dongiovanni1976x

Referencing the quote in boldface: What do Protestants base the term "High Sabbath" upon when they want to demonstrate that Jesus was crucified on a Wednesday if this is supposedly a later Catholic tradition?
And where can I find primary sources on this tradition?

Any help?

Steven Avery

Hi Don,

It looks like you are combining two unrelated issues. RCC 'high holy days' don't really enter into this picture and in fact 'high holy days' is a term most used in Judaism and linked to the period from Yom Teruah (aka Rosh Hashanah) to Yom Kippur and Sukkot and Simchat Torah, which also doesn't enter into this picture .

John 19:31
The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation,
that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day,
(for that sabbath day was an high day,)
besought Pilate that their legs might be broken,
and that they might be taken away.

Here is John Gill...

http://eword.gospelcom.net/comments/...ill/john19.htm
it was not only a sabbath, and a sabbath in the passover week, but it was the day in which all the people appeared and presented themselves before the Lord in the temple, and the sheaf of the first fruits was offered up; all which solemnities meeting together made it a very celebrated day: it is in the original text, "it was the great day of the sabbath"; which is the language of the Talmudists, and who say F4, ``(lwdgh tbv arqn) "is called the great sabbath", on account of the miracle or sign of the passover;'' and in the Jewish Liturgy F5 there is a collect for the "great sabbath":

F4 Piske Tosephot Sabbat, art. 314.
F5 Seder Tephillot, fol. 183. 2. &c. Ed. Basil.

Aish is complementary to this.

http://www.aish.com/torahportion/mor..._HaGadol.asp#1
Shabbat HaGadol
The Shabbat prior to Passover is called Shabbat HaGadol. The source of the term is unclear as it is not found in the Tanach or Talmudic literature,1 though in the Middle Ages a number of authorities occupied themselves with explaining the origin of the term.
One approach sees Shabbat HaGadol as originating with the special Haftorah, specifically the verse which refers to a day in the future which will be gadol, meaning "great." 2

# The Machzor Vitri section 259 writes "The Shabbat prior to Passover the people are accustomed to call it "Shabbat Hagadol" though they don't know why. The term may be found in the Zohar 1 47b, 2 204a, Tikunei Zohar 40b. (return to text)

# Cited in the name of Rav Shlomo Luria, known as the Maharshal, see Mateh Moses section 542, Rav Ovadia Yosef, Yabia Omer 4:39. Also the Maharal in Gvrurot Hashem chapter 39, and Tiferet Yisrael chapter 44. (return to text)

Don, your question is a bit unclear. The topic is fascinating.
Is the high sabbath the great sabbath ?

I offer these references only for context and a starting point.

Shalom,
Steven Avery

Cege

This page http://www.gotquestions.org/three-days.html might help with understanding the Wednesday view. It's based on the statement in Mark 16:1 that women purchased spices after the Sabbath.

John Kesler

From the article referenced above:

This "explanation" points out the fruitlessness of trying to harmonize every detail of the gospel accounts. The argument in the last sentence assumes that Mark and Luke must agree about what the women did relative to the sabbath, and since Mark 16:1 says that the women didn't even buy spices until after the sabbath, while Luke 23:56 says that the women prepared spices before the sabbath, there must be two different sabbaths in view! Look, though at Mark's narrative, which is clearly talking about the same sabbath throughout:

The unlikely spin that the article would put on this account is that the women prepared spices on Wednesday, before the Passover (per Luke), then waited until after Saturday evening (when the other sabbath was passed) to buy additional spices (per Mark), and attempted to anoint the body on Sunday morning. If the spices had already been prepared before the "first sabbath," which ended on Thursday evening, why would the women wait until Sunday morning to anoint the body? Why not anoint on Thursday evening or Friday before sundown? Also, why did the women buy spices after the "second sabbath" if they already had some prepared before the "first sabbath"? Could they possibly have thought that whatever amount they already had was insufficient, especially since, according to John 19:39-40, Joseph and Nicodemus had already wrapped Jesus' body in "about a hundred pounds" of spices, and the women witnessed Jesus' burial (Matthew 27:61; Luke 23:55)?

Larsguy47

Once the dating for when Jesus was placed into the tomb on the day of preparation becomes specific, then the gospel reference for "high sabbath" establishes that particular reference for that particular event. It doesn't matter what other Jews did in other times and used that term to refer to other things. One aspect defines the other.

Thus since the customary passover was held the same day as the 1st day of unfermented cakes, that is, the Passover is held on Nisan 14th in the evening until midnight only, when the official date changes to the 15th, it is impossible for Christ to have died on this date since it would have been Saturday, Nisan 15th by the time he was arrested.

When you consider that he must be in the grave parts of "three days and three nights" we understand that he died on THURSDAY, Nisan 20th, the day of preparation for "passover" sabbath of Nisan 21st, the 7th day of unfermented cakes. That is, after the sabbath of the 15th, the next preparation day occurs on the 20th. That was the day Jesus died. In 33CE that fell on a Thursday. That means that both Friday and Saturday were "sabbaths." But to distinguish the regular sabbath from a special sabbath not falling on a Saturday, it appears the term "high sabbath" was employed. This reference could thus reflect that a special Jewish holiday was involved, which would be a more special event-sabbath than the usual Saturday sabbath.

Jesus dying on Nisan 20th, of course, allows for the "three days and three nights" to be fulfilled: i.e. Thursday night, Friday night, Saturday night. He rose Saturday night/Sunday morning before 3 a.m.

Again, the gospels confirm that the 7th day of unfermented cakes falling on a non-Saturday was called a "high sabbath." In 33 CE this was the sabbath that began Thursday evening at sundown, Nisan 20th.

LG47

John Kesler

You aren't seriously suggesting that any of the gospels allows for a six-day interval between Passover and Jesus' crucifixion, are you? :huh:

dongiovanni1976x

Thank you all for your comments. I found the information on the Shabbat HaGadol very interesting. My question is this: When I was attending an Easter service this past Sunday at a local protestant church the pastor was trying to rectify Matthew 12:40 (3 days/3 nights etc) with the other Gospel accounts and argued for a Wednesday Passover. I had already narrowed down the possibiliies to 31 CE to 36 CE (since Lk 3:1 says that Jesus' ministry could not have started before 29 CE and GJohn mentions at least three sabbaths after this event and Pilate was recalled before Tiberius died in March 37 whcih was before the Passover that year) Therefore if you look at the Julian dates for Passover during those years you only get a choice of Tues (31CE), Mon(32CE), Fri(33CE), Tues(34CE), Mon(35CE), and Fri(36CE).
So where does the Wednesday argument come from? Because from what I understand the idea LG47 just put up here cannot mesh with the dates available either for Nisan 20 etc...

John Kesler

Interpreting Matthew 12:40 to mean that Jesus had to be buried for 72 hours is, I think, a major reason for the Wednesday-crucifixion theory. In my previous post, I mentioned one problem with this theory. Additionally, if one argues that Jesus was buried Wednesday evening before the "high sabbath" Thursday Passover, and argues for a literal interpretation of "three days and three nights," then the resurrection occurred on Saturday evening, a detail at variance with Luke 23-24:

Notice, first, that the women rested on the sabbath "according to the commandment," then went to the tomb on Sunday morning. The most natural reading is that the "commandment" in mind is the fourth of the ten commandments (Exodus 20:8-11; Deut. 5:12-15), and that the first opportunity to anoint the body was on Sunday morning when it was light. Also note that Luke 24:21 states that Sunday, the same day that the women went to the tomb, is referred to as "the third day since these things took place," which would is not consistent with a Wednesday crucifixion.

Cege

I think that's a major reason for the Wed theory, too.

Luke says the women went to the tomb at or just before dawn of a Sunday (first day of the week). Jesus wasn't there.

The Sunday had begun about 12 hours earlier, on Saturday/Sabbath at sundown.

Doesn't that allow for the resurrection to have occured anytime during the hours between the end of the Sabbath and Sunday up until dawn, and thus not be at variance with Luke?

John Kesler

If Jesus was buried on Friday evening, then a Saturday resurrection isn't even a part of three days, so I think that Luke intends to convey that Jesus rose on Sunday morning. As Cleopas says in 24:21, Sunday, the same day that the women visited the tomb (v:13), was "the third day."