The Only Sign Given

In the Introduction, I discuss the problems with the traditional Friday to Sunday morning view, and the goals to be attained by this book. Here is a brief excerpt.

I know all the arguments and explanations for this assumed scenario, but they have more holes in them than a colander (that bowl shaped item you probably have in your kitchen, that has hundreds of little holes in it for draining vegetables, pasta and such). The most heavily relied upon explanation is that the Jews of the first century counted any part of the day as the whole of the day. How convenient! A Jewish saying is quoted with authority, which says, "A day and a night are an Onah (a Jewish measure of time), a part of an Onah is counted asthe whole of it.” This has been the major crutch for explaining awaythe prophetic utterance of Jesus.

Friday afternoon to Friday sunset counts as DAY ONE.
Friday sunset to Saturday sunset counts as DAY TWO.
Saturday sunset to Sunday sunrise is DAY THREE.

This scheme has become the mantra of the conventional wisdom.There we have it. That is how the saying of Jesus is treated. An obscure Jewish calculation of time is applied and POOF! - the import and validity of Jesus vanishes. We should call this Copperfield Theology. A sleight of hand trick, prophecies disappear and the masses are duped. By using this trickery, we make Him out to be a liar and a fraud. Aren't there enough people around who are trying to do that, without any help from those who profess to believe in him.

In this chapter, we discuss the importance of the circumstances in which the prophecy of Matthew 12:38-40 was given. Here is a brief excerpt.

What caused the scribes and Pharisees to demand a sign? Let's back up, and see.

There was a man brought to Jesus, who was possessed of a spirit that caused him to be unable to see or speak. So Jesus healed him. The people who saw this healing, then begin to say, "Is this not the Son of David," a very definite messianic title. The people began to see and speak of Jesus as the Messiah of Israel. This alarmed the leaders of Israel. Why? The rabbis divided time into three ages; the primitive (patriarchal), the Law, and the Messianic. They were the guardians and shepherds of Israel in the age of the Law. Their authority however, would cease when Messiah came, for He would establish Messianic Law. Besides their personal reasons, there were also obvious political ramifications to the heralding of a Messiah, a King in Israel, i.e., a king who was not sanctioned by Rome.The proclaiming of a king, who was not sanctioned by Rome, was equal to rebellion. Rome did not tolerate rebellion. So when they heard the people speaking of Jesus as King Messiah, something had to be done.

They could not deny that a miracle had been done. That was evident for all to see. However, what they could do was cast doubt upon the authority by which it was performed. They claimed that Jesus operated by the power of Ba'alzebub (Satan). Jesus responds, "How can Satan cast out Satan?". His kingdom could not stand if he worked against himself like that. They could not withstand this 'greater than Solomon', so they moved to Plan B. Demand a sign.

We must understand they were not asking for a miracle, of those there had been plenty. They wanted a type of vindicating sign from God on behalf of Jesus, to publicly validate his Messiahship.

In Passover Reckoning, we investigate how Passover was reckoned or counted in the first century. We also looked at the evidence that many in the Church for the first two hundred years, continued the proper observance of Passover and we look at John's account of the Last Passover, in comparison to the other three Gospels. Here is a brief excerpt.

Passover in the Early Church
In the second century, there arose a controversy about the date on which the Passover was to be observed. The Eastern Churches, following the “rule of the gospel” and apostolic tradition, kept the Passover on the fourteenth day of the month. These churches were called Quartdodecimans, or Fourteenthers.

Eusebius quotes Polycrates, who says, “All these kept the fourteenth day of the month as the beginning of the Paschal festival, according to the Gospel, not deviating in the least but following the rule of faith.”7 This quote tells us that the early Church, into the second century, continued the observance of Passover and they kept in on its proper day, the fourteenth of Nisan. It also tells us that they continued to observe the Feasts of the Lord and operated according to the Jewish calendar. Where he says, “all these," is referring to all the bishops of the eastern churches who served before him.

In Two Sabbaths, we look at the obscured fact that during the week of Passover, there was always two Sabbaths. There was the regular weekly Sabbath and then there was the first of seven annual Sabbaths, the Fifteenth of Nisan, which was the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Here is a brief excerpt.

The Wave Offering
This is another witness of two Sabbaths during Passover week. According to Lev. 23:11, the priest "shall wave the sheaf before the Lord, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the Sabbath the priest shall wave it." This sheaf was the first-fruits of the barley harvest. The priest was to wave it before the Lord on the day after the Sabbath. The question is, which Sabbath? In the first century, there was a disagreement between the Sadducees and the Pharisees, as to which Sabbath this refers to. The Sadducees believed that it was a reference to the weekly Sabbath. However, the Pharisees taught that it was the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the Fifteenth of Nisan.

Edersheim also states with certainty,
The testimony of Josephus, Philo, and Jewish tradition, leaves no room to doubt that in this instance we are to understand by the 'Sabbath' theFifteenth of Nisan, on whatever day of the week it might fall.

As far as the dispute between the Sadducees and Pharisees, as to which Sabbath is correct, is not at issue here. What is of significance is the fact of the dispute itself! They were arguing over which Sabbath was correct. Which one of the two! Two Sabbaths! There is the regular weekly Sabbath and then there is the annual Sabbath of the Fifteenth of Nisan, whatever day of the week it may be. This will play a significant role in the passion chronology.

In First Day of the Week, we look at how this phrase was understood in both the Roman and the Jewish calendar. We see some very startling facts begin to surface, such as the fact that in the First Century, the Roman first day of the week, was not the Sun's Day, but was Saturn's Day (Saturday). This will have a profound effect upon the understanding of the Passion Narrative. Here is a brief excerpt.

Again, another witness says,

“The early Romans, who developed and made popular the Julian calendar, used Saturday as the first day of the week. As the worshipping of the Sun increased, the Sun's day (Sunday) advanced from position of the second day to the first day of the week (and Saturday became the seventh day). It was not until Christianity took hold throughout Europe that most calendars marked Sunday as the first day of the week.”

This fixing of Saturn as the first in the seven-day week came to the Romans through the Egyptians. “According to those ancient Egyptians, the planet that ruled the first hour also governed the entire twenty-four hour period, and gave its name to that day. The first (also the 8th, 15th and 22nd) hours of the first day were sacred to Saturn, the 23rd to Jupiter, the 24th to Mars and the first hour of the next day to the Sun. Therefore, they believed that the first day was ruled by and named after Saturn (Saturday) and the second was ruled by (and named after) the Sun (Sunday).”

This fact that the first day of the week in the Roman calendar during the first century was Saturn’s day seems to be well noted, but for reasons that should be obvious, is preferably ignored. In ancient lore, Rome’s connection to the god Saturn is quite old. Before Romulus and Remus founded Rome, a more ancient city was founded upon the same site. This ancient city was called Saturnia. The king or founder of this ancient city was none other than Saturn/Kronos, who is in ancient mythology identified with Ninus or more commonly known as Nimrod, the first king of Babylon.

In order to get an exact date for the Passover, we must be able to calculate the dates of Jesus ministry. We must know about when his ministry would have began and the duration of His ministry. In doing this, we can arrive at the proper year in which the death, burial and resurrection occurred. Here is a brief excerpt.

The Beginning of Jesus Ministry

There are several possible ways to determine this date. We will triangulate the date using three different approaches, as being the three best and most likely from a historical and Biblical standpoint.

WITNESS ONE

1. In John 2:20, a statement is made by the Jews during the first Passover mentioned in John, that the temple had been under construction for 46 years. Some may call into question the historical accuracy of this statement. However, it should only be doubted if there is sufficient reason. In my viewpoint and research, none is found.

We should understand this statement to mean, at the time it was made, that the temple had been in the process of building for 46 years. It is admitted by several sources, that the temple complex was not completed until A.D 63. Here in John 2:20, the Greek term for 'temple' refers to the whole temple complex, and not just the sanctuary itself.

According to the Jewish historian, Josephus, Herod began actual work on the temple in the eighteenth year of his reign. Herod began his actual reign of Judea in 717 AUC (AUC means from the founding of Rome), or about 37 B.C. Edersheim states that the temple construction began in the month of Kislev, 734 AUC, which corresponds to Nov/Dec. of 19 B.C. By counting forward 46 years from December 19 B.C., we come to December, A.D. 27. Thus, by the Passover of A.D. 28, the temple had been in the process of building a full 46 years.

In this chapter, we do the actual calculations for the dating of the Passover in A.D. 30, the year of Jesus' death and resurrection. Here is a brief excerpt.

I know from two different sources, that the first new moon, after the spring equinox, occurred on March 22, at approximately 8 p.m. The first source for this calculation was obtained with the help of the Kirkpatrick Planetarium, in Oklahoma City. The second source for this is provided by NASA’s website concerning the phases and eclipses of the moon.

So, March 22, at sunset, would have been determined to be the first day of the new month of Nisan. So all that is left to do is to count fourteen days from this time, and this will give us the day of Passover. Counting fourteen days from March 22, at sunset, as the first day of Nisan, we would come to Tuesday, April 4, at sunset, as the beginning of Passover. Passover would therefore, be observed on the night of April 4. So we have Passover, the fourteenth of Nisan, occurring on Tuesday Night, April 4(Julian)/April 2 (Gregorian).

We also have validation of these dates from a computer program, which displays the Jewish feast days in any given year. Here are some screenshots of these dates.

Mark 16:9 is a very important verse, when trying to understand this issue. The importance of this verse lies in the proper translating of the Greek, which unfortunately, has rarely been done. Another challenge concerning this verse, is the fact that most modern translations cast doubt upon the veracity of the ending of Mark, which includes this verse. Here is a brief excerpt.

To be completely accurate about this time, there is an overlapping of time of the end of the Sabbath and the beginning of the first day of the week. Remember earlier we noted that the new day would technically begin with the appearance of the first three stars in the sky. Knowing that these stars would likely become visible before the actual setting of the sun and assuming a clear enough sky to see them, there would be a period that would belong to both the first day of the week and the Sabbath (as much as an hour). That time being from the appearance of the first three stars in the sky and the actual setting of the sun. This period would likely be the actual time of the resurrection of Jesus. This is the only period that fits ALL THE SAYINGS OF JESUS, concerning the three days. Whether it is “on the third day," “after three days," “in three days” or “three days and three nights.” This period fulfills all of these requirements.

With this understanding, Mark 16:9 tells us that Jesus rose from the dead at the head of the week, that is, at the earliest portion of the time that marks the beginning of the first day of the week. This would also coincide with the time when the Sabbath was beginning to close.

A more literal and accurate translation of the verse would be,

"And having already risen early at the beginning of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene from whom he had cast out seven demons."

This section was added because if became apparent that so much of the understanding and so many of the answers to this issue lie within the Greek text itself. The goal here is not to get lost in a maze of confusing terms. Just the opposite is desired. We want to peel away the layers that surround the core of this issue.

What shall we liken it unto? It is like an archeologist on a dig, who believes that beneath the surface of a field are great treasures to be unearthed. He must be careful when attempting to bring them to the surface. A bulldozer is useless. He must use tools fitted for the task. So it is with the field of Biblical interpretation. The interpreter cannot bulldoze his way through the text by making vague or sweeping generalizations. He cannot assume that a clump of dirt is only a clump of dirt. With the proper tools in hand, when he comes upon what may look like a simple word or sentence, he must gently brush away, or peel back the outer layers, to reveal the possible treasures lying at the core. When this is understood, what may at first seem a tedious or laborious task, becomes a labor of love.

Sticking with the analogy above, we must also understand that the history and culture that we are dealing with is Hebraic/Aramaic, not Greek/Roman. So, in many cases we must look past the Greek, and go to the underlying Hebraic idea. This has been the major error of the conventional wisdom.

In The Chronology, we set forth the Biblical account of the Passion, taking into account the full three days and nights of Jesus' entombment. Here is a brief excerpt.

9. After receiving permission from Pilate, Joseph of Arimathea takes down the body of Jesus, and prepares him for burial. It is at this point that the annual Sabbath of the Fifteenth of Nisan, is fast approaching. The burial team must prepare the body of Jesus and have it in the tomb before sunset. This all occurred during the time which John calls the preparation. That is, it was the preparation for the approaching Sabbath of the Fifteenth.
(Mt. 27:57-58; Mk. 15:42; Lk. 23:50-54; Jn. 19:38-40)

10. The burial of Jesus' body. The burial team had maybe two hours to take the body down from the execution stake, prepare it for burial and place it in the tomb. The women who followed Jesus, accompanies the burial team. It is of great interest to note, that according to the Talmud, when a person died, they were first placed in a temporary burial spot, until the body had decayed and only the bones remained. In the case of a condemned criminal, this burial spot was provided for by the Sanhedrin. As stated earlier, although Jesus' appearance before the Council was likely nothing more than an interrogation, Joseph and Nicodemus may have felt otherwise. These men, being disciples or at least sympathizers of Jesus, as members of the Council, provided this temporary burial chamber for Jesus. Although, they didn't realize how temporary it would be.
(Mt. 27:59-61; Mk. 15:46-47; Lk. 23:55-56; Jn. 19:42)

In this chapter, we discuss the reasons for the change from honoring the Sabbath to honoring the Sun's Day as the day of worship. While changing the day of honoring God to Sunday, they also had to validate this change in the minds of the masses of Christians. Teaching a Sunday morning resurrection fit this purpose quite nicely. Here is a brief excerpt.

Up to this period, it is admitted by many that the Church met on the Sabbath and on the first day of the week. So the most convenient path would be to shift their energies to the honoring of the first day of the week, as the day of worship, the new Christian Sabbath. This accomplished at least two things for them. First, it would exclude them from being identified as Jews, not subjecting them to persecution of the Jews by Rome and it would distinguish them as a religion separate from the Jews. Up to that time, the Christians had been viewed as a sect of Judaism [they were generally called the Nazarenes by their Jewish brethren]. With this move to Sunday, they could at least plausibly deny any relation to Judaism.

However, the question arose how to validate this move in the eyes of the masses. They then began to teach that Sunday, the first day of the week, should be honored because this was the day of Jesus’ resurrection. This process of convincing the masses of this, did not happen overnight. It took some time.

In this chapter, we briefly sum up all the evidence presented in this book. Here is a brief excerpt.

With all the evidence presented herein, that is as simple as it can be stated. I am also not so naive to think that there will be many who will abandon their traditions of the Friday to Sunday morning theory, to accept what is presented here. Do not underestimate the power of tradition. It is indeed a powerful force. It helped to crucify Jesus.

It is much easier to continue in the status quo of what is accepted by our peers and those who have made themselves the experts and guardians of our faith. But I also know that there are those out there, who secretly question in their hearts, what doesn’t make sense, but is still highly regarded as truth, even though it doesn’t add up. It is a matter of faith, they say. This is true, no doubt. But I ask, Faith in what? Faith in the traditions of men, or faith in the words of Jesus..

When we are faced with the choice of continuing to accept the traditions of men or having a confidence that the words of Jesus are true, no matter what the scholars may say about them, what do we do?