I n this section we establish the timing of Passover and the wave sheaf based on the evidence in the Bible. I assume that you have already read the article on the Pharisees and Sadducees in the context of Passover. Following Passover is the first seven day feast called the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The count for this feast begins with Passover but the count for the following feast, Pentecost, does not begin with Passover day. It begins from within the Days of Unleavened Bread (the Passover season) on a day referred to as the wave sheaf day or Day of Omer, and is a feast counted in weeks. In a very real sense Pentecost is still counted from Passover because the Days of Unleavened Bread is sometimes considered by God as an extension of Passover. God has connected everything in His Pattern for Life .

Passover - the Wave Sheaf

The wave sheaf is established by a scripture in Leviticus:

The wave offering or heave offering was made by the Hebrew priests to God. The offering then became the property of the priests. The word omer is sometimes translated as sheaf — describing an amount of grain large enough to require bundling, hence wave sheaf . This is also the only way that Ezekiel 45:13 (which speaks of an omer as part of an ephah) makes sense. The omer offering was a quantity of grain brought to the Temple, or Tabernacle as the case may be, as a wave offering before anyone could eat of the harvest. The description in Leviticus 23:11 seems to suggest that the bundled sheaf was offered to God, however Leviticus 2:1 has already stated that unrefined grain could not be offered, because it had to be beaten fine, mixed with oil and incense and baked on the altar. Consequently Leviticus 23:13 seems to describe how the omer offering was prepared. As you can see it involved considerable work and hence had to be done on a work day. The first omer was of barley directly following the Passover. The second omer is offered at Shavuot. The Levitical priests themselves were also offered to God by Aaron as a wave offering. So we see that the offering can represent Christ or His servants. Christ alone is the first omer while they are both represented at Shavuot. First look at the wave offering as priests.

Heave offerings belonged to God and were much the same as wave offerings.

Wave offering and heave offering is essentially the same thing. The part of the peace offering that became the wave offering went to the priests.

The omer calculated from Ruth

The omer is actually an ancient Hebrew measurement approximately 43 oz. (roughly 2 1/2 lbs or 1.2 Kilo). The book of Ruth sheds some light on that claim. The first barley omer was the first of the first-fruits , bread made from a sheaf of barley which was offered on the first working day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The first-fruits is not the same as first of the first-fruits. The second grain harvested was wheat but the second omer was again barley (two loaves of barley bread) and are offered at Shavuot as a second wave offering. Even though Pentecost begins the wheat harvest, it ends the barley harvest and the grain had to be brought out of their habitations, not harvested. The two omers are of course connected and what connects them is the count. Counting to the Omer carries us from one wave sheaf to the other, joining two things of the same kind, Christ and the Church.

The book of Ruth talks of the ephah.

So Ruth took home an ephah of barley and also gave Naomi the parched corn that she had kept back from lunch.

Ruth had gleaned ten times what was needed for one person in a day. From this we also note that to prepare an omer was to prepare from scratch all the food that one person needed for a day. By prepare from scratch I mean, reaping, threshing, winnowing and then grinding into fine flour for baking.

When is the Wave Sheaf and Passover?

The date of the day of Omer is a matter of insistence for those who seek to serve God perfectly. The (working) day after the first Day of Unleavened Bread method of calculation requires counting days because the first day of Unleavened Bread may be the day before a weekly Sabbath. By the time I reach the end of this article you will see why it must be a working day. The Sunday method requires counting of days but may still place you outside of Passover. God said MY PEOPLE are destroyed for lack of knowledge and this is a case of an unfortunate lack of knowledge. Whichever method you choose you still have to count, but one has deep meaning and the other has no spiritual value that I can see. In spite of this there is a claim that the Sunday method people count while the Jews do not and that is used as a basis for condemning the Jewish practice. We will look at these in greater detail later when we talk about Pentecost. I mention this here because the start of the count relates to Unleavened Bread and specifically the first omer.

The third day

We will now look at evidence to show that our messiah was in the grave no more than three days and three nights meaning no more than seventy two hours but certainly less, and concurrently more than 48 hours. We will also see that on the third day He was out and about. The challenge comes in meeting all of the criteria simultaneously. There is no debate that Christ arose on a Sunday, although some may quibble over the way that Sunday is identified in Greek, but the fact that He rose on Sunday is well established. Counting backwards to establish when He was crucified and died is a matter of contention and that is what we are seeking to establish here. The third day was used repeatedly in the Old Testament to mean during the course of the third day. For example the manna fell very early in the morning and the second day began early the following morning. The third day would begin early the morning after that.

I am suggesting that the first twenty-four hour period is the first day and succeeding days are each 24 hours, therefore during the third day is between forty-eight and seventy-two hours. For the sake of accuracy a better comparison would be from New Testament usage so we note in these scriptures that Christ rose ON THE THIRD DAY i.e. before it was over

we could also look at (Mark 9:31, Mark 10:34, Luke 9:22, Luke 13:32, Luke 18:33, Luke 24:7, Luke 24:46)

The Jews understood the prophecy and made preparations to guard the tomb until the third day.

The apostles tell us that it occurred the third day i.e. on the third day.

Christ talked with people during the third day.

We are reminded in Acts that He spoke with people on the third day.

And the book of Corinthians tells us that it was according to scripture.

They all understood that it was to be done within three days.

Notice that it was to be within three days but also after three days!

Christ had to be in the earth three days and three nights but also had to be out ON the third day. Notice particularly Luke 24:21 referring to the walk to Emmaus. How is this possible?

Now some people claim that Christ died on a Friday, some on a Wednesday and some on a Thursday. If we put all these facts together with a Sunday walk to Emmaus then we have Sunday as the third day, Saturday as the second day, Friday as the first day and the actual day that it happened would be Thursday. You cannot get back as far as Wednesday and Friday is too close. I believe that people who insist on Friday have a way of reasoning that is completely foreign to me so I do not see how I can apply reason there. I will attempt to show that Wednesday is also unacceptable and that Thursday is the only day that stands up to scrutiny.

Let us look again at what this tells us. The following table is using days in the way we are accustomed to in the Gregorian calendar so that a day is followed by its night.

Christ had to die on the Thursday. There is no room for a possibility of a Wednesday. The Wave Sheaf was offered on the first working day after Passover. The fact that it is also a Sunday will be dealt with shortly but first take a look at the claim that Christ had to die in the middle of the week.

Wednesday - Middle of the week

The Wednesday theory is supported by a proposition that Daniel (Daniel 9:26-27) makes the claim that Christ died in the middle of the week. Daniel actually makes a statement that has a definite fulfillment in relating the ministry of Christ (three and a half years) with the Ministry of the two witnesses in Revelation 11:2-3. This shows that the period in question is actually 3 and a half years, which fits into a commonly used tool that God uses called the day for a year principle. Daniel 9:24-27 (KJV) says Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. ²⁵ Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. ²⁶ And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. ²⁷ And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate .

The first thing we notice here is that it is v26 which refers to the cutting off of the Messiah and it refers to sixty-two weeks. It is in v27 where we see the reference to the week and it is no longer talking about messiah. Now v25 says that from the commandment to rebuild the temple to the coming of the messiah would be seven weeks. Is this applicable if literal days are used? Next it says that in less than two years (sixty-two weeks) the temple walls would be built and the messiah would die, and the temple would be destroyed. The walls of the city were completed in 52 days so that leaves ten days to build the temple (Nehemiah 6:15). Again, is this applicable if literal twenty-four hour days are used? That brings us to the end of v26 so why would we insist that v27 is to be taken literally? I see no literal interpretation.

Those who insist that it was Wednesday must insert a day in the week so the count now becomes:

• p = Passover
  
• d1, d2, d3 = day 1, day 2, day 3
  
• UB = Day of unleavened Bread
• n1, n2, n3 = night 1, night 2, night 3
• WS = wave sheaf
  

If this is done then the third day argument above becomes Biblical error because there would be three full days before Christ arose on the wave sheaf day. Sunday cannot then be the third day and the Bible would be wrong.

Does Mark correct Luke?

I have already examined Matthew 28:1 under the heading What Really Happened in the article called Passover - pharisees and sadducees . To support the Wednesday argument proponents claim that the women had to take a whole day to buy and prepare the burial spices. The first argument that is used to support this is to say that Mark corrects Luke. In other words the plain meaning that they prepared the spices and then rested until Sunday cannot be taken at face value. According to their reasoning, it must be understood in the light of what it could be saying in the English . What I want to demonstrate is that this is a translation problem because in the original Greek there is no confusion.

As a matter of completeness let us address the fact that Sunday in English can literally be translated from first of Sabbaths in Greek; this is explained by the use of Sabbaton to mean both Sabbaths and week . I only mention this because if you check the verses in a lexicon you will notice the other sabbaton . I have found the discussion of this topic (the idiomatic meanings of Sabbaton) to be difficult and have had to accept that from my powers of deduction the arguments regarding this are circular. This in no way detracts from the up-coming argument. Sabbaton on its own means Sabbaths in classical Greek; it is when an attempt to create a phrase like first day of the week by using Sabbaton is made, that the idiom arises. In Greek when Sabbaton is preceded by the Greek for one or first it is interpreted as week if the context permits. This explains why verse 2 of Young's Literal translation begin with and early in the morning of the first of the sabbaths . It is the idiom here referring to the beginning of the week. I will come back to this subject later.

Let us see what Luke actually says.

In Luke 23:54 we have And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath {Greek: sabbaton) drew on. , then in v(56) And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day {Greek: sabbaton) according to the commandment , and finally in Luke 24:1 Now upon the first day of the week {the Greek idiom, literally: on the first of the Sabbaths) , very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them

Notice the use of Sabbaton , plural; in the English translation it is singular but in the Greek it is plural. V54 says that it was the preparation and THE SABBATHS drew on. So the two days are linked, that is, the day on which the body was wrapped is the preparation for the days (plural) on which they rested in v56. There is no other Sabbath! Remember that Sabbath just means rest. Luke makes no attempt to indicate that they are two days separated by an intervening day. This is standard language. Now why would Luke, who is apparently speaking to a Roman official, misuse a standard statement? That statement would be understood by 99 out of 100 people to mean one thing, so why would he expect the official to understand something completely different that would be so easy to express otherwise? All he had to say was the other Sabbath or the seventh day but instead he lumps them into Sabbaths. He was a highly educated man and was being relied on to enlighten Theophilus. So Luke is clear but does Mark really cast any doubt over the obvious meaning of Luke's account?

Now back to Mark 16:1 where it says that the Marys had already bought the spices; since there was a series of Sabbaths - from Matthew 28:1 in the previous article where we saw it was after the Sabbaths (plural) - they must have bought them on the preparation. Bear in mind that Mary (Lazarus' sister) knew that Christ was going to die and anointed His feet because of it (John 12:7), so she was already prepared for it. To quote Mark 16:1 (KJV), 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 anoint him . There is a claim that the KJV rendering had bought is inaccurate so let us put v2 with v1 and maybe we will see something else.

Still nothing so lets look at it in Youngs Literal Translation (YLT).

V1 shows that Mark's language here is challenging. King James says And when the sabbath was past but Mark actually uses the Greek Sabbaton (Sabbaths) and Young translates it as singular. By using Sabbaton Mark shows that he is now accounting for the entire period of the Sabbaths just like Luke. In other words it is not possible to insist that one Sabbath passed and then they bought spices and then another came and they prepared for the tomb; both of them had passed and he now is relating what had transpired after then. In YLT we have having past and having come so why not having bought . It is true that Young complicates the issue in verse 2 by mistranslating the idiom that means Sunday, but I have already explained that in dealing with Luke 24:1. I submit that the sense of the verse is that having done all that was required they came to the tomb prepared, not to account for some intervening period. Look back at v47 in the previous chapter. This narrates the end of the previous incident that Mark focused on and now he moves on to the Sunday morning. Using the English of Mark's account here to establish chronology, based on the English translation, is questionable. Mark actually corroborates Luke.

You cannot use Mark to correct Luke. In fact the language only poses a problem in English but in the original Greek it is clear that references are made to two adjacent rest days. Proponents of the Wednesday theory must exclude or discredit the account by Luke as an unfortunate use of poor language and present Mark as though it is the authoritative, albeit incoherent, account in the Bible. In reality Luke's language is the more straightforward, no doubt because he was making a special effort to assist a Greek, who may not be comfortable with Jewish custom. Luke of all people would hardly take the chance of deceiving Theophilus.

What about the other writers? Matthew also refers to (Greek: Sabbaton) Sabbaths. He says in Matthew 28:1 [KJV] In the end of the Sabbath (Greek: Sabbaton) , as it began to dawn toward the first [day] of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre . John ignores the whole spices issue completely (John 19:42- 20:1), therefore in every case where the incident is referred to, the period of Sabbaths is plural and does not suggest any intervening period.

Did the Marys have enough time

The next argument produced to support the Wednesday theory is that they could not have made their preparations in the time available. Let us look now at John's account.

Nicodemus had about one hundred pounds of spices. This must be at least two cement bags of spice since a bag of cement weighs eighty pounds and that is rock. A sack of flour is 48-50 pounds so it could also be two flour sacks of spice. This was a lot of spice and it was provided by a rich man who could afford the best. The embalming job was probably overdone. So why did the Marys go back? Because they had an inner yearning to do something even though it was only symbolic. My reasoning is that there are only two reasons why people do things: if it is necessary or if it is their desire. If it is not necessary then it has to be yearning or desire. When they left they stopped on their way home and bought a little spice and prepared to do a ritual goodbye ceremony or maybe they already had some that they had bought and stored at home.

Did they need an entire day to prepare the spice and do what they needed to? Look at the claim that they would not find anywhere open to purchase the spices. Remember that it was now Passover and Pilgrims from far and wide converged on Jerusalem to sacrifice their lamb according to the Law. This many potential customers attracted all manner of merchants. These are the same people that ripped off the pilgrims and changed money in the temple. How hard could it be to procure some spices in that environment? Having obtained the spice how much time would they need to prepare?

Now assuming that there was an extra day before the weekly Sabbath, and also the embalming was improperly done and need to be corrected, then how much time would they need to finish their task and what manner of urgency would they employ? Remember Lazarus - John 11:39 (KJV), Jesus said, Take ye away the stone. Martha, the sister of him that was dead, saith unto him, Lord, by this time he stinketh: for he hath been dead four days . After four days the body would have corrupted thereby creating two complications: from God's perspective Christ was not to see corruption.

and from the Marys' point of view, approaching the body would be impractical and the embalming would not be effectual. So God would have had urgency and would probably have engineered the over embalming by Nicodemus and the Marys would want to avoid the decay that they would have expected of Lazarus. They would never have left the job until Sunday if they had an intervening day.

Further evidence for three days by the soldiers

But is there any further evidence to confirm that it was no more than three days? Remember that the Pharisees were eager to make Christ out to be a liar and thereby discredit Him. They could very easily do so if something that He said could be proven to be untrue even in the smallest detail. Christ had claimed that if He was killed He would be resurrected within three days. If He went beyond then He could not be trusted, so waiting until the dot of three and seeing no activity would be sufficient. Now to Matthew

For this the little chart that I did earlier might be helpful. The soldiers had orders to guard the tomb for three days beginning with the first day of unleavened bread (Jewish days actually begin in the evening). If Christ was crucified on a Wednesday then they would have started Wednesday night at the latest and the first daytime would be Thursday then they would have gone home Saturday evening before dark. They would have been eager to leave as soon as the time was up so that they could claim that Christ did not rise in the specified time and was therefore a liar. If they are there later than that then it suggests that the three days were not yet completed or that Christ did not rise on the Sunday. The Soldiers were in fact still there on Sunday. Let us drop down to v11.

They reported to the Sanhedrin after the others left and claimed that they were asleep on the job Saturday night. They agreed to say that they were asleep not that they had left! The indication is that the event took place that same morning and this is the first opportunity that the soldiers had to report. If you read the account in John the sense is that it happened the same morning. If Friday is included then it means that Christ spent more than three days in the tomb and the soldiers watched for more than three days. There is no way that soldiers would just stand and watch somewhere during the night if they were not under orders and there is no way that Christ would say that He intended to spend three days and spend more, therefore I submit that the middle of the week theory is not supported.

Christ is our Wave Sheaf

Christ is our Wave sheaf. He was waved before God on the first Omer. He was resurrected and went to God and came back before His final ascension. Compare these scriptures in John 20.

You will notice that in verse 17 He could not be touched but by verse 19 He was basically asking to be touched, finally in verses 26-27 Thomas went poking around in His wounds.

First of the Firstfruits

The Bible shows that God represents salvation as three harvests and hence we must come to Him and not be empty. Not empty means that our lives must be a living sacrifice (Romans 12:1-2) because that is the only sacrifice in the New Testament. The first harvest in Israel was barley. The way that I understand this is that Christ is the first of the first (barley) harvest and the bride is the remainder of that barley harvest. Barley is the toughest grain and these are those that have to show that they are toughest. That part is very clear. Where I have tended to be uncertain is with the wheat. The second (wheat) harvest is another harvest that is tough, and I saw these as those resurrected at the end of the millennium after Satan is released for a short while. The final resurrection I saw as the tender grapes which comes at the white throne Judgement. I now view the three harvests as each having their own independent focus. The focus at Pentecost is some taken out of the whole to be the bride. That makes the barley remaining after the second omer all that are not the bride. In the first wave offering Christ is accepted as savior and kinsman redeemer which is the bridegroom. In the second omer He is accepted along with the bride and that begins the New Testament Church in earnest. That is at Pentecost, which we discuss in another place.

The understanding that I have of the first Omer clarifies whether it follows the weekly Sabbath or Passover. As I see it there is no connection between the weekly Sabbath and the Omer. The Omer represents the resurrected Christ and that depends on Passover. The sign of Jonah depended on Passover (how much time He spent in the grave) NOT the weekly Sabbath. Christ dies as our savior and is resurrected as our kinsman redeemer, the husband of the bride. If we read about Boaz and Ruth then we understand that it had to be accepted in the gate and hence Christ had to be accepted by God before He could marry the bride and redeem us. That is represented by the wave sheaf. In any case the situation had to be brought to the men in the gate.

So Passover and the first Omer are linked by Passover being the cost and the Omer representing that cost being accepted in the gate. To be satisfied with that explanation we need to understand what the city gate was in ancient Israel. It was obviously a place that could open and offer welcome as Lot did to the angels in Sodom, or act as a barrier for protection to restrict the unwanted, but it went beyond that and was a hub of activity in biblical times.

It was at the city gates that important business transactions were settled, court was convened, and public announcements were made. Look at some examples of public announcements.

Examples of conducting business.

The gate is the entrance

A place to negotiate the position of the whole city.

It demarcates the limits of responsibility.

An important part of the defenses of the city.

In the case of Passover it was not done indoors as in under the patronage of any man.

It was the place to find the elders and get representation.

David mourned Absalom but eventually returned to the city gate along with his people (2 Samuel 19:1-8) so even the King was found there. His appearance at the gate meant that he was once again attending to the business of the nation.

The wave sheaf was waved before the Lord. Before the Lord is wherever He places His name.

When we combine these we see why Christ went back as soon as He was resurrected. He was once again ready to take on His responsibilities and had to conclude the settlement of His stay on earth. This explains why it had to be a working day and not a day of rest and why it was the first available one.