Easter and Christianity – Some information
To millions of Church going Christians, "Easter" is one of the chief annual religious holidays. We
see during this time lots of bunnies and eggs, and new spring fashions that come around Easter time.
Television adds shout out their bargains featuring chocolate bunnies eggs and hot cross buns every
single year. Huge stadiums are filled with people that attend the "Easter sunrise Services." Like
Christmas, did you ever stop to think where it all came from? Most people with the hustle and bustle
of this season as well as Easter don't stop to think what are the origins of some of these holidays.
Let's see if we can answer that Question. Where did it all come from? Christianity? How can someone
even dare ask that question? Of course Christianity right? WRONG! Flat out wrong. The origins
of Easter I can confidentially say came from Paganism and we will prove it to you in this article.
Origins of Easter
When was the last time you went to your public library, and obtained one of the leading Encyclopaedias,
or history books, and looked up, or studied the subject on Easter?
If you are like the average person, the answer is probably "never." Maybe if more of us would study,
we wouldn't involve ourselves in something that goes back BEFORE THE TIME OF CHRIST!
Many people believe that Easter started at the time of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, on SUNDAY,
but nothing can be further from the truth! First of all Jesus did not resurrect on Easter Sunday, or any
other Sunday but a different day of the week (explained later). And the Church of God in the first
century did not call it Easter. They did not recognized the festival called Easter, nor did they celebrate
the resurrection of Jesus Christ, even though it was a wonderful event. The resurrection for
them was proof that Jesus was alive, and was King of Kings who was going to come back to the
earth to rule and reign. The resurrection for them was also assurance of salvation, and that Jesus was
doing his job as high Priest in the Tabernacle in Heaven, like Aaron did in the Old Testament, presenting
himself before the Father as the sin offering for all his people and his blood on the mercy
seat in Heaven for all of us. That's what the resurrection meant to them. But they did not celebrate it.
You can't find that in the pages of your Bible.
Let's see what some of the historians tell us about the first century church: "Easter: The English
term, according to the Ven. Bede, relates Eostre, a Teutonic of the rising light of day and spring,
which deity, however is unknown...That the apostolic Fathers did not mention it, and that we first
hear of it principally through the controversy of the Quartrodecimans are purely accidental" (The
Catholic Encyclopaedia, article "Easter," emphasis added).
Notice another source what it says: "...The name Easter (Ger. 'Ostern'), like the names of the days of
the week, is a survival from the old Teutonic mythology...[and] is derived from Eostre, Ostara, the
Anglo-Saxon goddess of spring, to the month answering to our April...There is no indication of the
observance of the Easter festival in the New Testament, or in the writings of the Apostolic
Fathers...The first Christians continued to observe the Jewish Festival [Passover], though in a new
spirit, as commemorating events which those festivals foreshadowed. Thus Passover with a new
conception added to it of Christ as the true Paschal lamb and first fruits from the dead, continued to
be observed, and became the 'Christian Easter''' (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th edition, emphasis
added). The New Testament Church history shows that the Christians continued in the festival of the
Old Testament with a new spirit, the truth of God in its full meaning, Jesus Christ! They celebrated
the festivals of the Bible in Leviticus 23.
Even though most authorities admit that our modern term "Easter" in the English language stems
from the Teutonic (Nordic) word, spelled and pronounced similarly, the term has even more ancient
roots beginning in ancient Assyria and BABYLON! And many other ancient pagan races of the
Middle East that participated in the worship of "Ashtoreth" and "Ishtar" (pronounced "Aestar"). This
worship of these deities can be traced back to Nimrod and his Wife who began the Babylonian
Among the Babylonians, "Ashtoreth" was pronounced by leaving the final syllable silent, and would
be transliterated in the English "Ishtar." The "I" however was given the English long sound "E" and
would be rendered "Easter."
The earliest beginnings of modern civilizations and the governments of man can all be traced back
to the one momentous biblical event-Nimrod and the Tower of Babel spoken of in Genesis the 11th
chapter. Nimrod established the first empire of ancient civilization in Genesis 10:10. Babel is none
other than ancient Babylon! So just how did this mystery religion get started? And why is it you find
traces of this religion in almost every race on earth?
Shortly after the flood in Noah's day, men began to migrate from the "east" and found a plain in the
land of "Shinar" (Mesopotamia). This is when Nimrod came on the scene. He was a "mighty
hunter" (Gen 10:8-9). As he gained prestige with the people, he devised a better means of protection
by organizing them into cities surrounded by walls.
The name "Nimrod" means "he rebelled." The Jewish Encyclopaedia says Nimrod was "...he who
made all the people rebel against God." In the Two Babylons by Hislop, a very well researched book
on the origins of the pagan religions of this world, we read a statement from Nimrod's father himself,
Cush, and he says that Nimrod: "For many ages men lived under the government of Jove [evidently
not the Roman Jupiter, but the Jehovah of the Hebrews], without cities without walls, and all speaking
one language" (p.26). All men worshipped Yahweh because of Noah, and then Nimrod turned the
people away from God, and started his own system of worship where he was the object of worship
and adoration, and not Jehovah. Many historians note that the whole earth at one time was a monotheistic
culture BEFORE they were polytheistic: "The Bible view has received recent confirmation
from Archaeology. Dr Stephen Langdon of Oxford University, has found that the earliest Babylonian
inscriptions suggest that man's first religion was a belief in one God, and from there, there was a
rapid decline into polytheism and Idolatry...Sir Flinder's Petrie said that the original religion of Egypt
was monotheistic...Sayce announced on (1898) that he discovered, on three separate tablets in the
British Museum, of the time of Hummarabi, the word 'Jahwe [Yahweh] (Jehovah) is God...Leading
anthropologists have recently announced that among all primitive races there was a belief in one
supreme God..." (Halley's Bible Handbook, p.62).
Nimrod built the Tower of Babel, see Genesis 11, and there God confused the people's language.
Josephus writes: "...The place wherein they built the tower is now called BABYLON" (Antiquities
of the Jews, I, iv, 2-3, emphasis added).
After God scattered the people all over the world (Gen 11:8), the people's language changed but the
same RELIGION LIVED ON, as one source says: "Herodotus, world traveler and historian of antiquity,
witnessed the mystery religion and its rites in numerous countries and mentions how Babylon
was the primeval source from which ALL SYSTEMS OF IDOLATRY FLOWED. Bunsen says:
'[The] Religious system of Egypt was derived from Asia and the primitive empire of BABEL"
(David Todd, The Origin of Easter, p.11, emphasis added).
So after the scattering of the people from Babylon, the religion stayed the same, but because of the
confusion of the languages, these gods were given different names because of the language change,
but they were still the SAME GODS: "In the ancient world, some of the various incarnations of the
great fertility goddess known as Ishtar (Babylonian), Astarte (Phoenician), Atargatis (Philistine),
Ashteroth (Hebrew), Easte (Anglo-Saxon), Ostara (German) and Aphrodite (Greek)...These goddesses
are regarded as essentially the same deity..." (Should You Observe Easter, or the Christian
Passover?, Dexter Wakefield, p.11, emphasis theirs).
Nimrod as well: "Dr. Herman Hoeh in his Compendium in World History, p.48: 'The Egyptian god
Osiris was the Baal of the Phoenicians, the Marduk of the Babylonians, the Tammuz of the Semites,
the NIMROD OF THE BIBLE.' All of those gods originated from the very foundation of man's
governments-Nimrod and Babylon!" (Origin of Easter David Todd, p.12, emphasis added).
After the death of Nimrod, his mother, who was also his wife, Semiramis, claimed he was the Sun
God. She claimed that Nimrod became alive once more, reborn as a spirit being. She in turn labelled
herself the "QUEEN OF HEAVEN." Concerning the idolatrous queen, The Encyclopaedia
Britannica writes: "Semiramis appears as a goddess, the daughter of the fish Goddess Atargatis, and
herself connected with the doves of ISHTAR OR ASTARTE" (11th edition, emphasis added). After
Nimrod's death she perpetuated the religion of Babylon with all its symbols.
Notice that Semiramis is called "Ishtar": "It is well known that the word 'Easter' is not a Christian
expression-not in its original meaning. The word itself, as the dictionary and encyclopaedia's explain,
comes from the name of a pagan goddess-The Eostre, Ostera, or Astarte, Ishtar [is just] another
name for Semiramis as we pronounce Easter Today" (Babylonian Mystery Religion, p.152,
emphasis added). So here we have the original meaning, and who is being worshipped at the time of
The Two Babylons confirms the above: "What means the term Easter itself? It is not a Christian
name. It bears its Chaldean [Babylonian] origin on its very forehead. Easter is nothing else than
Astarte...The QUEEN OF HEAVEN..That name, as found Layard on the Assyrian monuments, is
ISHTAR...the religious solemnities of April, as now practiced, are called by the name of Easter-that
month...(pp.103-104, emphasis added).
The spring festival for Ishtar, in which she was called the "goddess of the Spring," the pagans celebrated:
"Easter on the Sunday following the first moon after the spring equinox...[it] reflects the
turning of the winter into spring" (Myth of the Goddess, p.359, emphasis added).
Many pagan religions all over the world from Japan to China, India to the South East Islanders
commemorate the worship of the goddess of the spring Semiramis!
The Christianizing of Easter
Believe it or not, it was many centuries after, that the false apostate church was finally able to stamp
out the celebration of the Passover and the Days of Unleavened bread from the visible Church that
you see today! But history does show that there were scattered remnants of God's church observing
the Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread and the other Holy days down through the centuries
until our day today.
Remember our earlier quotation from the Catholic Encyclopaedia, in which they mentioned the
"controversy of the Quartodecimens?"
The Quartodecimens "Controversy" raged through the centuries in the Mediterranean world.
"Quartodecimen" is merely another word for "Fourteenth"! The controversy stemmed from the
insistence that the early New Testament Church of God ought to follow the custom of Jesus Christ of
Nazareth in observance of the Passover on the 14th of Nisan; the first month of the year, according
to God's calendar.
The church gradually began adopting pagan heathen customs and traditions, and began insisting on
standardizing the date for the observance of the spring festival. The masses of pagans who were
being "converted" into this new religion brought with them their ancient customs of the celebration
of life; sexual reproduction, fertility and the worship of the sun. Their gods and goddesses were
those such as Isis and Osiris, Nimrod and Semiramis; Astatre and Ashteroth, Ishtar and Tammuz, and
others. Apostate church leaders are the reason these pagans had to be accommodated.
History absolutely proves that pagan customs and ceremonies were allowed, and merely given
Finally, those who insisted on continuing to observe God's annual holy days were PUT OUT of the
Notice! "The first council of Nicea (325) decreed that the Roman practice should be observed
throughout the church. But even at Rome the Easter term was changed repeatedly. Those who continued
to keep Easter with the Jews were called 'Quartodecimans' (14th Nisan) and were excluded
from the church" (Catholic Encyclopaedia, article "Easter" emphasis added).
Interestingly, the Catholic Encyclopaedia subtly inserts the word "Easter" in its article under that
term, even though the writer of the article knew NO ONE would ever "keep Easter with the Jews,"
for the Jews never recognized this pagan custom. The Catholic Encyclopaedia continually refers to
the Passover as "Easter." Note some further quotes from the same source:
"Easter eggs: symbolic meaning of a new creation of mankind by Jesus rising from the dead was
probably and invention of later times. The custom may have its origin in paganism, for a great many
pagan customs, celebrating the return of spring, gravitated to Easter. The egg is the emblem of the
germinating life of early spring.
“The Easter rabbit lays the eggs, for which reason they are hidden in a nest or in the garden. The
rabbit is a pagan symbol and has always been an emblem of fertility’ (Simrock Mythology, 551).
"The Easter Fire is lit on the top of mountains (Easter Mountain, Osterberg) and must be kindled
from new fire, drawn from wood by friction; this [also] is a custom of pagan origin in vogue all over
Europe, signifying the victory of spring over the winter.
"The Bishops issued severe edicts against the sacrilegious Easter files, but did not succeed in abolishing
them everywhere. The church adopted the observance into Easter ceremonies, referring it to
the fiery column in the desert and to the resurrection of Christ; the new fire on holy Saturday is
drawn from flint, symbolizing the resurrection by the light of the world from the tomb closed by a
stone" (Catholic Encyclopedia, article "Easter" emphasis added ).
What a shocking admission. Notice that even the Catholics admit that the Origins of Easter and even
the name itself are totally Pagan. The rabbit is a pagan symbol. It is an emblem of fertility. Not to
mention the Easter fires are also pagan in origin. The church "adopted" these pagan ceremonies! Can
anything be plainer? Let's continue the same source:
"EASTER CONTROVERSY: First Phase:
"The dioceses of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the 14th day of the moon, on which
day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the Lamb, should always be
observed as the feast of the life giving pasch [Passover], contending that the fast ought to end on that
day, whatever day of the week it might happen to be. However, it was not the custom of the churches
in the rest of the world to end it at this point, as they observed the practice, which from apostolic
tradition has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the
resurrection of our Saviour. Synods and assemblies of bishops were held on this account, and all
with one consent through mutual correspondence drew up a ecclesiastical decree that the mystery
of the resurrection should be celebrated on no other day but the Sunday and that we should observe
the close of the paschal fast on that day only. [No such fast is mentioned in the bible].
"A letter of Saint Ireaneus is among the extracts just referred to, and this shows that the diversity of
practice regarding Easter had existed at least from the time of Pope Sixtus. Further Ireaneus states
that St. Polycarp, who, like the other Asiatics, kept Easter on the 14th day of the moon whatever the
day of the week that might be, following therein the tradition which he claimed to have derived
from St. John the apostle, [Polycarp] came to Rome about 150 A.D. about this very question, but
could not be persuaded by Pope Anicetus to relinquish his Quartodecimen observance.
"The question thus debated was therefore primarily whether Easter was to be kept on a Sunday, or
whether Christians should observe the holy day of the Jews, the fourteenth of Nisan, which might
occur on any day of the week. Those who kept Easter with the Jews were called Quartodecimans".
(ibid, emphasis added).
Again, it must be noted in this lengthy quotation from the Catholic Encyclopaedia that they have
subtly substituted "Easter" for the "Passover." What Polycarp observed "like the other Asiatics" was
not EASTER, but PASSOVER on the 14th of Nisan, as all the apostles had kept it.
That they admit he kept a great event "on the fourteenth day of the moon, whichever day of that
week that might be" - following the tradition which he claimed to have derived from "St. John the
apostle" - absolutely PROVES that the festival Polycarp kept (who was a student of John) was not
"Easter," but THE PASSOVER! In the final paragraph of the quotation, the distinction is subtly
drawn between "Christians" and "Jews." Another obvious and flagrant misapplication of terms is in
this final quote: "Those who kept Easter with the Jews were called Quartodecimens..."
Nonsense! They were called Quartodecimens because they kept the Passover - and absolutely
shunned the pagan "Ishtar" (pronounced "Easter") being adopted by an apostate, increasingly pagan
"II PHASE" The second stage in the Easter controversy centers around the council of Nicea (A.D.
325). "The emperor himself (Constantine) writing to the churches after the council of Nicea, exhorts
them to adopt its conclusions and says among other things, 'At this meeting the question concerning
the most holy day of Easter was discussed, and it was resolved by the united judgment of all present
that this feast ought to be kept by all and in every place on one and the same day...And first of all it
appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy feast we should follow the
practice of the Jews, who have impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin...for we have received
from our Saviour a different way...and I myself have undertaken that this decision should
meet with the approval of your saga cities in the hope that your wisdoms will gladly admit that
practice which is observed at once in the city of Rome and Africa, throughout Italy and Egypt...with
entire unity of judgment.' From this and other indication...we learn that the dispute now lay between
the Christians of Syria and Mesopotamia and dependent upon the Jewish calendar for its Easter"
(ibid., emphasis mine).
Remember, these lengthy quotations are from the Catholic Encyclopaedia! Constantine was a reformed
SUN WORSHIPER! When he embraced "Christianity" he embraced the so-called Christianity
of the leading bishops who were already apostate! He did not embrace the Christianity practiced
by those who were "holding fast to the faith once delivered to the saints," and who tenaciously
REFUSED to CHANGE the observance of one of the most important annual Holy Days Jesus Christ
ever hallowed, the PASSOVER!
Notice in the quotation above from Constantine's exhortation to the churches after the council of
Nicea. that he, too, showed disdainful contempt for the "Jews" (who are accused of having "impiously
defiled their hands with enormous sin") and he repudiates the "practice of the Jews," meaning
the observance of the Passover (the Lord's Supper, as the Apostle Paul began to refer to it) on the
14th of Nisan, as it had been observed for centuries!
At the end of the quotation concerning the development of keeping Easter in the Catholic Church,
the encyclopaedia admits "the important church of Antioch was still dependant upon the Jewish
calendar for its Easter." Again, a deliberate conclusion of terms is utilized in a subtle attempt to
mislead the mind of the readers.
By no stretch of the imagination were the converted brethren in Antioch, in Syria, who were dependant
on the "Jewish Calendar" (meaning Abib, or Nisan 14), keeping "Easter." By tenaciously adhering
to the 14th of Nisan, it is clear they were observing the Passover, and rejecting Pagan Easter.
Now notice the Quotation concerning the Third Phase:
"It was to the divergent cycles which Rome had successively adopted and rejected its attempt to
determine Easter more accurately that the third stage in the Paschal controversy was mainly due.
"The Roman missionaries coming to England in the time of St Gregory the Great founder of the
British Christians, the representatives of Christianity which had been introduced into Britain during
the period of Roman occupation, still adhering to an ancient system of Easter computation which
Rome itself had laid aside" (ibid, emphasis added).
What a fantastic admission!
Here we read of "Roman missionaries" arriving in the British Isles from Rome, yet discovering
Christians in the British Isles ALREADY that have been there since the Roman occupation of the
first century. This is a fascinating story of Joseph of Arimethea and the seventy missionaries that
started the first British Church in around 35 A.D. And these British Christians were adhering to the
very same system of determining the date for the PASSOVER as had always been observed by the
NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH!
Few have stopped to speculate on where all the other apostles mentioned in the Gospels went. Most
disappeared from sight, and the Bible quickly turns its attention to the Apostle Paul, and then to
some extent Peter and John. But whatever happened to Thomas Andrew Matthew etc..? Jesus plainly
said that he would send them to the "lost sheep of the House of Israel" (Matthew 10:5-6). Go to our
web site Article Where did the Original Apostles Go? for further details! Is it strange then, that
peoples in far away lands where the Israelites dwelt, had been converted to true Christianity, and
were observing God's annual Holy Days on precisely the correct dates, which actually created a
controversy with the Romans missionaries?
Now under the article "Councils" in the Catholic Encyclopaedia, notice one of the most important
purposes of the Council of Nicea:
"The first ecumenical, or council, of Nicea (325) lasted two months and twelve days. 318 bishops
were present. Hosius, the bishop of Cordova, assisted as legate of Pope Sylvester. The Emperor
Constantine was also present. To this council we owe the creed of Nicea, defining against Arius the
true divinity of the Son of God, and the fixing of the date for Keeping Easter [against the
Rome's State Religion
The Roman Empire is actually the Beast of Revelation 13 and Daniel 7 order our article Who What
is the Beast of Revelation? for further details. The Bible says that the whole world "worshipped the
Beast" (Rev 13:4). History is full of accounts of the worship of the Roman emperors, and the
Emperors religion which was Idolatrous Paganism, this was the STATE RELIGION OF THE ROMAN
EMPIRE! The following is from Robinson's Medieval and Modern Times, page 7: "In a word,
the Roman government was not only wonderfully organized...everyone was required to join in the
worship of the Emperor because he stood for the majesty and glory of the dominion...all were
obliged as good citizens, to join in the official sacrifices to the head of state as a god" (emphasis
added). In other words they "worshipped the Beast." Now in the Bible a beast is a symbol of a King.
And king and kingdom are synonymous, see Daniel 7:17, 23. So when the Bible says that they
"worshipped the beast," it can mean they worshipped the King. Now what was the religion of the
Emperors of the Roman Empire?
"The Identification of the Roman Emperor with the Sun has a long history...Nero also erected outside
his golden house a colossal statue of Sol Apollo with a radiant crown. The Emperor Aurelian
was a devotee of the Syrian cult Sol Invictus [ancient name of the festival we call Christmas
today]...A magnificent temple was erected to Sol on the Agrippae and its dedication day (Natalis)
[meaning "Birth] was December 25th...In the 3rd century the dedicatory inscriptions to Sol, Apollo
and Mithras were sometimes interchangeable. But it was Sol never Apollo who appeared and divine
protector of Constantine" (From Constantine to Julian, C. Lieu and Dominic Montserrat, p.75,
Mithras was identified with the Sun, which in turn was identified with the Emperor. The Sun was a
god, and the Emperors were worshipped as "King-Sun" with the deity. Here is another excerpt from
"The Great soldier-Emperors of the 3rd century naturally favoured the god [Mithra], so popular
among Romans soldiers, and we have seen how the armies of Aurelian and Diocletian fought under
the banner of the Invincible Sun God" (The Civilization of Rome, Donald R. Dudley, p.231, emphasis
added). The banner represented their god and Emperor as the source says as “Soldier-Emperor”
Samuele Biacchiochi's book From Sabbath To Sunday writes that: "...[the Romans] designated the
sun as their national god, though in actuality it was an imported deity," and "...the fact remains that it
was regarded as a Roman god" (p.239, emphasis added). Sun worship was the state religion of the
Empire, and the Emperor was the Sun deity incarnate on Earth since they were regarded as one and
the same. This same religion was the religion that Constantine adhered to before he converted to socalled
Christianity! Biacchiochi also points out that the emperors identified themselves with the
"worship of the Sun" (pp.239-240). So the emperors claimed divinity.
Now, as Biacchiochi pointed above, the religion of the Sun was an "imported" religion. Where did
this religion come from?
Gastone H.Halsberghe writes in his monograph, The Cult of Sol Invictus (part of the series on Oriental
Religions in the Roman Empire edited by the living authority on the subject, M.J. Vermaseren),
presents texts that shows that Sun Worship was "one of the oldest components of the Roman Religion"
(p.26, emphasis added). According to his conclusions, the Sun cult in ancient Rome experienced
two phases. Until the end of the first century A.D. the Romans practiced what he calls an
"autochthonous [i.e. native or indigenous] sun cult," but "starting in the second century [100 A.D.],
the eastern sun worship began to influence Rome and the rest of the Empire" (ibid, pp.27, 35, emphasis
Halsberghe maintains that from the beginning of the second century, the Eastern cult of "Sol
Invictus-The Invincible Sun god" penetrated Rome in two different fashions: Privately, through the
cult of Sol Invictus Mithra and publicly through that of Sol Invictus Elgabal" (Cult of Sol Invictus,
p.173, emphasis added).
Mithra is a sun worshipping cult from Persia, the old region of BABYLON! "Mithraism emerged in
ancient Persia. 'Mithr' was a word not only for the SUN but also for a friend, and that it seems to be
how this pagan god was originally worshipped-as both supreme SUN GOD and god of love" (Quest
for the Past, p.173, emphasis added). And by the time of the "second century A.D. the cult of Sol
Invictus was dominant in Rome and in other parts of the Empire" (Cult of Sol Invictus, p.44). By the
third century the Roman Emperors realized that the "cult was in their best interests: MITHRAISM
preached discipline, loyalty, bravery, and self sacrifice...[AND] backed by imperial approval, the
faith became so widespread that some historians believe that without the rise of Christianity (so
called), it would have became the Western world's religion" (Quest for the Past, p.173, emphasis
added). Now remember as we have seen from the sources above, Mithra, King-Sun Sol Invictus,
have all been shown to be terms that are "interchangeable" and mean one and the same thing. So
Mithraism was the state religion of the Roman Empire and the Emperor was worshipped through
this religion since he claimed divinity through this Sun-god. This dogma of the Leader of the nation
and the worship of the Sun god as one and the same is in the religion itself: "The identification and
worship of the Emperor as SUN GOD [was] encouraged by the Eastern Theology of the 'King-Sun,'
and by political consideration, undoubtedly contributed to the diffusion of a public sun cult" (Mysteries
of Mithra by Franz Cumont, p.101, emphasis added). As John wrote they "worshipped the
beast" as "KING-SUN."
Now we have traced the King-Sun or Mithra to Persia but it goes even farther back than this. It goes
all the way back to the religion of the Babylonian Empire! Now something must be cleared up. As
we have noted, the religion of Mithra came from Persia, but it was not the Mithraism of the Zoroastrian
Mithraism, but from the Babylonian Mithraism. S. Douglas Waterhouse explains: "[The] 'Persian'
theology [of Mithra] needs clarification.. While Mithra indeed was a very ancient Persian deity,
the late Hellenistic form of Mithraism that spread far and wide in the Roman Empire actually was
unknown in Persia. The astral mystery religion of western Mythra had its roots in...Chaldea
[Babylon] and Anatolia, and not in the cult of the Zoroastrianized Mithra in Iran...[the] western
Mithraism was first formulated as a result of intercourse between [the] Magi and [the]
Chaldeans...The first of these events came in 539 B.C. with the fall of Babylon to the Mede Persian
Empire..." (The Sabbath in Scripture and History, Appendix A., p.315). Yes Mithra was a Deity of
the Babylonian Religion! And this sun deity represents "Nimrod" (Two Babylons, pp.96, 98, 163).
Nimrod was the founder of the Apostate religion at Babel when he rebelled against God and started
his own system of worship known as the Babylonian religion.
The festivals of Rome as well can be traced back to Babylon as well as Hislop notes: "...The festivals
of Rome...Christmas [i.e. Sol Invictus], lady Day, EASTER...Each and all can be proven to be
Babylonian" (ibid, p.91, emphasis added). These were the celebrations of the state religion of the
"...under the name Mithra [Rome's state religion]...she [the wife of Nimrod was worshipped] as
Aphrodite, or 'wrath-subduer,' was called Mylitta..." (ibid, pp.157-158, 264). Who was Aphrodite?
"Aphrodite is primarily a descendant of the Mesopotamian goddess Inanna-ISHTAR, who became
ASTARTE in Phoenicia and was called Atargatis by the Philistines, and ASHTORETH by the
Hebrews...Aphrodite's Adonis [Nimrod], the dying and resurrected son-lover of the goddess in a new
form..." (The Myth of the Goddess, Anne Baring, pp.145-147, emphasis added). Aphrodite was also
known as "Venus by the Romans" and that the Greeks always knew that Aphrodite was an ASIATIC
GODDESS...[And] He [Homer, the historian]...reported that the goddess was widely worshipped in
Asian lands where she was called MYLITTA...[the wife of Mithra]...and perhaps best known under
the name ISHTAR OR ASTARTE" (Meridian Handbook of Classical Mythology, pp.57, 60, emphasis
added). And as we have noted earlier Easter is "nothing else than Astarte...The QUEEN OF
HEAVEN..That name, as found Layard on the Assyrian monuments, is ISHTAR...the religious
solemnities of April, as now practiced, are called by the name of Easter-that month...(pp.103-104,
emphasis added). And all these different names that we have seen are "regarded as essentially the
same deity..In the ancient world, some of the various incarnations of the great fertility goddess
known as Ishtar (Babylonian), Astarte (Phoenician), Atargatis (Philistine), Ashteroth (Hebrew), Easte
(Anglo-Saxon), Ostara (German) and Aphrodite (Greek)... (Should You Observe Easter, or the
Christian Passover?, Dexter Wakefield, p.11, emphasis theirs). So Easter was part of the religion of
the Emperor and the Empire as John said, they "worshipped the beast."
Origin of Easter Eggs
Why do people hunt for eggs? And why are rabbits associated with eggs when everyone knows that
rabbits DON'T LAY EGGS! Where did all this come from?
"Hence the eggs became one of the symbols of Astarte or Easter" (ibid, p.109). The sun was considered
to the be the "golden egg" by the ancient Egyptians: "Their dyed eggs were used as sacred
offerings at Easter season" (Babylon Mystery Religion, p.144). Concerning eggs, the Encyclopaedia
Britannica 11th edition says: "...they brought to the table of Easter day, colored red [eggs] to symbolize
Easter joy-THE CUSTOM MAY HAVE ITS ORIGINS IN PAGANISM, for a great many pagan
customs celebrated the return of the spring, gravitated to Easter" (emphasis added). It continues:
"Like the Easter egg, the Easter HARE came to Christianity from antiquity. The hare is associated
with the moon in the legends of ancient Egypt and other peoples-thus both the Easter Rabbit and
eggs were symbols of SEXUAL SIGNIFICANCE, SYMBOLS OF FERTILITY" (ibid, emphasis
added). Here is the true meaning of the rabbit and eggs. Just like its winter counterpart, Christmas,
many of the accoutrements of Easter deal with symbols of sex and fertility because Astarte or Easter
was a goddess of love, sex and fertility. The rabbit is the most pro-creative animal, and eggs the
symbol of life, what better time celebrate it than the time of the spring when life begins to emerge
from a dead winter.
Origin of Lent
Let's now look at the celebration of Lent, since it comes before Easter. Notice Colliers Encyclopaedia:
"Lent in the Christian Church...marked especially by forty days of fast in memory of the forty
days fast of Christ in the desert. Admittedly not of Apostolic origin" (emphasis added). If these are
not from the Apostles tradition, then where did it come from?
Classic poets relate the myth of the Easter Egg this way: "An egg of
wondrous size is said to have fallen from heaven into the Euphrates
River. The fishes rolled into the bank, where the doves having settled
upon it, and hatched it, out came Venus [The Roman Name for
Aphrodite], who afterwards was called the Syrian goddess.'" This Syrian
Goddess according to Hislop was Astarte: "Hence the eggs became one of
the symbols of Astarte or Easter" (Two Babylons, p.109)
"...fish and eggs were fertility symbols of the Mystery Religion, so also is
the Easter Rabbit-the hare a symbol of fertility: 'Like the Easter egg, the
Easter Hare says Encyclopaedia Britannica, 'Came to Christianity from
antiquity. The Hare is associated with the moon in legends of ancient
Egypt and other peoples...Through the fact that the Egyptian word for
Hare, UM means also 'open' and 'period,' the hare came to be associated
with the idea of periodicity, both lunar and human, and with the
beginning of a new life. As such the Hare became linked with
Easter...eggs.' Thus both rabbit and Easter eggs were symbols of sexual
significance, symbols of fertility" (Mystery Babylon, Woodrow, p.154).
"The forty days abstinence of Lent was DIRECTLY BORROWED from the worshippers of the BABYLONIAN
GODDESS. Such a Lent of forty days, in the spring of the year, is still observed by the Yezidis or pagan devil
worshippers of Koodistan, who have inherited it from their early masters, the BABYLONIANS. Such a Lent of
40 days was held in the spring by the Pagan Mexicans...[and] in Egypt" (ibid, pp.104-105, emphasis added).
In fact John Landseer, in Sabean Researches, pp.111-112 says that, "this Egyptian Lent of 40 days was
observed expressly in honour of OSIRIS, also known as Adonis in Syria, and TAMMUZ IN BABYLONIA"
The Sunrise Service
Every single year at Easter in huge stadiums sometimes, and in all churches all over our lands, the Easter
sunrise service takes place. Everyone faces the east at the rising of the sun. What is the origin of this custom?
Let's look at Ezekiel 8:14-16: "Then he brought me to the door of the gate of the YHWH'S house which was
toward the north; and, behold, there sat women weeping for Tammuz.
"Then said he unto me, Hast thou seen this, O son of man? turn thee yet again, and thou shalt see greater
abominations than these.
"And he brought me into the inner court of the YHWH'S house, and, behold, at the door of the temple of
YHWH, between the porch and the altar, were about five and twenty men, with their backs toward the temple
of YHWH, and their faces toward the east; and they worshipped the sun toward the east." Notice the significance
of these verses. There is a direct connection between Tammuz and the worshipping of the Sun-just as
there is with Nimrod and Baal. They all point to the same Idolatrous Sun worship. Clarke's Commentary says:
"Their turning their faces to the East plainly shows they were worshipping the rising of the Sun" (emphasis
The Soncino Commentary says the worship of Tammuz "came from Babylonia."
"...The pagan MITHRAS OF ROME met together at dawn in honour of the sun god" (Mystery Babylon
Religion, p.156, emphasis added).
In the latter part of verse 17 of Ezekiel, it talks about putting the branch to their nose. The JFB Commentary
writes: "Rather, they held up a branch or bundle of Tamarisk (called Barsom) to their nose at daybreak, while
singing hymns to the rising sun." Notice the similarity of that ancient custom and the Easter sunrise service:
Is Friday Good?
The accepted belief that Jesus died on Good Friday, and resurrected on Sunday morning has never
been put to the test, just accepted as the dogma of the church. This assumption will discuss later in
the article. But let's look at Good Friday and see how it fits in with Lent and Easter.
"Certainly, the scriptures never associate fish with Friday. On the other hand, the word 'Friday'
comes from the name 'Freya,' who is regarded as the goddess of peace, joy, and fertility, the symbol
of her fertility being a fish. The goddess of sexual fertility among the Romans was called
VENUS...Friday is regarded as her sacred day because it was believed that our planet Venus ruled
the first hour of Friday...the fish was also regarded as being sacred to her...The fish was regarded as
sacred to ASHTORETH...In ancient Egypt, Isis was sometimes represented with a fish on her
head...Considering that Friday was named after the goddess of sexual fertility, Friday being her
sacred day...Catholics have been taught that Friday is a day of abstinence from meat, A DAY TO
EAT FISH" (ibid, pp.142-143, emphasis added). When I was a Catholic my mother always warned
me on good Friday not to eat meat. When I came to the knowledge of the truth I would purposely eat
meat in front of my mother to see what kind of reaction I would get out of her. It wasn't pleasant.
Then I would ask her where it is in the Bible that you can't eat meat on Good Friday? She just told
me to shut up and follow the Catholic traditions. This is basically what religions are based on, traditions
of men and not God.
Hot Cross Buns
Jeremiah 7:17-19 states this: "Seest thou not what they do in the cities of Judah and in the streets of
"The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to
make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may
provoke me to anger.
"Do they provoke me to anger? saith YAHWEH: do they not provoke themselves to the confusion of
their own faces?"
Who is the Queen of Heaven? The Goddess Astarte or Easter! JFB Commentary writes: "Cakes were
made of honey, fine flour etc..., in a round flat shape to resemble the disk of the moon, to which they
were offered." The Britannica says: "...[Hot Cross Buns] are traceable to the remotest period of
pagan history...The Greeks offered such cakes to Astarte and other divinities...In time the Greeks
marked these cakes with a CROSS, possibly an illusion to the four corners of the moon..." (emphasis
added). And "the 'buns' known too, by that identical name, were used in the worship of the queen of
Heaven, the goddess of Easter...The hot cross buns are not now offered, but eaten on the festival of
Astarte [Easter]" (Two Babylons, p.108, emphasis added).
Now that we have seen that the traditions of Easter come from Paganism. We will now examine
whether that Passover is for Christians and binding on them today. Also we will examine if the
church in history actually celebrated the feast of Passover and the Days of Unleavened bread as well.
Passover Is It for Christians?
Now if Easter did not come From the Apostolic Church, nor is it commanded to celebrate in the
Bible. What About Passover? Are Christians to keep the Passover? What does your Bible say? What
about history? Is there any evidence in history outside the Bible to show that the New Testament
Church observed the Passover?
Now Many people believe that God's law is done away and not binding on Christians. Is that true?
What did Jesus say about the law?
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
" For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from
the law, till all be fulfilled.
" Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he
shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same
shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:17-19). Notice Jesus said "Think Not"
that he came to destroy the law or the prophets but to "fulfill" them. To fulfill an obligation is to DO
IT. And also he says that those who "teach" the law will be called "great" in God's kingdom. So Jesus
did not come to destroy the law or prophets. He even went on to say that till heaven and earth pass
away not one jot or tittle shall in no wise pass from the law. We are still in that time today.
What about Paul?
Many people believe that the Apostle Paul came and did away with the law. Is that true? How did
Paul WORSHIP God?
"But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my
fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:" (Acts 24:14). Paul’s
system of worship was rooted in God's law and the prophets like Christ. Paul wrote that the law of
God is " Holy, and Just and good" (Rom 7:12). And that the "doers of the law shall be justified"
(Rom 2:13). So, no, Paul did NOT teach that the law was done away. The apostles even told Paul to
go to the temple to show everyone that he "also walkest orderly, and keepest the law" (Acts 21:24).
So God's law is NOT done away. So what about the Passover? Is there Biblical evidence that shows
the New Testament Church Taught and kept the Feast of the Passover? Absolutely!
In the letter to the Corinthians Paul wrote that the New Testament Church in Corinth should "keep
the feast" for "Christ OUR PASSOVER was sacrificed for Us" (I Corinth 5:8, 7). In these passages
he said that we should "Purge out, therefore the old LEAVEN...as YE ARE UNLEAVENED [Physically]"
(v.7). Notice that they were unleavened Physically. The obviously meaning of this scripture is
that the New Testament Church was observing the days of Unleavened bread and the Passover.
In the letter to the Colossians, Paul had a problem with outside elements that were trying in infect
the church with their doctrines. These doctrines consisted of Gnosticism. The Gnostics basically
believe that the "spirit is entirely good, and matter [the physical] is entirely evil" (NIV Study Bible
Intro to 1 John). Now "since the body was considered evil, it was to be treated harshly. This ascetic
form of Gnosticism is the background of part of the letter to the Colossians" (Vaughan, p.167, emphasis
added). This also included the "occult...astrology and magic," "special knowledge," and
"mediating beings." All these elements are seen to have been influencing the Colossian congregation.
It is clear in the letter that Paul was combating some of these things. Like the special knowledge
of the Gnostics, Paul claimed he had a higher and saving knowledge of God and Jesus (Col 1:9,
25-29; 2:2-3). He said "lest anyone [Gnostics] should deceive you with persuasive word" (verse 4).
He called this special knowledge "philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the
rudiments of the world, and not after Christ" (verse 8). The most important knowledge was that of
God and Christ, "In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" (verse 3).
Adherents to the heresy included people who advocated obeisance to Angels and other spiritual
powers. Paul warned the Colossians of those who delight in the "worship of Angels" (Col 2:18). In
the light of Christ's atoning sacrifice, these supposed "principalities and powers were useless as a
means of access to God," he said in (verses 10, 15).
Based on the belief that the flesh was evil and the spirit is good, these teachers taught strict asceticism,
denying the self any physical pleasure. Through "neglect of the body" (v.23), they hoped to
attain increased spirituality. Paul described their rules as "do not touch, do not taste, do not handle"
(v.21). These regulations concerned only "things which perish with the using," he wrote, because
they were based on "the commandments and the doctrines of men [NOT God]" (v.22).
These early Gnostics also combined Judaism with their gentile concepts such as circumcision (v.11).
"It is likely therefore, that the Colossian heresy was a mixture of an extreme form of Judaism and an
early stage of Gnosticism" (NIV Study Bible, Intro to Colossians).
The Colossians were being Judge NOT for observing the Festivals of God in Leviticus 23, new
moons and Sabbaths; but rather they were being judged on HOW they observed these days. Apparently
in a joyous festive manner. This is what God taught that these feast were to be celebrated and
to "rejoice before YHWH your God" (Lev 23:40). This was entirely contrary to the Gnostic teaching
of self denial so evident in this chapter. This is why Paul wrote, "Let no man [The Gnostics] therefore
judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an HOLYDAY, or of the new moon, or of the
SABBATH DAYS:" (Col 2:16). This scripture shows that the New Testament Church OBSERVED
AND TAUGHT THE OLD TESTAMENT FEASTS AND SABBATHS. Paul said "let no MAN"
"JUDGE" you. He was concerned about the Gnostics telling the church HOW they should observe
these days NOT if they should observe them.
Paul also said that he by all means had to "keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem" (Acts 18:21).
This feast was Pentecost which was the last day of the feast of Weeks of Lev 23.
What about Jesus? Did He keep the Feasts? Of course he did!
When he was 12 years of age we see him in Jerusalem for the Passover, see Luke 2:41-50. Jesus
also kept the Feast of Tabernacles, see John 7:1-14.
One more further note. Have you ever wondered why, in the Gospel of John especially, we read of
the "Jews Passover" and the "Jews Feast of Tabernacles" and the "Jews Preparation Day," see John
7:2; 11:55; 19:42. Why does John use this language?
"John's concern [was] to inform the reader that he is referring to the Passover of the Jews suggests
that, to use Joachim Jeremiah's words 'He obviously distinguishes the Jewish Passover from the
Christian'" (God's Festivals, Biacchiocchi, p.73, emphasis added). That's all John was doing. He was
distinguishing between the Jews Passover and Feast of Tabernacles from the Christian Passover and
Feast of Tabernacles. You see Christ was "Our Passover," Our "First fruits," our "Atonement," and
he "Tabernacled" among Us, see I Corinth 5:7; 15:20; 1 John 2:2; John 1:14. To the Jews because
they rejected Christ. He was none of those things. So John had to distinguish between the two. "The
keeping of the festivals was taken for granted" (ibid, p.72). These festivals were never up for discussion
of being done away. So this means that there was a "Christian Preparation Day." A "Christian
Passover." A "Christian Feast of Tabernacles" etc...
"...the expression 'Jews' in the fourth Gospel generally conveys the IDEA OF CONTRAST to the
disciples of Christ (for St. John vii.15)..." (Alfred Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah,
p.309, emphasis added).
The Lord's Supper
There is no question that the Lord's supper Has to be observed. Jesus said, "This do in remembrance
of Me" (Luke 22:19). A remembrance is a memorial. The Apostle Paul wrote about the Last supper
that, "For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come"
(I Corinth 11:26). Notice that the Lord's Supper was observed long after the death of Christ by the
Church and we keep it as a memorial of the death of Christ which happened on the Passover. The
Lord's supper was to be observed once a year on the Passover. And what is the "Lord's Supper"?
None other than the PASSOVER MEAL! And we are to observe it "till he comes," that's the second
coming, so it continues today. This passage in Corinthians shows that the Corinthians Church was
observing the festival of the Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread.
Many scriptures show that the Lord's Supper is the Passover Meal. The synoptic Gospels consistently
and repeatedly speak of the Last supper as the Passover. The disciples asked Jesus, "Where will
you have us to go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?" (Mark 14:12; cf. Matt 26:17-18; Luke
22:7-9). In Luke 22:15, Jesus himself declares:" I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with
you before I suffer." The term "eat the Passover" refers exclusively to the Passover meal which Jesus
later gives instructions to his disciples (Mark 14:15; Matt 26:18; Luke 22:11).
When was the Passover Meal to be Observed?
Many in the churches of God observe the Passover at the end of the 13th and the beginning of the
14th of Nisan because that's the way Christ observed it. They also point to 1 Corinthians 11 that says
that in the "same night in which he was betrayed" (v.23). Because of this scripture they believe that
the Lord's supper must be done on the beginning of the 14th end of the 13th of Nisan. But the reality
is, the 14th of Nisan "in the evening" (Exodus 12:6), which really means "between the two evenings"
which is between 3:00 pm to 6:00 pm is when the Lamb would be slain, and then "they shall eat the
flesh in that night" (v.8). This is when the Passover took place and when Jesus death exactly took
place. He was slain on the "9th hour" see Luke 23:44; Mark 15:33-34; Matt 27:46. This corresponds
to our 3:00 pm which is between the two evenings
Between the two evenings: God instructed the Israelites, "And ye shall keep it [the paschal lamb] up
until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel
shall kill it in the evening... and they shall eat the flesh in that night..." (Exodus 6-8).
Kitto's Encyclopedia of Biblical Literature says "Tradition... interprets the phrase between the two
evenings to mean from afternoon to the disappearing of the sun, the first evening being from the
time when the sun begins to decline from its vertical or noontime point toward the west; and the
second from its going down and vanishing out of sight which is the reason why the daily sacrifice
might be killed at 12:30 p.m. on a Friday (Mishna, Pesachim, v. 1; Maimonides, Hilchoth, Korban,
Pesach., 1.4). But as the paschal lamb was slain after the daily sacrifice, it generally took place from
2:30 to 5:30 p.m. We should have deemed it superfluous to add, that such faithful followers of
Jewish tradition as Sandia, Rashi, Kimchi, Ralbag, etc., espoused this definition of the ancient
Jewish canons, were it not for the assertion which is made in some of the best Christian commentaries
and which is repeated in the excellent article Passover in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, that
`Jarchi and Kimchi hold that the two evenings were the time immediately before and immediately
after sunset so that the point of time at which the sun sets divides them.' Now Rashi most distinctively
declares, `From the sixth hour (12 o'clock) and upwards is called between the two evenings
because the sun begins to set for the evening. Hence, it appears to me that the phrase between the
two evenings denotes the hours between the evening of the day and the evening of the night. The
evening of the day is from the beginning of the seventh hour (immediately after noontime), when the
evening shadows begin to lengthen, whilst the evening of the night is the beginning of the night'
(Commentary on Exodus 12:6). Kimchi says almost literally the same thing: `Between the two
evenings is from the time when the sun begins to incline towards the west, which is from the sixth
hour (12 o'clock) and upwards. It is called between the two evenings because there are two evenings,
for from the time that the sun begins to decline is one evening, and the other evening is after the sun
has gone down, and it is the space between which is meant by between the two evenings' (Lexicon s.
"Eustathius, in a note on the seventeenth book of the Odyssey, shows that the Greeks too held that
there were two evenings, one which they called the latter evening at the close of the day; and the
other the former evening, which commenced immediately after noon" (Vid. Bochart Hierozoic, Part
I, lib. ii. cap. I, oper., tom. ii. p.559, edit. 1712).
The term "evening" merely means "leveling." Because of popular use, many people say "good
evening" when encountering friends in the very early part of the night, or the very late part of the
afternoon. But popular usage of English terms does not indicate the true meaning of Hebrew terms
which were extant thousands of years before the English language came into existence. The term
"between the two evenings" actually meant any time from the zenith, or the "leveling" of the sun at
its highest point, as it began its decline, until the moment of the "going away of the sun," or sunset.
This is why the sacrificial lambs were sacrificed from about 2:30 p.m. onward, on the 14th of Nisan.
But we need not speculate about language or custom, for there is irrefutable internal biblical proof
about what time of day is meant by the phrase "between the two evenings," translated "in the
evening" in Exodus 12:6.
God said, "...and they shall eat the flesh in that night" (Exodus 12:8) proving that the killing of the
lamb (or kid) took place a few hours prior to the going down of the sun. The paschal meal was
concluded in the early hours of the fifteenth of Nisan (within only a few hours after sunset).
"SEVEN DAYS shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day shall ye put away leaven out of
your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day [obviously
counting inclusively; seven days in all], that soul shall be cut off from Israel" (Exodus 12:15). To
embrace only seven days, the Days of Unleavened Bread HAD TO BEGIN ON THE FIFTEENTH,
and the process of putting leavening out of their houses had to be completed ON THE FOURTEENTH,
prior to the preparation for the paschal meal.
Otherwise, if the original Passover had taken place just after the thirteenth, just at the beginning of
the fourteenth, you have EIGHT DAYS of Unleavened Bread!
But the Bible says there were to be only SEVEN DAYS of Unleavened Bread!
Notice further proof: "In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month AT EVEN, he shall eat
unleavened bread, UNTIL the one and twentieth day of the month at even." If you begin counting
WITH the fourteenth or at the end of the thirteenth, including the whole day, you would have eight
days, not seven. It follows that the expression "on the fourteenth day of the month at even" means
AT THE END OF THE FOURTEENTH, just as the fifteenth is about to BEGIN, or there would be
EIGHT days of Unleavened Bread.
The first Day of Unleavened Bread is the FIFTEENTH, not the fourteenth. But the paschal meal was
to be in preparation, including the putting away of leavening, and the killing of the lamb (or kid)
very late on the fourteenth! Therefore, the Israelite's homes would be unleavened for a full SEVEN
DAYS, plus only a few hours, late on the fourteenth, prior to the beginning of the Feast of
Unleavened Bread. This is the PURPOSE of the "preparation" day. Remember that phrase! Christ
was on the Cross until mid afternoon of the fourteenth of Nisan, and died at the precise moment
when the high priest slew the first of the Pashal lambs! "Between the Two Evenings" They HASTED
to bury Him! Why? "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" (John 19:31). An
"high day Sabbath" was an annual holy day! The holy day which came immediately after Christ's
death was the FIRST DAY OF UNLEAVENED BREAD, the 15th of Nisan! (explained in full later).
So Christ died right at the "ninth hour" which was the time "between the two evenings," when the
lambs were slain.
Now back to the earlier point of when should we keep the Passover.
So if the event of Christ's death took place exactly at the time when the Passover lamb was slaughtered,
then the Passover Meal was to take place at the same time as well. This night is very important
to God. And he calls this night of eating the Passover Meal, "This is that night of the Lord to be
observed" (Ex 12:42). But what are we going to do with the scripture in I Corinthians 11:23? Notice
the scripture. The expression the "same night," in which Jesus was "betrayed." The word "same" is
in Italics. That means is was added by the translators, therefore not in the original text. They do that
some times to try and clear up the translation by adding some words to the text, that's why you find
italicized words in the bible. So this scripture can read, "The night in which he was betrayed." All
Paul was doing was hearkening back to what happened at the first New Testament Passover Meal.
Nothing indicates that Paul was observing Passover at the same time that Jesus ate the Passover at
the end of the 13th and the beginning of the 14th.
So why did Jesus do the Passover early? Well, because, he was going to be the Passover lamb at the
very time when they slaughtered the Lamb, he couldn't hold the Passover Meal at that time. That was
the time when he had to die for the sins of the world. So he held it early. Now Samuele Biacchicchi's
Book God's Festivals shows this to be correct, he writes, "A plausible resolution of the discrepancy
is to assume that the Last Supper was a special paschal meal eaten the evening before the official
Passover Meal. The anticipation of the paschal meal could have been motivated by the fact that
Jesus knew he would suffer death at the Passover in fulfillment of the type provided by the slaying
of the paschal lamb on Nisan 14. He knew he could not possibly eat of the paschal lamb at the usual
time and himself be sacrificed as the true paschal lamb when the lambs were slain.
"It was more important that Christ's death should synchronize with the death of the Passover lambs
than that his eating of the Passover meal synchronize with the official time of the Passover meal. In
view of the legitimate concern, Jesus anticipated his eating of the Passover with his disciples to the
evening before the official Passover so that the types of the slaying of the lamb and the offering of
the first fruits would be fulfilled 'not only as to the event, but as to the time'''
"Support for this assumption can be found in the time references to the Passover in Matthew 26:2,
18 and John 13:1. In Matthew 26:2, Jesus said to his disciples: 'Ye know that after two days is the
feast of the Passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.' Clearly this indicates that
Christ knew that his death would occur at Passover which was two days away. Christ's awareness
that his death would occur on Passover day could have caused him to anticipate his last paschal meal
with his disciples a day earlier.
"Christ could not have instructed his disciples to prepare the Passover at the official time (Nisan 14)
when he had just informed them that he would be crucified at that time. This explains the sense of
urgency in the instructions Jesus gave to his disciples: 'Go into the city to such a man, and say unto
him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the Passover at thy house with my disciples.'
(Matt 26:18). The phrase 'My time is at hand' presumably refers to the short time left to Passover
when the 'son of man will be delivered up to be crucified' Because of the shortness of time, hasty
arrangements had to be made for a special Passover meal.
"A similar conclusion can be drawn from John 13:1, which functions as a prologue or title to the
story of the Last supper in the Upper room. As translated by the RSV, it reads: 'Now before the feast
of Passover, when Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart out of this world to the Father,
having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end.' Noval Geldenhuys argues
that this translation, followed largely by the A.V. & N.I.V. among others, is misleading because it
completely detaches the Last supper from the Passover. He suggests that the expression, 'before the
feast' should be connected with the verb 'Knowing' (eidos). Thus the translation would read: 'Knowing
(already) before the Passover that his hour had come to depart out of this world unto his Father,
Jesus, who loved his own in this world, loved them unto the end (or to the 'uttermost').'
"According to this translation (which is followed by Weymouth, Knox, Moffatt and others), John
does not wish to detach the events of the Last Supper from the Passover. Rather he gives a reason for
their occurrence, namely, Jesus Knew in advance of his impending death at Passover and, consequently,
He showed his love toward his disciples by arranging for an early paschal supper, at which,
among other things, He washed his disciples feet" (pp.56-57, emphasis added). So there is no reason
to believe that the Passover Meal was changed to one day earlier. We are to eat that Passover Meal
on the "night of the Lord to be observed" (Ex 12:42). This night was the "flesh" to be eaten (Ex
12:8), and Jesus gave us no indication that he changed that night. Jesus was killed right at the same
time that the Lamb was killed (Ex 12:6). And we are to eat the Passover Meal when it was to be
eaten, at the same time, "that night," at the end of the 14th and the beginning of the 15th of Nisan!
During the Passover service the British-Israel Church of God, like Christ, after the Passover Meal,
will get up and we wash one another's feet, as Christ did in John 13:4-5: "He riseth from supper, and
laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself.
" After that he poureth water into a basin, and began to wash the disciples' feet, and to wipe them
with the towel wherewith he was girded." After this Jesus explained to his disciples that they should
follow this example of humility: "Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.
"If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet.
" For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you" (vv.13-15). This ordinance
is generally called, "the ordinance of humility" (ibid, p.62). But it also means more than this in
Christ's answer to Peter: "He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every
whit: and ye are clean..." (v.10). It was a symbol of them being cleaned spiritually in their hearts
through the grace of Christ, and his atoning sacrifice he was about to make on the cross.
Every year, the British-Israel Church of God "shows the lord's death till he comes" by Keeping the
Passover as a memorial of what Christ has done for his church and the entire world. It is a night to
be "observed," and kept. It is evident in the Bible that the Church of God kept the Passover, and we
continue to keep it today following Christ's example and the example of the Apostles as well. Will
you keep it?
From Passover to Easter in the History of the Church
So WHY did Easter take the place of the Passover? There are many factors that were at work during the
development of the church that sundered the church from its Jewish/Old Testament roots.
These main factors were:
1. The two revolts of the Jews against the Romans in A.D. 66-70 and the second in A.D. 132-135.
These two violent uprisings contributed to the church changing its position on many doctrines.
2. The internal strife between the Jews and the Christians over Christ. This factor as well split the
two groups and having Christians server their ties with its Jewish/Old Testament roots.
3. Anti-Semitism between the Christians in Rome, and the Romans themselves against the Jews
cause the break of the Christian Church from Its Old Testament roots.
When we read in history all these factors involved, we can see why the churches today celebrate Easter
and not the Passover.
Let’s start with the internal strife between the Christians and the Jews.
In A.D. 49 in Paul’s time, “…the Emperor Claudius, according to the Roman historian Suetonius
(ca. A.D. 70-122), ‘expelled the Jews from Rome since they rioted constantly at the instigation
of Chrestus’ (a probable erroneous transcription of the name of Christ). The fact that on this
occasion converted Jews like Aquila and Priscilla were expelled from the city together with the
Jews (Acts 18:2) proves, as Pierre Batiffol observes, ‘that the Roman police had not yet come to
distinguish the Christians from the Jews”’ (From Sabbath to Sunday, p.167, Bacchiocchi). Jews
and Christians were meeting in synagogues and following Old Testament laws and Feasts. As
we read plainly in the Bible that Saul of Tarsus sent letters to the, “synagogues, that if he found
any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem”
(Acts 9:2). Early Christians worshipped in the synagogues on the Sabbath.
But, “Fourteen years later, however, Nero identified the Christians as being a separate entity,
well distinguished from the Jews. The Emperor, in fact, according to Tacitus (ca. A.D. 55-120),
‘fastened the guilt [i.e. for arson upon them] and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class
hated for their abomination, called Christians by the populace”’ (ibid, pp.167-168). What
happened during this time that seemed to separate the Christians from the Jews?
One, as we seen above was that “they rioted constantly at the instigation of Chrestus.” This
raged on, and it still happens today with debates between Christians and Jews as to whether
Jesus was the Messiah. Also, “The predominance of Gentile members and their conflict with the
Jews, inside and outside the Church, may have necessitated a differentiation between the two
communities in Rome earlier than in the East. Leonard Goppelt, in his study on the origin of
the Church, supports this view when he writes: ‘The Epistle presupposes in Rome, as one would
expect, a Church with a Gentile-Christian majority (11, 13) and a Judaeo-Christian minority
(14f.) This co-existence of the two parties provoked some difficulties comparable to those
known at Corinth at the same time....The situation of the Church of Rome in relationship to
Judaism, as far as the Epistle to the Romans allows us to suspect, is similar to the one presented
us by the post-Pauline texts of Western Christianity: a chasm between the Church and
Synagogue is found everywhere, one unknown in the Eastern churches which we have described
above. Judaism does not play any other role than the one of being the ancestor of Christianity’
(Leonard Goppelt, Les Origines de 1’Eglise, 1961, pp. 202-203).. the predominance of Gentile
members primarily of pagan descent, and their conflict with the Judaeo-Christians inside the
Church and with Jews outside, may have indeed contributed to an earlier break from Judaism in
Rome than in the Orient” (ibid, pp 166-1667, emphasis added). The Gentilization of the Church
had a huge hand in severing the church from the synagogue. Disputes over the Law, over
circumcision, the same things that caused the church to come together in Acts 15 over the same
questions about the gentiles and circumcision still plagued the church at that time.
And what was the easiest thing to do to make yourselves look different from the Jews? Bacchiocchi
writes, “The abandonment of Sabbath-keeping and the adoption of Sunday could then represent
a significant aspect of this process of differentiation” (ibid, p.167, emphasis added). Of course!
The one sign that separates God’s people from all peoples of the earth, the Seventh-Day
Sabbath! And why choose Sunday? They were Romans. Their former religion of Sun worship,
the most important day of the week was SUNday. The church decided to look more like Romans
than the Jews.
Christians “by 64 A.D.,” as F. F. Bruce comments “were clearly differentiated at Rome . . .”
while it “took a little longer in Palestine (where practically all Christians were of Jewish birth)”
(Spreading the Flame, p.157).
Anti-Jewish Feelings During the First Century
At this time during the severing of the Church from the synagogue, the Roman populace, the
intelligentsia were attacking the Jews, their customs and their Sabbath-Keeping. Literarily, a
new wave of anti-Semitic literature surged at that time, undoubtedly reflecting the Roman mood
against the Jews. Writers such as Seneca (died A.D. 65), Persius (A.D. 34-62), Petronius (died C.
A.D. 66), Quintilian (C. A.D. 35-100), Martial (c. A.D. 40-104), Plutarch (c. A.D. 46-after 119),
Juvenal (died c. A.D. 125), and Tacitus (c. A.D. 55-120), who lived in Rome for most of their
professional lives, reviled the Jews racially and culturally. Why this anti-Jewish sentiment?
After the time of Nero the Jews experienced a setback. Military, political, fiscal, and literary
repressive measures were taken against them on account of their resurgent nationalism, which
exploded in violent uprisings in many places. Under Vespasian (A.D. 69-79) both the Sanhedrin
and the high priesthood were abolished. This was the first great war between the Jews and the
Romans. As you can see, the Roman mood against the Jews was bitter, the Churches mood was
the same in Rome, since most of the church at Rome was composed of Romans!
Notice, “ … the Church of Rome that we find evidence of the earliest concrete measures to wean
Christians away from veneration of the Sabbath and to urge Sunday observance exclusively. Justin
Martyr, for instance, writing from Rome about the middle of the second century, presents a most
devastating and systematic condemnation of the Sabbath, as well as
giving the earliest explicit account of Christian Sunday worship services. He empties the
Sabbath of all its theological significance, reducing it to a temporary ordinance derived from
Moses, which God imposed solely on the Jews as “a mark to single them out for punishment
they so well deserve for their infidelities …Justin’s negative view of the Sabbath is reflected also in
the early introduction of the Sabbath fast by the Church of Rome, in spite of the opposition of
Eastern Christianity and of several Western churches. That the Church of Rome was the
champion of the Sabbath fast and anxious to impose it on other Christian communities is well
attested by the historical references from Bishop Callistus (A.D. 217-222), Hippolytus (c. A.D.
170-236), Pope Sylvester (A.D. 314-335), Pope Innocent I (A.D. 401-417), Augustine (A.D.
354-430), and John Cassian (C. A.D. 360-435). The fast was designed not only to express sorrow for
Christ’s death but also, as Pope Sylvester emphatically states, to show “contempt for the Jews”
(execratione judaeorum) and for their Sabbath “feasting” (destructiones ciborum)” (The
Sabbath in Scripture and History, p.137, emphasis added).
After this the anti-Semitic mood kind of withered away until the second revolt by the Jews
happened in Hadrian’s time. “…under Hadrian, as we noted earlier, the practice of the Jewish
religion and particularly Sabbathkeeping were outlawed” (ibid, p.135, emphasis added). At this
time a ‘radical change took place in the church of Jerusalem…Hadrian destroyed the city, [and]
expelled both Jews and Jewish Christians…In accordance to the Emperor’s edict the city was
repopulated by foreigner’s, and only gentile Christians were allowed to enter…” (ibid, p.135,
emphasis added). It was at this time that we see a significant break with the church and the
Jews, and in church literature at that time an “attitude of reconciliation toward the empire but
towards the Jews they adopted a policy of racial differentiation…” (Sabbath to Sunday, p.178).
From this point on, Christian theology was littered with Greek and Roman philosophical speculation
about the Bible, almost like a Romanization of the Bible. Biacchiocchi continues to say:
“The problem with Gentile Christians was not only their lack of familiarity with Scripture, but also
their excessive fascination with their Greek philosophical speculations, which conditioned their
understanding of biblical truths. While Jewish-Christians often erred in the direction of legalism,
Gentile Christians often erred in the direction of the philosophical speculations which sundered
Christianity from its historical roots” (God’s Festivals, p.103, emphasis added).
It was at this time that as “Epiphanius asserts that the controversy over Passover erupted after A. D. 135,
when the Jewish-Christian bishops of Jerusalem were replaced by Gentiles bishops as a result of
Hadrian’s edict which forbade Jews and the Jewish-Christians to enter the city” (God’s Festival’s, p.97).
This is what is called the Quatro-deciman Controversey.
The Controversy flared up in the second century over the date of the celebration of the Passover.
This controversy threatened to split the churches.
The two protagonists of the controversy were on the one side Bishop Victor (A.D. 189-199) and
Bishop Polycrates of Ephesus on the other.
Victor championed the observance of Easter-Sunday, that is the observance of the feast on the
Sunday following the date of the Jewish Passover, and he eventually “excommunicated the
recalcitrant Christian communities of the province of Asia for refusing to adopt Easter-Sunday”
Bishop Polycrates of Ephesus represented the Asian Churches who strongly advocated the traditional
date of the Passover on the 14th of Nisan commonly known as “Quartodecimen” or “Fourteenth”
day of Passover. “The Asian bishops, however unanimously agreed to remain true to the Apostolic
tradition transmitted to them by the Apostles Phillip and John...” (ibid, p.99). They sent a letter to
Bishop Victor of Rome, and in turn Victor sent a letter to the churches excommunicating all the
churches of the province of Asia.
Why Easter instead of Passover? “such measures influenced the new gentile hierarchy to change the
date of the Passover from Nisan 14 to the following Sunday (Easter-Sunday) in order to show
separation and differentiation from the Jews and Jewish-Christians” (ibid, p.102, emphasis added).
The New Christian theology was to separate from the Jews. The reconciliation with the empire was
taking place. The gentile church was full of Romans. The former feast in the spring they used to
worship on was Easter. They brought Easter back but Christianized it. At this time two major
changes took place. “The Sabbath was changed to Sunday and Passover was transferred to Easter-
Sunday” (ibid, p.103).
Then anti-Semitism grew so much that at the time of Constantine, the church really wanted to make
a clean break from Judaism. In the council of Nicea, they desired to establish a clean break from
Judaism which took place in A.D. 325. They said, “Let us then have nothing in common with the
detestable Jewish crowd: for we have received from our Saviour a different way” (Eusebius Life of
Constantine 3, 18-19, Nicene and Post-Nicene Father 2nd series, vol.1, p.524-525). So there is the
official break, and the visible Church was born. Now mainstream Christian, Orthodox, Catholics,
Protestants etc.. all celebrate Easter instead of the Passover.
Ever since this controversy, scattered remnants of God’s true church have been keeping Passover
throughout the centuries. The Quartodecimens, after that, the Paulicians, the Bogomils, the
Albigenses, the Waldenses, the Seventh-Day Baptists, and the Churches of God today.
The Plain Truth About the Death Burial and Resurrection of Jesus Christ It is commonly supposed
today that Jesus was crucified on Friday afternoon, and that the resurrection
occurred on Sunday Morning. Few professing Christians ever thought to question, or prove this
"Good Friday-Easter-Sunday tradition." Yet in the Bible it tells us to "prove all things," and you will
be astounded at this proof. And where we will get the proof, is from the pages of the your Bible.
When Jesus was alive as a human being, the Pharisees asked him for a sign-for proof of him being
the Messiah. Jesus answered them saying: "But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous
generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet
" For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three
days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matthew 12:39-40). He expressly said that the only
sign of him being the Messiah is, he would be in a rock hewn tomb (heart of the earth) for three days
and three nights. If this did not happen, then he would be an impostor, and he would not be your
saviour and mine.
Some people try to split hairs with this statement, because in the other gospels Jesus said he would
rise on the "third day," see Matthew 16:21; Mark 10:34; Luke 24:7. There is NO contradiction with
this statement, and with the statement he made when he said "Three days and three nights." Both
expressions are used interchangeably in the scriptures. In Genesis for example we read that:
" God divided the light from the darkness.
" And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening (darkness) and
the morning (Light) were the first day.
" And the evening and the morning were the second day.
" And the evening and the morning were the third day" (Gen 1:4, 8, 13). Here then is an example of
the term "the third day," counted up and shown to include three days and three nights.
Jesus even said, "Are there not twelve hours in the day?" (John 11:9). 12 hour period for the day and
as we see, in Genesis, a twelve hour period for the night which is a 24 hour period. So Jesus had to
stay in the tomb for 72 hours. As Jesus said, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it
up...But he spake of the temple of his body" (John 2:19, 21). Now I know some people believe that
Jesus meant part of three days and three nights to try and defend the position of Good Friday to
Easter Sunday. In our argument section at the end of this article we will go through in detail to show
that this view is just not valid.
Now let's continue. Now If Jesus died on Friday, then 72 hours later would make it Monday afternoon,
according to three days and three nights. And of course Good Friday to Easter Sunday Morning
is not three days and three nights either so we are left with a problem that men created not God.
When we see the events of Christ's death there is no contradiction. We have complete harmony with
the scriptures. Only men put confusion into religion, not God.
Now bearing this mind that Jesus had to stay into the tomb for 72 hours, we know that the resurrection
had to take place at the SAME TIME HE WAS BURIED! It has to be at the time of burial to
fulfill what Jesus said that he had to be in the heart of the earth for "three days and three nights." If
we can find the hour he was buried then we can find the time WHEN HE WAS RESURRECTED!
The Preparation Day
Before we go on further, we must examine what preparation day is, and which one the Bible is
specifically describing when it pertains to Jesus death. When we understand this was can understand
the time, and the day in which Jesus died.
Now the Bible makes it clear in all Gospels that Jesus was buried on the preparation day, “And he
took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein
never man before was laid....And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on.” (Luke
“And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to
the door of the sepulchre, and departed....And there was Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary,
sitting over against the sepulchre....Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the
chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,” (Matthew 27:60-62).
“And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the
sabbath,...Joseph of Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which also waited for the kingdom of
God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus....And Pilate marvelled if he
were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while
dead....And when he knew it of the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph....And he bought fine
linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which was
hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre.” (Mark 15;42-46).
“There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews' preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at
hand.” (John 19:42)
What is this day of Preparation. And prepare for what? This word is used for two preparations.
The Adam’s Clarke Commentary shows the first meaning of preparation day: “Every Sabbath had a
preparation which began at the ninth hour (that is, three o’clock) the preceding evening. Josephus,
Ant. b. xvi. c. 6, s. 2, recites an edict of the Emperor Augustus in favor of the Jews, which orders,
‘that no one shall be obliged to give bail or surety on the Sabbath day, nor on the preparation before
it, after the ninth hour.’ The time fixed here was undoubtedly in conformity to the Jewish custom, as
they began their preparation at three o’clock on the Friday evening.” The Jews were to prepare on
Friday, and get things ready for the coming of the WEEKLY Sabbath.
But John connects this preparation with the “High Day” Sabbath (John 19:31). This is not the
weekly Sabbath. Notice what The New Englishman’s Greek Concordance and Lexicon says. Their
definition is “preparation - in New Testament only, the Day of Preparation before a special Sabbath.”
(emphasis added) A high day, not the weekly Sabbath! This is the annual Sabbath of the First day of
Unleavened Bread that begins on the 15th of Nisan that the Jews would prepare for. John 19:14
shows which preparation day it was, “And it was the preparation of the PASSOVER,” Not for the
weekly Sabbath. The 14th of Nisan was the day when the lambs would be sacrificed and the houses
would be cleansed of the leaven, and the great day of the Feast would start of the Passover to commemorate
the night when the death Angel Passed over the house of the children of Israel, see Ex 12.
So in conclusion, this preparation because it is connected with the High Day Sabbath was not preparation
for the weekly Sabbath but the Passover, in which John 19:14 also shows that this is the case.
The High Day Sabbath that the Jews prepared for was the First Day of Unleavened Bread where they
celebrate the Feast when the Death Angel Passover their houses as the ate the Lamb that was slain on
the 14th, see Ex 12:6. Then on the 15th “... I will pass through the land of Egypt this night,” (Ex
12:12). Bullinger’s Companion Bible writes, “This great sabbath, having been mistaken from the
earliest times for the weekly sabbath, has led to all the confusion....We have therefore the following
facts furnished for our sure guidance:
1.The “high day” of John 19:31 was the first day of the feast.
2.The “first day of the feast” was on the 15th day of Nisan.
3.The 15th day of Nisan, commenced at sunset on what we should call the 14th. “ (Appendix
156, emphasis his).
This other source says the same, “Jesus was crucified on a Passover day, Nisan 14, and the Sabbath
that followed was the first day of Unleavened Bread, an annual holy day, a high day” (Richard T.
Ritenbaugh article “After Three Days” & Forerunner’s Commentary under “John”).
This annual feast day was not a fixed day on the weekly cycle, it could end up on any day of the
week. A Tuesday or a Wednesday. The Apostle John made specific that the day was a high day Sabbath
so is to not cause confusion to the real day of the Resurrection.
Now, when it comes to the other Gospels, because of John’s Gosepl, we can easily know which
“Sabbath” and which “preparation day” they mean.
“And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone,
wherein never man before was laid....And that day was the preparation,[of the Passover] and the
[High Day] sabbath drew on.” (Luke 23:53-54).
And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to
the door of the sepulchre, and departed....And there was Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary,
sitting over against the sepulchre....Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, [of
the Passover] the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,” (Matthew 27:60-62).
‘And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, [of the Passover] that is, the
day before the [High Day] sabbath,...Joseph of Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which also
waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of
Jesus....And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked
him whether he had been any while dead....And when he knew it of the centurion, he gave the body
to Joseph....And he bought fine linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid
him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre.”
Now that we understand the meanings of some of these terms we can understand the Gospels much
more clearer in a new light as to what was going on, and to which day Jesus actually died. This High
day Sabbath that was about to begin could of landed on ANY DAY OF THE WEEK we must remember.
It is crucial if we want to get to the truth of the Death, Burial and Resurrection of Jesus.
Now let’s go to the events and the timing of the death of Jesus Christ...
The Bible tells us that Jesus died shortly after the "ninth hour" or three o'clock in the afternoon. This
is the same time that the Bible calls "between the two evenings." Woodrow writes: "Daylight hours
in the bible are divided into four divisions, beginning at sunrise and ending at sundown. The third
hour would be 9AM, the sixth hour would be 12 Noon, the ninth hour 3PM, and the twelfth hour 6
PM" (Mystery Babylon Religion, p.144, emphasis added).
Now according to the reckoning of time in the Bible, each full 24 hour period of a day ended and a
new day began at sundown, see Leviticus 23:32. And since our Saviour was put to death on the
"preparation day" the day before the "high day" Sabbath, special measures were to be taken to be
sure that his body was removed before sundown-before the high day Sabbath began: "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.
"Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with
him...But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs" (John
19:31-33). The reason why the Jews did not want the body on the cross after sundown was because
the law required it:
"And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang
him on a tree:...His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him
that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD
thy God giveth thee for an inheritance." (Deut 21:22-23). The Apostle Paul used this same scripture
when he was speaking of Jesus Christ in Galatians 3:10-13. But notice the scripture. Jesus had to be
buried "THAT DAY" before sundown!
Jesus was then taken down and buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimethea: "There laid they Jesus
therefore because of the Jews' preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand" (John 19:42).
These things took place "when the even was come." (Mark 15:42). The Greek word here translated
"even" is "opsios" meaning "late afternoon" (Mark 15:42). This is when they buried him. And it
happened on "Preparation Day" the “day BEFORE THE [High Day] SABBATH.”
Let's look at Luke's Gospel to confirm this truth: "And, behold, there was a man named Joseph, a
counsellor; and he was a good man, and a just:
"(The same had not consented to the counsel and deed of them;) he was of Arimathaea, a city of the
Jews: who also himself waited for the kingdom of God.
"This man went unto Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus.
"And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone,
wherein never man before was laid.
"And that day was the preparation, and the Sabbath drew on" (Luke 23:50-54). The expression "the
Sabbath drew on" really should read "and the Sabbath was about to begin" (NASB & NIV Bible).
The New King James Bible says: "and the Sabbath drew near." So its clear that they buried Jesus
BEFORE SUNDOWN, before the start of the High Day Sabbath. Remember, God says that from
sundown to sundown is the time when the days start and end, see Lev 23:5, 32.
Conclusion: Now if Jesus was buried just before sundown, then he must of RESURRECTED AT
THE SAME TIME, 3 DAYS AND 3 NIGHT LATER JUST BEFORE SUNDOWN! NOT IN THE
MORNING! And the proof of this is absolutely biblical.
Where people start to err, (as we alluded to earlier) is when the Bible mentions the "Sabbath" in the
synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. But the Apostle John makes it clear that the Sabbath
mentioned was a "High Day" Sabbath, after the day of Preparation. Because people fail to study the
Old Testament, they do not understand that there was TWO SABBATHS THAT WEEK! That week
there was an ANNUAL SABBATH, and the WEEKLY SABBATH!
The "High Day" Sabbath was a Jewish usage of the annual Sabbath that could occur at ANY DAY
OF THE WEEK! And John made it clear that the Sabbath after the burial was the High Day ANNUAL
SABBATH, and this annual Sabbath was the first day of Unleavened Bread that took place
after the killing of the Passover when Jesus died, see Lev 23: 5-7 and Bullinger's Companion Bible,
p.1569 & Appendix 165. Many times in the Bible God calls his annual feast days a "Sabbath" see
Lev 16:31 23:24, 32. This why God says to Israel "My Sabbaths [Plural] shall ye keep" (Ex 31:12-
The Weekly Sabbath: Now we have just proved to you that there was an annual Sabbath, but what
about the weekly Sabbath? In every passage about the Sabbath in the Gospels there is a mistranslation,
and only the Ferrar Fenton Translation of the Bible renders it correctly.
In Matthews 28:1 it should read: "After the SABBATHS [Plural] towards the dawn of the day following
the SABBATHS [plural]..."
Mark 16:2: "And at very early dawn following the SABBATHS [plural]..."
Luke 24:1: "But at daybreak upon the first day following the SABBATHS [plural]..."
John 19:20: "Now on the first day following the SABBATHS [plural]..." Ferrar Fenton says: "This is
literally according to the Greek Text: and its important to observe that at that particular period [there
were] TWO SABBATHS, OR DAYS OF SACRED REST..." (Ferrar Fenton Bible, p.1042, emphasis
added). Strong's Exhaustive Concordance and Thayer's Lexicon correct the English translation and
add "Sabbaths." So obviously the weekly Sabbath of Rest is in the text as well.
There is another sequence of events that absolutely proves this chronology of two Sabbaths in one
In Mark 16:1 it says that Mary Magdalene and her companions bought spices "AFTER THE SABBATH
WAS PAST." They were planning to prepare these ointments and spices, so they can anoint
the body of Jesus. Yet Luke 23:56 says they prepared these spices and then rested on the weekly
Sabbath day. Compare these two texts carefully: "And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene,
and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and
"And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the Sabbath day according to the
Mark said they brought spices AFTER the Sabbath was past. Luke said they prepared the spices
BEFORE the Sabbath arrived. Is this a contradiction? They are not! They compliment each other
perfectly, if you understand that there were two Sabbaths that week. They bought spices on Friday
after the annual High Day Sabbath on Thursday. Then they prepared spices that Friday before the
weekly Sabbath, and rested according to the commandment. After the weekly Sabbath was over, then
they went to the tomb!
Resurrection Accounts in the Gospels
Since we have established that there were two Sabbaths that week, let's examine the resurrection
account to see what they say about when Jesus rose from the dead! Do they prove that Jesus resurrected
in the afternoon near Sundown as we have proven above? Because he died at this time? Let's
go through each of the Gospel accounts.
Matthew 28:1 says: "In the end of the Sabbath, as it BEGAN to dawn toward the first day of the
week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre." Let's look at the literal
translation of this verse: "But LATE of the Sabbaths at the DRAWING TOWARDS [the close of]
ONE of [the] SABBATHS" (NIV Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, Marshall, p.134, emphasis
added). The Sabbath was just about to come to a close when Mary came to the tomb. So this
was about Saturday afternoon around 6 o'clock PM when the Sabbath was about to close. Remember,
God says that from sundown to sundown is the time when the days start and end, see Lev 23:5,
Here's another literal translation of the same text: "Now late on the Sabbath as it was getting DUSK
towards the first [Day] of the week" (George Ricker Barr, Greek to English Interlinear, p.86, emphasis
added). You see it was NOT after the Sabbath, but LATE ON THE SABBATH, that she came to
Now what does the word "dusk" mean? "earliest part of the evening just BEFORE darkness"
(Webster's Dictionary, p.52, emphasis added).
"Sunset;...Dusk...sundown" (Collier's Thesaurus, p.920, emphasis added). So its sundown! That's
when she came to the tomb!
And what happened on THAT DAY before Mary even got there? The angel said to them, "He is not
here; for he is RISEN [past tense]..." (v.6). Jesus was already gone. And this was at the time when
the Sabbath was coming to an end, late on a Saturday afternoon when Mary got this message.
Notice the text does not say that he "rose" on the first day, but that he was "risen" in the past tense.
Jesus was gone long before Mary even got there before 6 PM on the Sabbath. JESUS ROSE ON
THE WEEKLY SABBATH AFTERNOON!
Luke's Gospel: What about Luke's Gospel? Does this contradict Matthews account? Let's see.
"Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing
the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them" (Luke 24:1). What! Didn't
Matthews account say that they came when it was late on the Sabbath, just before the first day of the
week, at sundown? Why does Luke's account say that they came "very early in the morning"?
Again we look at the Interlinear by Marshall, p.349. We see that the word "morning" is not in the
literal translation. It should read: "Now on the first day of the week, VERY EARLY, they came unto
the sepulchre..." They came "very early" on the first day of the week.
Please keep in mind that virtually all translators of the Greek Bible into English have been Protestants
or Catholics who traditionally keep Sunday and believe in the “Easter story” according to what
they have grown up with. It is only natural for them to interpret the scriptures according to their
beliefs when there is a question of the intent of the original.
John Gill's Exposition of the Bible contains the following comment about the expression “Very
Early” in Lukes Gospel: “(orqrou baqeob)'…when it was yet dark, as in (John 20:1) and so read the
Syriac and Persic versions here, and the Ethiopic version, 'while it was yet night.'” Below is the
explanation of this phrase in John's Gospel since Luke and John literally mean the same thing.
Also notice, the word day is in italics—it is not there in the Greek. And the word for “week” is
actually plural in the Greek and should be translated with “weeks,” and it is a reference to the day of
the wave-sheaf offering as we will show you later in the booklet.
John's Gospel: John's Gospel compliments Matthew's and Luke's as well.
"The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre,
and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre" (John 20:1). The phrase "early, when it was yet
dark" should read "early darkness yet being" (ibid, p.453, emphasis added). Or "yet being early
What is "Early darkness"? "Dusk; EARLIEST PART OF THE EVENING, JUST BEFORE DARKNESS"
(Webster's Dictionary, p.52, emphasis added). "Sunset; ...Dusk...sundown" (Collier's Thesaurus,
p.920, emphasis added). It was early evening, dusk, or sundown. It means darkness just arrived,
meaning sundown on a Saturday night at 6 PM. This is what Luke says. They came "very early" at
sundown at the end of the Sabbath and the beginning of the first day of the week. Saturday SUNDOWN,
NOT SUNDAY MORNING! Why did they come after the Sabbath was coming to an end?
Because they "rested the Sabbath day, according to the commandment" (Luke 23:56). So as soon as
the Sabbath was over, they rushed to the tomb to anoint him with spices, its only logical.
Mark's Gospel: Now Mark's Gospel is the gospel most people use to show the resurrection took
place on Sunday!
"Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene,
out of whom he had cast seven devils" (Mark 16:9). But the verse does not say that he "rose" on the
first day of the week. Look at it closely. Does it say early on the first day of the week Jesus was
"rising" or that he "did rise" at that time? No, it says that when the first day of the week came, he
"WAS RISEN." This is past perfect tense, that is, he was risen already!
The Greek word rendered "was risen" is "anastas" and has the meaning of "having risen" indefinitely
in the past. Neither the Greek or the English wording of the verse indicates that Christ rose early on
the first day of the week.
Note: "When the Bible was originally written, commas (and other punctuation marks) were completely
unknown. Punctuations were invented by Aldus Manutious in the 15th century. Since the
original manuscripts had no punctuation marks, the translators placed commas wherever they
thought it should go-BASED ENTIRELY ON THEIR BELIEFS. In Mark 16:9, notice where the
comma is placed: 'Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week,' Placing the comma
here seems to connect the first day of the week with the time of the resurrection. But, if the comma
had been placed after RISEN, it would read like this: 'Now when Jesus was risen, early the first day
of the week he appeared first to Mary...'Is the scripture explaining the time of the resurrection OR
the time when Jesus appeared to Mary? The context, other verses, the fact that 'was risen' is the past
perfect tense-these things all indicate that the first day of the week is when Jesus appeared to Mary,
NOT the time of the resurrection. This would have been more clear to the reader if the translators
placed a comma after 'risen,' instead of after 'week.' Let us remember that it is the words of the Bible
that were inspired by God, but the punctuation was later added by men and is subject to error [by
man's way not God's]" (Woodrow, Mystery Babylon, pp.145-146, emphasis added). So here is the
conclusion of the text. The first day of the week was the time when he appeared to Mary, and not the
time when Jesus resurrected.
One More note. The word “early’ in Mark 16:9 can, “Sometimes it refers to the beginning of the
season, e.g. the early rain (Psa_84:6; Jam_5:7; see RAIN)” (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia).
Since the “first day of the week” is a beginning of a season, a new festival season of the “Feast
of weeks” as we will prove to you later in the book, then it compliments the other scriptures that
shows that Jesus appeared to Mary at the end of the weekly Sabbath and the “beginning” of the first
day of the week. As God says in the first day of the Feast of Weeks, “And he shall wave the sheaf
before the LORD, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the [weekly] sabbath the priest shall
wave it.” (Lev 23:11). Christ was the “First Fruits” from the dead. He was the wave sheaf offering
that went to God on the “first of the Sabbaths” or “first day of the week” (explained later).
The Bible tells us that the appearances took place on the first day of the week, not the resurrection,
why? Because there was no one there to witness the resurrection because they "rest[ed on] the Sabbath
according to the commandment" (Luke 23:56). This is the whole reason you have the past tense
in the Gospels, because it happened on the Sabbath. Yet when did he appear to Mary, as Mark's
Gospel, and other Gospels write? Saturday afternoon at sundown at the end of the Sabbath around
6:PM AND NOT ON SUNDAY MORNING!
Now does Mark 16:1 contradict the other gospel accounts?
“And when the Sabbath was past, [Greek “passing”] Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had
bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.” This is the time of sundown on the
Saturday. They do not contradict. What about Mark 16:2? " And very early in the morning the first
day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun."? How do we reconcile this in
the Bible? If we read this carefully we see NO SPICES were with them, and that Mary Magdalene
and the other Mary and Salome knew at sundown that Jesus was risen! The “they” of this verse,
didn't know he was risen till morning (verses 6-7). Also notice that Mary came when the “Sabbath
was passing” this can't be early in the morning but at sundown. This is very clear in the Gospels. G.
Campbell Morgan shows on p.338 of his book The Gospel of Mark, these were “different people”
than Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary. These people came after, at the rising of the sun.
Who were these people? Luke shows that it was “Cleopas,” and his company, Luke 24:13-35. They
talked about how the women of their company came to the tomb "early" (v.22), obviously talking
about Mary when she went to the tomb on the Sabbath afternoon at 6PM when it came to an end.
They also mentioned the "angels" (v.23). Then verse 24, he says some of "them which were with us
went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not." Cleopas
was not with Mary at the end of the Sabbath when she went, so this is obviously a separate trip to the
tomb, the same trip that Mark mentioned in chapter 16:2.
Also in verses 6-7, the angel told them to tell the disciples that Jesus would meet them in Galilee..
But in verse 8 it says that they told no one what happened.. But in Matthew 28:7, 10, Jesus and the
angel told Mary to tell the disciples to meet him in Galilee, and the left with "joy" and were going to
"bring his disciples word" (v.8), also see Luke 24:10. Where as Mark 16:8 there was no joy, but
"fear," and "neither said any thing to any man." So this is obviously two separate visits to the tomb
by two separate groups.
What about John 20, does this contradict the other accounts? No! Peter and John went to the tomb,
but it wasn't revealed to them yet that Christ rose from the dead (v.9). Then they went home (v.10).
Afterwards Jesus appeared to Mary and told her to tell his disciples that He rose from dead..Does the
statement in John's account contradicts Luke's account in 24:12? No! Actually this statement is not
in the "original text" of the Gospel of Luke. "It looks like an insertion" taken from John's Gospel, see
The Anchor Bible, p.1542, by Fitzmyer, and Darrell L. Bock, in his commentary on Luke, p.1902
and the Wycliff Commentary, p.1068.
"First of the Sabbaths?"
But what about the second usage of the plural form, Sabbaton, in Matthew 28:1, which has been
translated in the King James Bible with, “as the first… of the week”? [Remember, the word “day” is
not in the Greek.] And since the word is plural in the Greek, it should be translated “weeks.” What is
meant with this expression, “first of the weeks” that also occurs in several other places in scripture,
such as in Luke 24:1, in John 20:1, or in Mark 16:2? It refers to the day of the wave-sheaf offering—
the first of seven “first days of the week” that would be counted to arrive at the Day of Pentecost. In
order to know when to keep the day of Firstfruits, God instructed Israel, “And you shall count for
yourselves from the day after the Sabbath, from the day that you brought the sheaf of wave offering;
seven sabbaths shall be completed. Count fifty days to the day after the seventh Sabbath (Lev. 23:15)
Due to the fact that most modern day Christians do not understand or keep God's Holy Days, this
knowledge is lost on most people and they believe the mistaken assumption that what is referred to
by the gospel writers is “Sunday” as the first day of each week. This is in error. Several noted scholars
understand what the phrase “first of the weeks” actually means.
The Companion Bible, published by Zondervan Bible Publishers, states this in the comment on John
20:1: “'The first day of the week' = On the first (day) of the Sabbaths (pl). Gr; te mia ton sabbaton.
…Luke 24:1 has the same. Matthew reads 'towards dawn on the first (day) of the sabbaths,' and
Mark 16:2, 'very early on the first (day ) of the Sabbaths.' The expression is not a Hebraism and
'Sabbaths' should not be rendered 'week' as in the AV and RV. (This is) a reference to Lev. 23:15-17
and shows that this day is the first of the days for reckoning the seven Sabbaths to Pentecost. On this
day, therefore, the Lord [Jesus] became the firstfruits of God's resurrections harvest (I Cor. 15:23).”
(p.1570. emphasis added).
All four of the Gospel writers use this expression, “first of the Sabbaths (weeks)” which every Jew
of that day understood to be the day of the wave-sheaf offering and the beginning of the counting of
seven Sabbaths until the Day of Pentecost. This was a day that occurred once a year in the calendar,
not once a week.
Dake's Annotated Reference Bible states simply in reference to this phrase, “Literally, the first day of
the sabbaths, referring to the seven sabbaths to Pentecost..” (Note on John 20:1).
In every case where “first day of the week” is translated in the New Testament, the correct rendering,
according to the Greek, is, “first of the Sabbaths.” It refers to the day of the wave-sheaf offering,
which took place on the first Sunday (as we would call it) after Passover each year. Many people
unfortunately use this phrase in the gospels and where it occurs in Acts and Corinthians to try to
support the keeping of Sunday as a day of worship. Understanding the truth on this one phrase alone
removes virtually all arguments that the Bible in any way supports the keeping of Sunday as a day of
Now we can understand in full Mark 16:9: “Now when Jesus was risen [on the weekly Sabbath],
early [the beginning of the Season of] the first day of the week [First of the Sabbaths] he appeared
first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.” This fits exactly with the scripture
of the Feast of weeks in Lev 23:10-11: “ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest [Christ
is the first fruits from the dead 1 Corithians 15:20] unto the priest:...And he shall wave the sheaf
[representing Jesus] before the LORD, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the [weekly]
sabbath [The Sabbath when the Ressurection occured] the priest shall wave it.” This is why he told
Mary, “Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father:” (John 20:17). He was not presented
to his Father yet as the wave sheaf. Interesting, the wave sheaf could not be touched by anyone until
the offering was made (see Yochanan 20:17). But Jesus went to Heaven presented himself as the
wave sheaf offering, then afterwards allowed his disciples to touch him.
When was the Wave Sheaf Cut?
The passage in Lev 23 says nothing about WHEN the wave sheaf was cut. The instruction there has
to do with WHAT must be done with the wave sheaf, before WHOM and WHEN. It was the day of
“waving” the sheaf not the “cutting” of the sheaf of grain. Jesus fulfilled this symbolism when He
presented Himself before the Lord (Father) of heaven on the first day (John 20:1-18). This wave
sheaf represented the RISEN Christ and the work He had to do on the first day before the Father,
NOT when He rose.
“Jewish history from the Second Temple period gives an interesting insight. The second-century
Mishnah affirms that, when the Sadducees controlled the Temple, the sickle was put to the grain just
as the sun was going down on the weekly Sabbath (Menahot 10:1-4, Jacob Neusner translation, pp.
753-754). The book, Biblical Calendars, states, “The Boethusians [Temple priests] reaped [the
firstfruits sheaf] at the going out of the Sabbath” (p. 218. Additional information can be found in
the section titled “Temple Service,” p. 280, as well as in The Temple: Its Ministry and Services by
Alfred Edersheim, 1994, pp. 203-205). The New Testament’s silence on this Sadducean practice—
along with its agreement with the ritual’s fulfillment in Christ—must be construed as acceptance
of its validity” (Forerunner Commentary, under “Leviticus 23” emphasis added).
At the time of the first century, there were two beliefs. One was the Pharisees who believed that the
sheaf was cut after the annual Sabbath of the first day of Unleavened bread. Second. The Saducees
believed however that the “morrow after the Sabbath” meant the first weekly Sabbath after
Passover, which the gospels confirm as well. They argued that the word “Sabbath” in Greek, when
used by itself, can only mean the Seventh-Day Sabbath of the week, and not the annual Sabbaths.
Now, “The largest and main group were the Sadducees, prominent during the time of Christ and the
apostles. This sect was predominately secular in nature and, unlike the Pharisees, did not pretend to
be zealous. Their power and influence were political—not religious (Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th
ed., Vol. 23, pp. 989-990).
“We know that the Samaritans and the Sadducees kept a Sunday Wave Sheaf and a Sunday Pentecost.
That is an important factor in history. The Jews do not keep the Wave Sheaf because they keep a Sivan
6 Pentecost, which came from the traditions of the Pharaisees in rabbinical Judaism, AFTER the
Temple was destroyed.... So the Temple period structure and right throughout, including the Samaritans,
always kept Pentecost on a Sunday. The early church kept Pentecost on a Sunday. Only the Jews [who
followed the Pharisees] kept a Sivan 6 and only after the Temple was destroyed.
“Modern Judaism does not do this now.... This (the Sadduccean) position was held up until the
destruction of the Temple in 70 CE (see F F Bruce, art. Calendar, The Illustrated Bible Dictionary, ed.
by J D Douglas and N Hillyer, IVP, 1980, Vol. 1, p. 225). AFTER the dispersion, the Pharisaic position
became the accepted practice and the conflict is noted in the Mishnah (Hag. 2:4)” (Article, ‘The Wave
Sheaf offering, by CCOG, emphasis added).
The Sadducees method of counting Pentecost was correct. The high priests who served during the
first century (until A.D. 70) were Sadducees. They were in charge of the temple as Pentecost arrived
in A.D. 31. By keeping the correct day, and with thousands of orthodox Jews present in Jerusalem,
the stage was set for Christ to miraculously build the Church of God (Acts 2).
The Pharisees established the method followed by most Jews today. The rabbinic Jewish tradition
adopted their method, which dates back to the early centuries A.D. Instead of using the day after the
weekly Sabbath, the Pharisees assigned the wave sheaf offering to the day following the first High
Day, regardless of the day of the week that it fell upon.
One obvious inconsistency is that by always counting from Nisan 16 (the day after the first High
Day) the target date should always be Sivan 6, regardless of the day of the week. If the day God
determined for Pentecost had been a set date on the sacred calendar [which the Pharisees do], it
would NOT be necessary to count in the first place!
Using this method, the Pharisees were correct about 25% of the time.
So since the gospels are silent on the matter, and the chronology of events concerning Christ’s death
and resurrection shows that the “first of the weeks” or “Sabbaths” occurs in the gospels after the
weekly Sabbath, then we come to the conclusion that the “morrow after the Sabbath” means the
weekly and not the annual Sabbath.
But notice, they cut the wave sheaf offering (which was a symbol of the time when Christ ROSE
FROM THE DEAD), at the same time when Jesus was resurrected, late on the weekly Sabbath near
sundown! Then they would keep that grain for the next day in the morning and wave it to God as an
offering of the firstfruits of the harvest, and “the sheaf was offered (waved) before God the
following morning, or more precisely, between 9:00 a.m. and noon”(Forerunner’s Commentary),
which symbolises the RISEN (past tense) CHRIST!
The chart below verified by works on the "Jewish Calendar"-actually God's calendar-is absolutely
correct according to the computation preserved since the days of Moses!
A.D 29 Sat April 16
A.D. 30 Wed April 5
A.D. 31 Wed April 25
A.D. 32 Mon April 14
A.D. 33 Friday April 3
(Quotes from "The Crucifixion was not on Friday by David Hulme).
This fits perfectly with the scenario of the Bible. In 31 A.D. Jesus was put to death on a Wednesday
and exactly 72 hours later, or three days and three nights later, he was resurrected on The Sabbath
There is even a prophecy that says the Messiah would be "cut off" and that "in the midst [middle] of
the week he would cause the oblation to cease" (Daniel 9:26-27). Notice if people adhere to Jesus
being crucified in 30 A.D., the Passover still lands on a WEDNESDAY. The crucifixion was not on
Friday, but Wednesday, and he was resurrected on the Sabbath Day.
Chart Below shows the exact time sequence of events of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus
How the Bible Counts Time
God said “from even unto even, shall ye celebrate your sabbath.” (Lev 23:32)
Jesus said “Are there not twelve hours in the day?” (John 11:9, 10). Distinguishing it from the night (v.10).
Genesis 1 shows the counting of time, “evening (night) and morning (day) is one “day” counted sunset to sunset.
When you count backwards from the weekly Sabbath near Sundown 3 days and 3 nights you get to Wednesday
afternoon near sunset which secular history shows the Passover did take place in the year 31 A.D.
Spiritual Significance of Jesus' Resurrection on the Sabbath
The Sabbath was very significant for the resurrection of Jesus. It shows that the Sabbath is liberty
and not bondage. Even Jesus showed that the Sabbath was a time for freedom and liberty. Think of
it! Even God said in the Old Testament: "And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of
Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched
out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day" (Deut 5:15). The
Sabbath was a memorial of God delivering them from bondage to freedom. This is what the Sabbath
stood for! As God says: "I am the Eternal thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from
the house of Bondage" (Deut 5:6). Now how does this tie in with the resurrection of Jesus on the
Jesus through his resurrection broke the bondage of death and corruption! "For David speaketh
concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should
not be moved: "Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh
shall rest in hope: Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy
One to see corruption" (Acts 2:27-28) Corruption is bondage: "Because the creature itself also shall
be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." (Rom
8:21). Jesus conquered corruption: "O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
" The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.
"But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Corinth 15:55-
557). Jesus had freed us from the bondage of sin and death. Therefore, the SABBATH IS A SYMBOL
OF FREEDOM FROM BONDAGE TO LIFE, THAT'S WHY JESUS RESURRECTED ON THE SABBATH DAY!
1) Some may argue in Luke 24:21:" ... and besides all this, today is the third day SINCE THESE
THINGS WERE DONE."
Yes, the walk to Emmaus was on Sunday, but it is a misunderstanding and mistranslation that Sunday
was the third day since the crucifixion.
The Greek word for "since" after "the third day" in Luke 24:21 actually means "away from". Away
from is the same as our "after". Jesus died late on a Wednesday afternoon and was laid in the grave
at sundown on Wednesday as Thursday was beginning. He was in the grave 3 days and 3 nights on
Wednesday night, Thursday night, and Friday night and Thursday day, Friday day, and Saturday day
using our reckoning of days and nights. He rose in the Sabbath afternoon. So He was in the grave 3
days and 3 nights and rose after 3 days and 3 nights while the Sabbath was still on. So He rose on
the third day. Sunday is therefore the 4th day. The actual literal Greek translation of Luke 24:21 is:
"But surely also together with all these things, it brings a third day away from which all these things
Translators take the cumbersome literal translation and make it flow , taking some liberty with it, but
trying to retain accuracy. The 4th day is "away from" the third day. So it is apparent that the verse is
literally saying they were walking and talking after the third day, which was Sunday. However, have
other translators understood this point too? Yes, let's look at 3 of them. (Luke 24:21).
Moffatt Translation--by James Moffatt
“....but he is dead, and that is three days ago!”
The New Berkeley Version in Modern English-- Gerrit Verkugl
“Moreover, three days have already passed, since all these events occurred.”
The Syriac New Testament Translated Into English From The Peshitto Version -- James Murdock
“...and lo, three days have passed since all these things have occurred.”
The Syriac Reading can be confirmed by 2 of the oldest manuscripts in Estrangelo Aramaic: the Sinaitic
Palimpset and the Curetonian Syriac.
There is exceedingly ample evidence that the correct translation for Luke 24:21 is that the KJV
should read, "today is after the third day since these things were done." As the information above
shows, the oldest and multiple original manuscripts show that "away from" is the correct word for
since, and shows us that they were talking about Sunday being the 4th day since Jesus was laid in the
grave. That troubled them, because He has clearly said many times that He would rise on the third
day, after 3 days and 3 nights. He would fulfill the sign of Jonah, as Jonah was 3 days and 3 nights in
the great fish, so Jesus would be 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth. These two disciples
were challenged in their faith, because it appeared that Jesus' many prophecies concerning His being
raised from the dead had failed. They were going back to Emmaus in defeat, when a stranger joined
them. This stranger explained to them all the prophecies concerning the Messiah from the Bible.
They did not recognize that it was Jesus, the risen Messiah talking to them. Only when they sat
down to eat and He blessed the bread and gave it to them, were their eyes opened and they recognized
Him as Jesus. He then instantly disappeared from them.
2) Now the famous "part of a day theory" that some used to prove that Jesus died on Friday and
resurrected on Sunday. They say is was "part of three days and three nights." They say "this is the
way Jews told time." They get this from the Babylonian Talmud. Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah, tenth in
the descent from Ezra was very specific: "A day and a night are an Onah ['a portion of time'] and the
portion of an Onah is as the whole of it" [J.Talmud, Shabbath 9.3 and b.Talmud, Pesahim 4a] .
As we have proved, GOD, in his word THE BIBLE says to count the days from SUNSET TO SUNSET,
24 hours periods see Leviticus 23:32.. Jesus said the same thing "Are there not twelve hours in
the day?" (John 11:9). The Bible is not interpreted by the Talmud, or by a Human commentary, the
Bible INTERPRETS ITSELF, see 2 Peter 1:20. Jesus always referred to the scriptures. He always
said, "It is written," see Matthew 4. The Talmud and the other Rabbinic writings are the very things
that Jesus complained about to the Pharisees when it was in direct contradiction to the bible which
this theory is!. Their strict interpretation of the Bible, that he called the "commandments of Men,"
and not of God, notice: " Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem,
saying,...Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands
when they eat bread.
" But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your
tradition?...ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition...Ye hypocrites, well
did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, "This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and
honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
" But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men" (Matthew 15:1-
3, 6-9). So when Jesus said "three days and three nights" he meant it the way God meant in the
BIBLE, SUNSET TO SUNSET! Jesus referred to God's word not some Rabbi's.
The Review and Herald, the official publication of the Seventh-day Adventists, listed several texts
that, they claim, indicate that three days means no more than a day and one half. Let’s look to see if
Scripture supports these claims.
Here is the first text they offer as “proof” that “after three days” does not mean after three days!
King Rehoboam told the people who came to meet him, “‘Come back to me after three days.’ And
the people departed” (II Chron. 10:5). The same event is quoted in I Kings 12:5: “Depart for
three days, then come back to me.” The story continues with verse 12: “So Jeroboam and all the people
came to Rehoboam the third day, as the king directed, saying, ‘Come back to me the third day.”’
The people left “for three days” and did not return until “after three days,” as the king had
Let us suppose they had first met the king sometime on Friday. As they were ordered to return at
the end of three days, they would not have returned before the same time of day the following
Monday. Now was Monday “the third day” from the day they had originally met with the king? The
first day from that Friday was Saturday, the second day from that Friday was Sunday and the third day
was Monday - exactly the time the king expected them to return.
Monday, not Sunday, was the third day from Friday.
The next text offered as “proof” that “three days and three nights” means only one day and two
nights is Esther 4:16 and 5:1. “Fast for me,” said Queen Esther, “neither eat nor drink for three
days, night or day. My maids and I will fast likewise. And so I will go to the king.” “Now it
happened on the third .day that Esther put on her royal robes” and went to the king.
First “night or day” meant that she would not drink or eat night or day, which includes the full 24 hour
Second, which day was this? The third day of the fast. Suppose Queen Esther had requested the
Jews late Friday evening, shortly before sunset, to fast. The first day of their fast would have been
Saturday, the second day would have been Sunday and the third day, Monday, the queen would have
entered the king’s palace. Isn’t that plain? The Jews did not fast parts of three days, but three
days, night and day.
Notice that in each of these examples, three days means three days, not parts of three days or
only a day and one half.
3) Some argue that the Apostles did Keep Easter in the verse in the book of Acts: "And when he had
apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep
him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people" (Acts 12:1-4). This deliberate insertion
into the King James Translation of the Bible is utterly fraudulent, and those who collaborated in its
insertion knew it was. The Diaglott, which is a transliteration directly from the original Greek, says,
"…and having seized him, he put him in prison, delivering him to four quarternions of soldiers to
guard him, intending after the PASSOVER to lead him out to the people."
Here is the New International version of the same verse: "After arresting him, he put him in prison,
handing him over to be guarded by four squads of four soldiers each. Herod intended to bring him
out for public trial after the Passover."
The New Revised Standard has it: "When he had seized him, he put him in prison and handed him
over to four squads of soldiers to guard him, intending to bring him out to the people after the Passover."Here is each word from the fourth verse in Greek, with the accompanying number from Strong's
Exhaustive Concordance. Notice carefully the word Pascha for "Passover": ". . . piazo:G4084 . .
tithemi:G5087 . . phulake:G5438 . . paradidomi:G3860 . . tessares:G5064 . . tetradion:G5069 . .
stratiotes:G4757 . . phulasso:G5442 . . bouleuo:G1011 . . meta:G3326 . . pascha:G3957 . .
anago:G321 . . laos:G2992."
Now, notice the definition of the word from Strongs G3957: "3957. pascha, pas'-khah; of Chald. or.
[comp. H6453]; the Passover."
Now, notice the marginal notes from Dr. Bullinger's Companion Bible: "Gr. To Pascha, the Passover.4) Some might object to the reaping of the sheaf in the closing hours of the Sabbath because it is a
day of rest when no work is to be done. After one understands the full reason for it, as well as Jesus’
direct statement that a priest is blameless in the performance of his required duties (Matthew 12:5),
any objections to the practice disappear.
So Easter is a heathen custom, nowhere is it commanded in the Bible. The Apostles continued to
celebrate the Feasts of Passover. Jesus resurrected on the weekly Sabbath not Sunday. These are
God’s true feasts! Will you keep them? I pray you do!
Written by Peter Salemi.