Is Sabbath, Saturday or Sunday.

[pinacled]

There are 2 distinct shabbat.
Weekly and Yearly.

The weekly shabbat is what is mentioned in the gospels.

yair(luke) 23
[ 54 It was Preparation Day, and a Shabbat was about to begin. 55 The women who had come with Yeshua from the Galil followed; they saw the tomb and how his body was placed in it. 56 Then they went back home to prepare spices and ointments.

On Shabbat the women rested, in obedience to the commandment;]

And with the testimony luke gave of the women's Torah observence concerning shabbat.
One can presume the women would also observe 7 yammin of mourning(spices and ointments).
Meaning they visited the tomb 7 or 8 days later.
Genesis 50

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/2943271/jewish/Why-Do-Jews-Sit-Shivah-for-Seven-Days.htm

 

[Stravinsk]

The Friday-Sunday problem is also based on the assumption that the crucifixion took place on Friday. What seems to support this is the notion that the body was taken down before the Sabbath, but that assumes that the Sabbath in question was the weekly Sabbath rather than an annual Sabbath.

If the crucifixion took place on Thursday and there were 2 sabbaths (a "high" sabbath and a weekly one) - there is still the problem of 3 nights and 3 days.

Thursday - night 1
Friday - day 1, night 2
Saturday - day 2, night 3

Sunday "while it was still dark" or "at the dawning of the day" doesn't equal a 3rd day. At best with a Thursday Crucifixion one has 3 nights and 2 days.

For me this is primary evidence that either A) Christ expects the only sign He gives to a wicked generation to be faulty and open to ridicule by any common man who can count to 3 or B) A different calendar was in play. The Christian apologetics I've read that try to convince me that "partial days = full days" or something of that nature always seemed like a reach to me to justify what is essentially a Roman time keeping system.

 

[tango]

If the crucifixion took place on Thursday and there were 2 sabbaths (a "high" sabbath and a weekly one) - there is still the problem of 3 nights and 3 days.

Thursday - night 1
Friday - day 1, night 2
Saturday - day 2, night 3

Sunday "while it was still dark" or "at the dawning of the day" doesn't equal a 3rd day. At best with a Thursday Crucifixion one has 3 nights and 2 days.

For me this is primary evidence that either A) Christ expects the only sign He gives to a wicked generation to be faulty and open to ridicule by any common man who can count to 3 or B) A different calendar was in play. The Christian apologetics I've read that try to convince me that "partial days = full days" or something of that nature always seemed like a reach to me to justify what is essentially a Roman time keeping system.

If you're counting days using what modern day terminology might refer to as "days or parts thereof" it seems like it would work. I'm thinking along the lines of the long stay parking garages that might quote a daily rate but if you arrive at 3pm on Tuesday and leave at 2pm on Friday you pay for Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday so you pay for four days even though you were there for slightly under 72 hours.

Since Jesus was put into the tomb before the Sabbath started it was during the day before the Sabbath. So assuming the crucifixion was on what we'd call a Thursday, you'd have Thursday being day 1 and night 1, Friday being day 2 and night 2, Saturday being day 3 and night 3, and then the body was discovered missing in the small hours of what we'd call Sunday morning.

I can't say I've studied the annual sabbaths in a whole lot of detail but unless there's a reason why they have to be the day before the weekly Sabbath it also leaves open the possibility that the annual Sabbath was on what we'd call a Thursday and the crucifixion on what we'd call a Wednesday.

How would you use a different calendar to explain it, on the basis that whatever we call days and whether we consider a day to start at a specific time (e.g. midnight) or based on solar cycles (e.g. sunset to sunset) you'd still have the same number of days and nights between any two given times?

 

[Stravinsk]

If you're counting days using what modern day terminology might refer to as "days or parts thereof" it seems like it would work. (snip)

That's the only way Christian Apologetics can get it to work. A Thursday burial after even necessarily does not include the "day" part of Thursday. Thus, one is short 1 day with a Thursday burial.

I might mention, there is no justification in using modern day terminology when interpreting biblical meaning. The bible defines a day as the period between "morning and evening". It defines months by the moon (the word for month in the bible is actually "moon"), and there is no name for days of the week like the Roman calendar uses.

Since Jesus was put into the tomb before the Sabbath started it was during the day before the Sabbath. So assuming the crucifixion was on what we'd call a Thursday, you'd have Thursday being day 1 and night 1, Friday being day 2 and night 2, Saturday being day 3 and night 3, and then the body was discovered missing in the small hours of what we'd call Sunday morning.

I can't say I've studied the annual sabbaths in a whole lot of detail but unless there's a reason why they have to be the day before the weekly Sabbath it also leaves open the possibility that the annual Sabbath was on what we'd call a Thursday and the crucifixion on what we'd call a Wednesday.

How would you use a different calendar to explain it, on the basis that whatever we call days and whether we consider a day to start at a specific time (e.g. midnight) or based on solar cycles (e.g. sunset to sunset) you'd still have the same number of days and nights between any two given times?

If we take both these statements:

"On the third day He will be raised to life"

“An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. "


As true, and unambiguous, then it is clear that:

The "third day" is an ordinal number and must correspond to some sort of marker.
"Three days and three nights" refers to a cardinal count of 3, both of days and nights.


My position is that Christ was crucified and buried on the even before weekly Sabbath, that Sabbath being both the weekly and annual Sabbath. The day of Resurrection is the "third day" that falls "after 3 days and nights".

There is no point in asking which Roman day this is, because it assumes continually cycling 7 day weeks (from Creation's beginning until now) where moon is a sign for nothing but a pope's determination of when to celebrate Easter/passover.

BUT, if we were to assume this, that would be a "Friday" crucifixion and a Tuesday Resurrection. Tuesday is the 3rd day of the week. The 3rd day of the week what happens in Genesis?

- Dry land appears (corresponds to Jonah exiting whale onto dry land)
- Vegetation arises from dry land.

Again, the Tuesday designation assumes a continually cycling 7 day week, whereas I believe months are determined biblically by moons, and thus are days in relation to it (the marker is the moon that starts the month).


At this point, people will ask about the passages that say "the first day of the week" in the bible. Mia twn Sabbaton is literally "one (blank) of Sabbaths" and not "First day of the week". The reason for the (blank) is that a word is missing from the received text. One is not synonymous with First, just as Ordinal numbers are distinct from Cardinal numbers. In any case, it is mistranslated based partly on a tradition already established by the Roman Catholic Church - Sunday - the venerable "first day of the week", or in Constantine's pagan view "the venerable day of the Sun".

 

[tango]

That's the only way Christian Apologetics can get it to work. A Thursday burial after even necessarily does not include the "day" part of Thursday. Thus, one is short 1 day with a Thursday burial.

[/QUOTE]

Burial wouldn't be after evening because by then the Sabbath would have started and work wasn't permitted. The whole point of taking Jesus down from the cross was that he could be put in the tomb before the Sabbath. That would require that a part of what we'd call Thursday be counted in the time he was in the tomb.

I might mention, there is no justification in using modern day terminology when interpreting biblical meaning. The bible defines a day as the period between "morning and evening". It defines months by the moon (the word for month in the bible is actually "moon"), and there is no name for days of the week like the Roman calendar uses.

True, although for some it makes it easier than referring to "the fourth day", "the sixth day", "the first day" etc, and ultimately it's hard to see much difference. We happen to call "the first day" Sunday so using the terms interchangeably doesn't seem like it creates any new problems. In that regard I don't see it as any different to the way we call a day Sunday while the French call it Dimanche.

The only real issue I see is working with the different concepts of when a day begins. What we call Thursday begins one second after 23:59:59 on Wednesday regardless of the season but at the time "the fourth day" started when the sun set following the third day, which wouldn't be the same precise time throughout the year.

If we take both these statements:

"On the third day He will be raised to life"

“An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. "


As true, and unambiguous, then it is clear that:

The "third day" is an ordinal number and must correspond to some sort of marker.
"Three days and three nights" refers to a cardinal count of 3, both of days and nights.

"Three days and three nights" could be argued to refer to a period meaning "no less than three days and three nights". If I agree to wait for an hour for you to arrive I'm not obligated to leave after exactly 3600 seconds to be true to my word. If I leave before 60 minutes have elapsed I have broken my word to you but if I decide to wait for 90 minutes I am still true to what I promised.

"On the third day" gives less wiggle room.

My position is that Christ was crucified and buried on the even before weekly Sabbath, that Sabbath being both the weekly and annual Sabbath. The day of Resurrection is the "third day" that falls "after 3 days and nights".

There is no point in asking which Roman day this is, because it assumes continually cycling 7 day weeks (from Creation's beginning until now) where moon is a sign for nothing but a pope's determination of when to celebrate Easter/passover.

BUT, if we were to assume this, that would be a "Friday" crucifixion and a Tuesday Resurrection. Tuesday is the 3rd day of the week. The 3rd day of the week what happens in Genesis?

- Dry land appears (corresponds to Jonah exiting whale onto dry land)
- Vegetation arises from dry land.

Again, the Tuesday designation assumes a continually cycling 7 day week, whereas I believe months are determined biblically by moons, and thus are days in relation to it (the marker is the moon that starts the month).

This is interesting but seems like a bit of a stretch to use it to justify an idea.

At this point, people will ask about the passages that say "the first day of the week" in the bible. Mia twn Sabbaton is literally "one (blank) of Sabbaths" and not "First day of the week". The reason for the (blank) is that a word is missing from the received text. One is not synonymous with First, just as Ordinal numbers are distinct from Cardinal numbers. In any case, it is mistranslated based partly on a tradition already established by the Roman Catholic Church - Sunday - the venerable "first day of the week", or in Constantine's pagan view "the venerable day of the Sun".

I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that the text should be translated as "some time after the Sabbath" with no more precision than that?

 

[Stravinsk]

I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that the text should be translated as "some time after the Sabbath" with no more precision than that?

I'm saying Mia Twn Sabbaton doesn't = "First day of the week"

Mia = "one", not "first"

the word "day" is missing (this is why it is italicized in KJV)

The word translated "week" is actually a plural form of "Sabbath" (the Greek word for "week" was known and used in this period, but not used here)


The translation is thus in question and seems to be put forward according to prior bias, most likely on Catholic Tradition.

 

[Origen]

At this point, people will ask about the passages that say "the first day of the week" in the bible. Mia twn Sabbaton is literally "one (blank) of Sabbaths" and not "First day of the week". The reason for the (blank) is that a word is missing from the received text.

It is not missing from the RT. It was never there. It is not found in any Greek text. The phrase is an idiom.

The phrase ("first day of the week") takes more than one form.

Matthew 28:1
μίαν σαββάτων

Mark 16:2
τῇ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων
Mark 16:9
πρώτῃ σαββάτου

Luke 24:1
τῇ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων

John 20:1
τῇ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων
John 20:19
τῇ μιᾷ σαββάτων

Acts 20:7
τῇ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων

1 Cor. 16:2
μίαν σαββάτου

These are all of the examples in the N.T. They all mean "first day of the week." There is nothing missing because that is the normal Greek construction of the idiom.

One is not synonymous with First, just as Ordinal numbers are distinct from Cardinal numbers.

The use of ordinal and cardinal numbers in Greek work differently. Trying to force normal English usage upon Greek syntax does not work. Koine Greek has its own rules of grammar.

In any case, it is mistranslated

Not true. It is normal. Literally dozen and dozens of N.T. scholars\translators who know Greek disagree.

 

[tango]

I'm saying Mia Twn Sabbaton doesn't = "First day of the week"

Mia = "one", not "first"

the word "day" is missing (this is why it is italicized in KJV)

The word translated "week" is actually a plural form of "Sabbath" (the Greek word for "week" was known and used in this period, but not used here)


The translation is thus in question and seems to be put forward according to prior bias, most likely on Catholic Tradition.

If I'm understanding you correctly (I'm not sure, so if I missed the point I'm not being obtuse), you're saying that where Scripture says "first day of the week" which implies a very specific day (i.e. the one we call Sunday) it should say "one of the week" meaning some unspecified day during the week that could be any day from what we call Sunday up to and including the moment before sunset on what we call Friday?

 

[Stravinsk]

If I'm understanding you correctly (I'm not sure, so if I missed the point I'm not being obtuse), you're saying that where Scripture says "first day of the week" which implies a very specific day (i.e. the one we call Sunday) it should say "one of the week" meaning some unspecified day during the week that could be any day from what we call Sunday up to and including the moment before sunset on what we call Friday?

Almost, but not quite.

Mia twn sabbaton, equals, literally "One (blank) of Sabbaths"

- the word "day" is missing
- the word translated "week" is actually Sabbaths in the plural
- The word "one" is used, not "first", indicating singularity, not rank (the words for "one" and "first" are different and are used in a consistent manner throughout the biblical Greek)

Furthermore, there is a Greek word for "week" that was in usage at the time, and it is not found here.

 

[Origen]

No Greek lexicon or Greek grammars agree with above claims.


For those of you who are really interested in this topic seek out scholarly sources, those who actually KNOW Greek.

Dr. Mounce is a well respected Greek and N.T. scholar.

(1) He has taught Greek for years.
(2) He has written excellent grammar, now in its fourth edition (Basic of Biblical Greek Grammar).
(3) He was the New Testament chair of the ESV translation of the Bible.
(4) He now severs on the NIV translation committee.
(4) His articles has been published in peer reviewed journals.




https://www.billmounce.com/monday-with-mounce/sabbaths-and-sunday-σάββατον

 

[tango]

Almost, but not quite.

Mia twn sabbaton, equals, literally "One (blank) of Sabbaths"

- the word "day" is missing
- the word translated "week" is actually Sabbaths in the plural
- The word "one" is used, not "first", indicating singularity, not rank (the words for "one" and "first" are different and are used in a consistent manner throughout the biblical Greek)

Furthermore, there is a Greek word for "week" that was in usage at the time, and it is not found here.

Doesn't "one (blank) of Sabbaths" potentially refer to just about any period of time we can dream up?

 

[Stravinsk]

Doesn't "one (blank) of Sabbaths" potentially refer to just about any period of time we can dream up?

Yes, it is curiously obscure. Since Sunday, "first day" is such a bedrock of Christian timekeeping/worship - one would imagine it should not only be crystal clear in the text...but also - prophesied! But where is it ? It should be all over the OT, this big change that would come with Christ. Christ doesn't mention the change in day either, in fact he tells his followers to pray that their flight not be in winter or on the Sabbath. Why? Why not just say things were going to change?

So many a church service I have attended, especially on Easter where "first day" is likened to Genesis first day, and Jesus being "the light" (sigh...veiled Sun worship)....and yet, we know from Genesis that the Sun and Moon were not created until the 4th day! We also know that Lucifer means "light bearer" and he wasn't always a rebel angel. So, idk...go figure eh?

 

[Stephen]

Going back to the topic title: "Is the Sabbath Saturday or Sunday?"

@hobie claims that the Catholic Church changed the day of the Jewish weekly sabbath from Saturday to Sunday.
It didn't.
He gives many quotations to support his case but newspapers and church bulletins do not necessarily reflect authentic Church teaching. For that we need to look at authoritative documents. such as those isuued by General Councils, Papal Encyclicals, Apostolic Constitutions and Letters, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church which Pope Paul II declared to be "a sure norm for teaching the faith".

Here are two quotes from such authoritative sources.

Catechism of the Catholic Church
Sunday is expressly distinguished from the sabbath which it follows chronologically every week; for Christians its ceremonial observance replaces that of the sabbath. In Christ's Passover, Sunday fulfills the spiritual truth of the Jewish sabbath and announces man's eternal rest in God. For worship under the Law prepared for the mystery of Christ, and what was done there prefigured some aspects of Christ

"Those who lived according to the old order of things have come to a new hope, no longer keeping the sabbath, but the Lord's Day, in which our life is blessed by him and by his death"
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, para 2175 – current edition taken from the Vatican web site)
The quote given is from St. Ignatius of Antioch, Ad Magn. 9, 1: SCh 10, 88

Pope John Paul II
We move from the "Sabbath" to the "first day after the Sabbath", from the seventh day to the first day: the dies Domini becomes the dies Christi! (Apostolic Letter, Dies Domini, Pope John Paul II, 1998 – para 18).

My emboldening in both quotes.

 

[Stravinsk]

Speaking of Authentic teaching...

"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy" - Commandment written on Stone

"If you want to enter life, keep the commandments" - Matthew 19:17

"Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath" Matthew 24:20

"‘Thus says the Lord God: “The gateway of the inner court that faces toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the Sabbath it shall be opened, and on the day of the New Moon it shall be opened." - Ezekiel 46:1

"15 Then He said to me, “Have you seen this, O son of man? Turn again, you will see greater abominations than these.” 16 So He brought me into the inner court of the Lord’s house; and there, at the door of the temple of the Lord, between the porch and the altar, were about twenty-five men with their backs toward the temple of the Lord and their faces toward the east, and they were worshiping the sun toward the east." - Ezekiel 8:15-16

"And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the wedding; and the door was shut." Matthew 25:10

"“So I say to you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. 10 For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. " Luke 11:9


...

In any case, not one Jew, Christian, or Muslim can find their Saturday/Sunday/Friday or any other holy day by nature. Without a calendar, communication device or just someone to ask, every one is lost to their esteemed day if they get disoriented.

 

[Stephen]

Speaking of Authentic teaching...

"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy" - Commandment written on Stone

"If you want to enter life, keep the commandments" - Matthew 19:17

But which commandments?

 

[tango]

Yes, it is curiously obscure. Since Sunday, "first day" is such a bedrock of Christian timekeeping/worship - one would imagine it should not only be crystal clear in the text...but also - prophesied! But where is it ? It should be all over the OT, this big change that would come with Christ. Christ doesn't mention the change in day either, in fact he tells his followers to pray that their flight not be in winter or on the Sabbath. Why? Why not just say things were going to change?

Flight from an oppressor in the winter, or on a day when you're not allowed to walk more than a notional distance, are such non-ideal situations it makes sense to hope they don't happen.

I wouldn't worry about Sunday being specifically prophesied or listed. When Jesus said that the Sabbath was made for man rather than the other way around it made it clear the purpose of the Sabbath was that we had a day of rest, not that we slavishly observed it in a specific manner or very legalistically refused to do anything that might be considered "work" even if the consequences of that were horrendous (an ER surgeon who refused to work on the Sabbath wouldn't be much use, for example)

So many a church service I have attended, especially on Easter where "first day" is likened to Genesis first day, and Jesus being "the light" (sigh...veiled Sun worship)....and yet, we know from Genesis that the Sun and Moon were not created until the 4th day! We also know that Lucifer means "light bearer" and he wasn't always a rebel angel. So, idk...go figure eh?

There's certainly some tradition that seems unhelpful and that's justified in all sorts of ways that are equally unhelpful. I'm usually bothered when people explain Easter traditions - the idea that the stone in front of the tomb was egg-shaped (hence Easter eggs) and the Easter bunny is a symbol of new life really seems to be stretching credibility. But then I wouldn't use this as justification for saying something else is inherently wrong - we can celebrate Christ's resurrection without claiming that fertility symbols have anything to do with it.

 

[Stravinsk]

But which commandments?

Only those mentioned in the following several verses of course.

Otherwise, you may:

Curse God
Misuse the name of God
Change Gospel texts to fit agendas
Set up idols and worship them
Worship the Sun, Moon or stars
Pray to the dead as intercessors
Drink the Blood of the dead
Torture and eat animals (or pay for others to do so on your behalf)
Summon and command evil spirits
Set up a man made calendar
Control the laity through false teachings such as the holiness of relics,
the selling of indulgences, and the assumption of authority that can
refuse forgiveness on conditions not met.
Give and receive the mark of the beast (provided you receive it yourself)
Bow down and worship the devil in exchange for the rule over all the
Kingdoms of man.
Encourage/Accept/Demand adoration of popes,priests,bishops etc through
the use of language, prostration/kneeling and blind obedience.

You see how reducing a paraphrase to an absolute list leaves a very wide path
for an individual to follow

 

[Stephen]

Only those mentioned in the following several verses of course.

Otherwise, you may:

Curse God
Misuse the name of God
Change Gospel texts to fit agendas
Set up idols and worship them
Worship the Sun, Moon or stars
Pray to the dead as intercessors
Drink the Blood of the dead
Torture and eat animals (or pay for others to do so on your behalf)
Summon and command evil spirits
Set up a man made calendar
Control the laity through false teachings such as the holiness of relics,
the selling of indulgences, and the assumption of authority that can
refuse forgiveness on conditions not met.
Give and receive the mark of the beast (provided you receive it yourself)
Bow down and worship the devil in exchange for the rule over all the
Kingdoms of man.
Encourage/Accept/Demand adoration of popes,priests,bishops etc through
the use of language, prostration/kneeling and blind obedience.

You see how reducing a paraphrase to an absolute list leaves a very wide path
for an individual to follow

Thank you for that response. It helps me to assess:
your interest in sensible discussion,
your understanding of scripture,
your understanding of Catholicism.

If I were to say - approaching zero it might seem unfriendly, and we want to be friendly here, so I will just say have a nice day.

 

[Stravinsk]

Thank you for that response. It helps me to assess:
your interest in sensible discussion,
your understanding of scripture,
your understanding of Catholicism.

If I were to say - approaching zero it might seem unfriendly, and we want to be friendly here, so I will just say have a nice day.

No worries, Stephen. If I were to say, how wonderfully passive aggressive this statement is, full of contempt hidden behind a phony good will blessing that probably reflects your personality in life, that might seem cutting. But I don't want to do that, so I'll just say also, have a nice day.