How could the first Pentecost have been on a Sunday?

[Wesrock]

How is that possible? Pentecost means “fifty”, referring to the fiftieth day after the Passover. Our Pentecost is on a Sunday because our Easter is on Sunday. That is because the Church ruled that Easter should be the Sunday after the Passover would have been celebrated that year in the Old Law.

In addition to what’s been quoted from Leviticus on how to calculate Pentecost, I’d like to note that John’s chronology is gaining new appreciation as being correct. That is, Friday was the day of preparation, and Jesus died before Passover officially began at dusk that evening, making Saturday the first day of Passover (Dusk on Friday through dusk on Saturday). So Passover and the Sabbath may very well have coincided, and counting to Pentecost would have started on Sunday (the first Easter), or First Fruits (that year).

 

[rstrats]

Wesrock,
re: “I don’t see how it can be argued either that Jesus did not rise on Sunday, as attested to in scripture…”

As far as scripture is concerned, there is only one (Mark 16:9) as it is translated in the KJV and similar versions that places the resurrection on the first day of the week. And a number of study Bible versions in their notes question whether Mark wrote verses 9-20 as opposed to them being added at a later date. But even if verse 9 is authentic it could just as well be translated with the comma being placed after the word ‘risen’ (past tense) instead of after the word ‘week’. As you know, punctuation marks were not in the early writings and had to be determined by the translators according to their subjective understanding of the text’s meaning. Some of the versions that place the comma after ‘risen’ are The Centenary Translation, The Sacred Scriptures-Bethel Edition, The Contemporary English Version, The Montgomery Translation, The Expositors Greek Testament and God’s New Covenant-A New Testament Translation.

re: “. The scriptures are also clear that Jesus died on a Friday.”

How do you account for the missing night time which the Messiah said would be involved?

 

[Wesrock]

Jesus was tying his sign to Jonah and the literalness need not be pressed, especially in the face of other evidence.

So Matthew, Like, and John don’t also note that it was Sunday? Does not Mark 16:1-8 place it on a Sunday? Are you saying that first century Christians did not meet on Sundays to celebrate the breaking of the bread?

 

[rstrats]

Wesrock,
re: “Jesus was tying his sign to Jonah and the literalness need not be pressed, especially in the face of other evidence.”

Jonah 1:17 says that Jonah was in the fish for 3 nights. The Messiah said He would be in the “heart of earth” for 3 nights just the same as Jonah was in the fish for 3 nights. Do you have scripture that says that Jonah wasn’t in the fish for 3 nights?

re: “So Matthew, Like, and John don’t also note that it was Sunday?”

That is correct. They do not say that the resurrection took place on the first day of the week.

re: “Does not Mark 16:1-8 place it on a Sunday?”

No they don’t. Those verses say nothing regarding the day of the resurrection.

re: " Are you saying that first century Christians did not meet on Sundays to celebrate the breaking of the bread?"

No I’m not saying that. But as far a scripture is concerned, there is only 1 mention about anyone meeting on the first day of the week where breaking bread is mentioned. There is never again any mention of people meeting on the first day of the week.

 

[Vico]

Wesrock,
re: “Jesus was tying his sign to Jonah and the literalness need not be pressed, especially in the face of other evidence.”

Jonah 1:17 says that Jonah was in the fish for 3 nights. The Messiah said He would be in the “heart of earth” for 3 nights just the same as Jonah was in the fish for 3 nights. Do you have scripture that says that Jonah wasn’t in the fish for 3 nights?

re: “So Matthew, Like, and John don’t also note that it was Sunday?”

That is correct. They do not say that the resurrection took place on the first day of the week.

re: “Does not Mark 16:1-8 place it on a Sunday?”

No they don’t. Those verses say nothing regarding the day of the resurrection.

re: " Are you saying that first century Christians did not meet on Sundays to celebrate the breaking of the bread?"

No I’m not saying that. But as far a scripture is concerned, there is only 1 mention about anyone meeting on the first day of the week where breaking bread is mentioned. There is never again any mention of people meeting on the first day of the week.

Three days and nights does not mean 36 hours,but can mean less than that, because it was not customary to separate days from nights. Read in Esther 4:16, where the Jews were ordered to fast for three days, and three nights: and yet in Chapter 5:1, Esther, after part of three days, went to visit the king.

Esther 4:16 Go, and gather together all the Jews whom thou shalt find in Susan, and pray ye for me. Neither eat nor drink for three days and three nights: and I with my handmaids will fast in like manner, and then I will go in to the king, against the law, not being called, and expose myself to death and to danger.

Esther 5:1 And on the third day Esther put on her royal apparel, and stood in the inner court of the king’s house, over against the king’s hall: now he sat upon his throne in the hall of the palace, over against the door of the house.

 

[Vico]

Three days and nights does not mean 36 hours, but can mean less than that, because it was not customary to separate days from nights. Read in Esther 4:16, where the Jews were ordered to fast for three days, and three nights: and yet in Chapter 5:1, Esther, after part of three days, went to visit the king.

Esther 4:16 Go, and gather together all the Jews whom thou shalt find in Susan, and pray ye for me. Neither eat nor drink for three days and three nights: and I with my handmaids will fast in like manner, and then I will go in to the king, against the law, not being called, and expose myself to death and to danger.

Esther 5:1 And on the third day Esther put on her royal apparel, and stood in the inner court of the king’s house, over against the king’s hall: now he sat upon his throne in the hall of the palace, over against the door of the house.

Correction: 72 hours not 36 hours

 

[rstrats]

Vico,
re: “Three days and nights does not mean 36 hours, but can mean less than that…”

How about providing an example where 3 days and 3 nights ever meant less than 1 1/2 calendar days?

re: “Read in Esther 4:16, where the Jews were ordered to fast for three days, and three nights…”

Actually, the verse reads: “… neither eat nor drink for three days, night or day.” But even if that is the same thing as “three days and three nights”, nothing in the Esther account precludes at least parts of 3 night times and at least parts of 3 daytimes.

 

[Wesrock]

Wesrock,
re: “Jesus was tying his sign to Jonah and the literalness need not be pressed, especially in the face of other evidence.”

Jonah 1:17 says that Jonah was in the fish for 3 nights. The Messiah said He would be in the “heart of earth” for 3 nights just the same as Jonah was in the fish for 3 nights. Do you have scripture that says that Jonah wasn’t in the fish for 3 nights?

re: “So Matthew, Like, and John don’t also note that it was Sunday?”

That is correct. They do not say that the resurrection took place on the first day of the week.

re: “Does not Mark 16:1-8 place it on a Sunday?”

No they don’t. Those verses say nothing regarding the day of the resurrection.

So all the gospels saying that the empty tomb was found on Sunday and that they were all told he is risen on Sunday has no bearing on Christ rising on Sunday? That Christ’s first resurrected appearance was on Sunday is irrelevant?

The idea that Christ’s last day of work was Friday, that he rested on the Sabbath, and that he rose regenerated as a new creation on the first day of the week is irrelevant? That Christ repeatedly claimed that he would rise on the third day is irrelevant? That Luke 24:21 places Sunday (the first day of the week) as being the third day since the crucifixion is irrelevant? That Jesus had to be taken down quickly before evening and the beginning of the Sabbath, that he could not be properly anointed that day or the next because of the Sabbath, and that they came the next day is irrelevant?

1 Kings 12: 5-12 and 2 Chronicals 10: 5-12 both speak of what sounds like 72 hour periods, but the event in question happens on the third day. You can’t use modern liberalism retroactively to interpret what Jesus meant. And your treatment of Esther is worse. Day is obviously used in two senses, the first being what I mean by “one day” (24 hour period type of thinking, a whole day), the second is a distinction between light and dark.

One can’t put so much emphasis on an allusion to Jonah at the expense of everything else.

Even if Mark 16: 9 and later are addendum, they were early ones, and attest to early Christian tradition. The Didache also confirms Christian worship on “the Lord’s Day”, meaning Sunday. Scripture alone is sufficient to determine Christ’s death on Friday and Resurrection on Sunday, but combined with early Christian tradition, there’s no reason to doubt it.

 

[Vico]

Vico,
re: “Three days and nights does not mean 36 hours, but can mean less than that…”

How about providing an example where 3 days and 3 nights ever meant less than 1 1/2 calendar days?

re: “Read in Esther 4:16, where the Jews were ordered to fast for three days, and three nights…”

Actually, the verse reads: “… neither eat nor drink for three days, night or day.” But even if that is the same thing as “three days and three nights”, nothing in the Esther account precludes at least parts of 3 night times and at least parts of 3 daytimes.

I posted the scripture. Did you read my correction of 36 to 72 hours?

 

[Vico]

Vico,
re: “Three days and nights does not mean 36 hours, but can mean less than that…”

How about providing an example where 3 days and 3 nights ever meant less than 1 1/2 calendar days?

re: “Read in Esther 4:16, where the Jews were ordered to fast for three days, and three nights…”

Actually, the verse reads: “… neither eat nor drink for three days, night or day.” But even if that is the same thing as “three days and three nights”, nothing in the Esther account precludes at least parts of 3 night times and at least parts of 3 daytimes.

The norm is that a day is sunset to sunset, beginning with night then day, so three can mean part of day 1, even just before sunset, through part of day 3, such as just after sunrise, giving a period of slightly more than 36 hours.

 

[rstrats]

Wesrock,

First let me say that I think that the resurrection did take place on the 1st day of the week. I was merely pointing out that there is only one scripture that specifically states a 1st day resurrection. And I was mentioning that for the benefit of some who may think that there are others.

I realize that a 1st day resurrection can try to be deduced by putting together the various accounts regarding the event - for example using the questionable notion of a 6th day of the week crucifixion in the determination process.

 

[rstrats]

Vico,
re: “Did you read my correction of 36 to 72 hours?”

Not until after I had posted my comment. BTW, why do you bring up 72 hours?

 

[rstrats]

Vico,
re: “The norm is that a day is sunset to sunset, beginning with night then day…”

That is correct.

re: “…so three can mean part of day 1, even just before sunset, through part of day 3, such as just after sunrise, giving a period of slightly more than 36 hours.”

Correct again. What is your point?

 

[Vico]

Vico,
re: “The norm is that a day is sunset to sunset, beginning with night then day…”

That is correct.

re: “…so three can mean part of day 1, even just before sunset, through part of day 3, such as just after sunrise, giving a period of slightly more than 36 hours.”

Correct again. What is your point?

Matthew 12:38 Then some of the Scribes and Pharisees answered him, saying: Master, we would see a sign from thee.

39 But he answering, said to them: *An evil and adulterous generation seeketh for a sign: and a sign shall not be given it, **but the sign of Jonas, the prophet.

40 For as Jonas was in the whale’s belly three days and three nights: so shall the Son of man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights.

Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 40. In the whale’s belly.[4] The word signifies a great fish, and was not perhaps that which we commonly call a whale. In the prophet Jonas, it is called, a great fish.

— Three days and three nights; not three whole days and three nights, but part of three natural days, from which, in common computation, the nights used not to be separated. We have an instance of this, Esther iv. 16, where the Jews were ordered to fast with her three days, and three nights: and yet (Chap. v, ver. 1) Esther, after part of three days, went to the king.

— In the heart of the earth: by which is signified, Christ’s descent into hell; as St. Paul says (Ephesians iv. 9.) that he descended into the inferior parts of the earth, and this cannot be understood of the grave only. (Witham)

— Jesus Christ expired on the cross about the ninth hour, or 3 p.m. when the general and supernatural darkness that covered the earth, may be counted for the first night, and the light which again appeared, for the term of the first day. (Bible de Vence)

— As Jonas was a sign to the Ninivites, so is Christ to the Jews; for as he by the prodigy of remaining so long in the fish’s belly, and afterwards coming forth alive, gave such authority to his preaching, that the Ninivites were converted; so Christ, by his death and resurrection on the third day, shall shew that he is the true Christ, and this generation shall acknowledge him for the Messias. (Menochius)