA pastor trying to work around the 31AD problem?

No. Luke is very clear about it:

Of course it is clear. Both names were applied to the whole feast, as the verse says.

Of course it is clear. Both names were applied to the whole feast, as the verse says. What can't be the case is "the first day of unleavened bread" being applied to Nisan 13.

I believe Jesus ate the Chagigah with His disciples friends to accomplish that portion of the law. It was refered to as a Passover in a generic way, like the 7 days of unleavened bread was also refered as the Passover and like Deut 16:2 refers to the "cattle" to be the Passover sacrifice(of the Chagigah) because the term was used in a general way to encapsulate all the feasts that happened that time.
...
These fulfillment(passover, Pentecost) on the appointed time-day are not possible on the year 31 AD but it is on the year 33 AD.

Elle, it sounded like you were saying that 31 AD was all possible because of the generic way of referring to the days. Then you go and conclude it wasn't possible.

I must have missed your point.

(And by the way, I'm not sure a valid argument would be with the Jews worried about breaking the ceremonial law. They broke their Creator. And then in your version, you say they still instigated the tribunal)

I don't know if you were refering to my view, if so you have mis-understood what I have said by which is the opinion of many scholars that the reference of "the first day of unleavened bread" by the 3 gospels was the evening of Nisan 14th (Thursday at dusk when Nisan 13 and 14th met at sundown). At that time it was the beginning of "the first day of unleavened bread". That's when many believe the last supper took place.

Sorry, for not asking sooner and it is unclear to me -- how do you interpret the fulfillment of the whole Spring Feasts scenario as the days progress for a 31 AD by which Nisan 14th falls on a Thursday with most TYPES that are not fulfilled on appointed time. Contrary to a Nisan 14th scenario that falls of a Friday (example given below), like it was on 33 AD, all TYPES fulfillment falls on appointed times.

Contrary to a Nisan 14th scenario that falls of a Friday (example given below), like it was on 33 AD, all TYPES fulfillment falls on appointed times.

Also, tell me is your position the same as the Church's (those at the head)?

-This conflicts that how the disciple could think that Judas was being instructed to buy things for the Feast. Nisan 15th was a Ceremonial Sabbath, thus it was unthinkable that Jesus would of instruct Judas to go to buy things for the Feast. (John 13:29)

-They go outside to sing hymn. This would break Ex12:22 where it says it was forbidden to go out until morning.

- Jesus arrested & tribunal takes place until early morning. These are civil work which are forbidden to be conducted on Ceremonial Sabbaths, and weekly Sabbaths.

-Joseph buys a linen cloth to wrap Jesus. It was unlawful to buy on the ceremonial Sabbath day of Nisan 15th.

-According to the Pharisaical interpretation the wave sheaf happens here. However Jesus doesn’t resurrect until the following day. Right. So here also, the wave sheaf is not fulfilled at the appointed time.

-I had never seen this before, this is very interesting to have 8 Sabbaths in the count when you start counting the day of Nisan 16th that falls on a Sabbath.

Rosangela, do you (& Head of Church) believe that the fulfillment of Pentecost fell on a Sabbath?

Scenario when Nisan 14 falls on a Friday -- on 33 AD

I think this is totally non sense(look at all the red section). I understand why she's considering to stick with 31AD, because for admitting the error and changing to the 33AD date would mean the whole collapse of the SDA timeline including 1844. That's the price that many will not be willing to pay.

What really matters in this is all the Spring Feast TYPES(Death of Paschal Lamb on Nisan 14th, Jesus ressurection not coinciding with Wave sheaf offering on 16th, Omer count ending with 8 Sabbaths, Pentecost not fulfilled on Sunday, and etc...) that was NOT fulfill on the appointed time with a 31 AD scenario where Nisan 14th falls on a Thursday.

But if Passover days are referred to in general, why couldn't it be 31 AD?

I understood you saying "the Passover" can refer to any number of days during the time. So when someone said "the Passover", one would not know if it was preparatory to Passover, Passover, or one of the days of the unleavened bread. That is, no specific day could be affixed.

This can be nothing else than Nisan 14th that starts in the evening by removing all leavened in the house and cleaning the place.

John said that supper was “before the feast of the Passover”.

Then again in v.29, John mentions that before Judas left the supper, some disciples thought Jesus instructed Judas to go buy things for the (Passover) feast.

Another point that I haven’t mentioned before, is that the 4 gospels(Mt 26:26; Mk 14:22; Lk 22:19; Jn 13:18) and Paul (1Co 10:16,17; 1Co 11:23,26-28) all refers to the bread of that meal as (leavened) bread.

By default the Greek word artos means leavened bread.

To make things even messier is the Chagigah (peace offering) was also referred as Passover, or day of unleavened bread, or Pentecost, or Feast of Tabernacle, or just generally as "festival offering" which is the literal meaning of chagigah. So, it all depends on the context also for the usage of the peace offering.

"To kill the Passover"

Just a hunch, but would Elle say Jesus ate lamb and/or was lamb part of their passover meal that night?

Let’s look at the context Luke, Mark, and Matthew used in their expression :

AV Lk 22:7 “ Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. 8 And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat. ”

AV Mk 14:12 . “And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover? ”

AV Mt 26:17 . “ Now the first [day] of the [feast of] unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? ”

Context says :
A) Two accounts say it was the day “when the passover must be killed”.
B) All three accounts relates to this day as a day “to prepare to eat the passover”

This can be nothing else than Nisan 14th that starts in the evening by removing all leavened in the house and cleaning the place. They had the whole day(evening and next day) to do so. The remaining of the leavened bread could be eaten that day(Nisan 14th), but not on the evening of Nisan 15th and for 7 days afterwards.

Mark 14:12 is very clear. Two words are used: the verb thuo (to sacrifice, kill, slay) and the word pascha (Passover, Passover lamb). "To kill the Passover" - the chagigah would never be referred to in this way.

Traditionally there were two Passover chagigahs which they called the first Chagigah(eaten evening of Nisan 14th), and the second Chagigah(eaten evening of Nisan 15th).

No, this can be nothing else than the Nisan 14th that had started on the previous sunset, for it refers to the preparation of the Passover sacrifice.


John doesn't say that at all. You are reading into the text what is not there.

Why would Jesus instruct Judas to buy things for the Passover feast at that time of the night if Nisan 14 was just beginning and he had the whole morning next day to buy things? Rather, the disciples thought Judas was going to buy the necessary things for the chagigah, which was offered on Nisan 15, just after the morning sacrifice.

?????

Mark 14:12 And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb, his disciples said to him, "Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?"

Luc 22:7 Then came the day of Unleavened Bread, on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed.

So they ate leavened bread after the first day of Unleavened Bread had arrived? Your argument is a very strange one.

Not to mention that you hold that in the sentence "then came the day of Unleavened Bread" the verb "came" doesn't mean "came" at all, for it refers to a day that would come several hours later, at sunset.

“Pay attention to this: "On the first day of Unleavened Bread ... his disciples said to him, 'Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?'". ON the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples asked Jesus where they should prepare the Passover meal. It isn't referring to the following day, but to the day in course, which would end at sunset.

No, it doesn't. It means "bread" in a generic sense. In 1 Samuel 21:6, for instance: "So the priest gave him the holy bread, for there was no bread there but the bread of the Presence, which is removed from before the LORD, to be replaced by hot bread on the day it is taken away." Here, referring to the bread of the Presence (which is unleavened bread) the LXX uses arton thermon, "hot bread;" there is no need to use azumon.

AV Jn 13:1 . Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. 2. And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's [son], to betray him; …4 He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself…..”

Most people had come from far away, and had to find a place and buy the stuff necessary to prepare for the Passover meal that was taken on the next evening. Basically, for most of them coming from another town, they had 24hrs to do the real preparation. Many people got there a couple days earlier to do the cleansing ritual, but the preparation for the Passover mostly started in the evening of Nisan 14th. Jesus and the disciples also came from out of town, so they did what others did starting the evening of Nisan 14th by finding a place and getting everything ready for it.

It is with your application of verse 29 that makes no sense at all. Your view is saying they were eating the Nisan 15th meal (Thursday evening) which was considered as a ceremonial Sabbath and all day Friday also, and then the next day(Nisan 16th) was Saturday which was another Sabbath day. Two days being Sabbaths in a row and there’s no way Jesus would of instructed Judas to go buy things for the feast if they were already eating it and having two Sabbath days coming ahead.

"what day was "the first day of unleavenened bread""?. Was it evening of Nisan 14th or evening of Nisan 15th? Could be both.

I did a mistake in the other post, I thought they used artos with azumos to say unleavened bread. They don't they only use azumos in the NT for unleavenened [bread]. Never once, the word azumos is used to described the bread in the last supper in all 4 gospels accounts and by Paul. Not once. If that meal was the Passover meal like you believe, then we would of had at least ONE account saying the bread was unleavened. There was none in all 6 accounts (Mt 26:26; Mk 14:22; Lk 22:19; Jn 13:18; 1Co 10:16,17; 1Co 11:23,26-28).

c)I did not see any texts in scriptures that the shewbread was unleavened.

Concerning the symbolic representation of the bread of the last supper, that bread represented His body that was broken for us. We all know that Jesus came in a sinful corrupt body like postfall Adam, despite He did not sin. To represent His body as an unleavened bread could imply that He came with a perfect uncorrupt body which would contradict the heart of the gospel message.

"To kill the Passover" was a reference of what day it was "the first day of unleavened bread". It was on Nisan 14th. Read my reply to kland above post #171790.