W e are now going to focus our attention on determining Passover from  examining who controlled the religious activities in Jerusalem at the time. A lot of the discussion about the accuracy of Passover celebrations focuses on the activities of the Pharisees as opposed to the Sadducees. I want to examine the reasonableness of this approach in the following paragraphs. For a more complete picture of how this fits into our lives consider examining it within God's Pattern for Life .

Pharisees and Sadducees

Generally the Pharisees and Sadducees were very similar but there were distinct differences that kept them miles apart. They were both members of a Jewish sect of the intertestamental period but while Pharisees were noted for strict observance of rites and ceremonies of the written Law, as well as the oral traditions concerning the law, the Sadducees were more lax and were not committed to anything that was not clearly written in the Torah or in their Book of Decrees.

The Pharisees were more meticulous and more reliable on points of law

For those who want a more detailed expose on the Pharisees and the Sadducees, there is an extensive article WHO WERE THE PHARISEES AND THE SADDUCEES? by Bryan T. Huie, March 16, 1997, Revised: March 14, 2008 or many others on the internet.

Here I have a more focused perspective and have left out much of what is to be found out there and inserted some information more relevant to this topic.

Doctrinally the Pharisees differed from the Sadducees especially because the Pharisees based their doctrines on both the Torah, as well as the oral traditions, whereas the Sadducees only revered the Torah and their own Book of Decrees. This can be established by an internet search and will not be pursued here for the sake of space.

The Bible shows that both were actively involved in the crucifixion.

The Sadducean party came from the ranks of the priests, the party of the Pharisees from the scribes (the people who copied the Bible).

Focussing on the Pharisees the Jewish Encyclopaedia says :

. . .party representing the religious views, practises, and hopes of the kernel of the Jewish people in the time of the Second Temple and in opposition to the priestly Sadducees. They were accordingly scrupulous observers of the Law as interpreted by the Soferim, or Scribes, in accordance with tradition.

Kaufmann KohlerPHARISEESJewishEncyclopedia.com - The unedited full-text of the 1906 Jewish Encyclopediahttp://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12087-phariseeslast accessed Dec, 2020

They had a reputation even in the eyes of Christ of being meticulous about the law.

This was probably said by former followers of John who were now among Christ's company, otherwise they would not know the private details of the disciples. Either way Christ did not deny that they fasted frequently.

He, Christ, recognises their attention to detail in things specified by the Law.

They were also the group that people looked to, to establish authoritative positions on points of the Law,

The Pharisees ruled the roost at the time of Christ

The first evidence of this is the fact that the Sadducees should have been preparing to celebrate their Passover at the time when they were condemning Christ. It was a time for purification and looking to God who is righteous, not to murdering innocents.

Who is this they referred to? It is revealed in several scriptures:

Remember that the Scribes formed the Pharisees and the Priests formed the Sadducees and from John they all intended to keep the Passover later, demonstrating that they took the lead from the Pharisees.

Moses' seat

This argument is supported by Christ himself. Christ instructed those in His lifetime to recognise the importance of Moses' seat, not Aaron's. Moses gave instruction to the priest on how to carry out God's will. This statement actually confirms who was in charge of the religious observances during Jesus' lifetime. The Pharisees were in Moses' seat.

Notice that he did not say The scribes and the Pharisees AND the priests and the Sadducees. Moses was a prophet and a judge. He was not a priest. Aaron was the high priest; but Moses held the position of authority and Aaron was the subordinate not the other way around. Moses was not perfect like Christ and at times held personal views that needed to be corrected, as happened when Jethro corrected him on judging the people, but he accurately relayed God's words. This is what Jesus was referring to because the people looked to them for religious direction. This statement shows us that Christ was confident that whoever was controlling what was relayed to the people was reliable. So why am I so confident that the Pharisees were the ones who controlled Moses' seat? Remember that the Pharisees were associated with the scribes (who preserved the Bible) while the Sadducees were usually priests (who performed the ceremonies). It is true that the Jews had been liberated by the Maccabees who were priests, but they had become very corrupt. What Christ told people boils down to this, When in doubt; go with the Pharisees rather than the priests. The Pharisees were of the scribes who for centuries had accurately preserved the Bible hence Christ knew that they preserved what was true but just did not do it. Christ never corrected the disciples or the Pharisees on keeping Pentecost or Passover. The issue never came up for all the years that He preached. He never sinned and would therefore have kept the right day and the disciples never asked Him about keeping a day that is different from what the Pharisees maintained for the people. Christ was no hypocrite and He was not deceitful; He would never give anyone bad advice. If He thought that neither the Pharisees nor the Sadducees gave correct advice He would have said so plainly.

By comparing the following scriptures we find that one's seat defines what is under one's control: (Esther 3:1, Job 23:3, Psalm 1:1, Ezekiel 28:2, Amos 6:3, Revelation 2:13, Revelation 13:2, Revelation 16:10). Moses controlled what reached the people from God. This was the position that the Scribes and Pharisees had and it appears that the Pharisees were dominant in this over the Sadducees. The Pharisees dictated what was to be done and the Sadducees performed accordingly for the people.

For corroboration of this fact first look at when Passover was celebrated. John 18:19 (KJV) The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples and of his doctrine. The High priest was among the company and notice what they did: John 18:28 (KJV) Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover. They had not yet kept the Passover as would have been required by the Sadducees. The Sadducees argued that the Passover should be killed and eaten at the beginning of the 14 ^th. while the Pharisees insisted on the end of the Fourteenth for killing the Passover. The Sadducees acquiesced to the Pharisees on the most important celebration of the Jews: the timing of Passover.

Historical Record

Secondly the argument is also firmly supported by the historical record.

Pharisees ...No surviving writing gives us information about the origin of the Pharisees. The earliest reference to them is dated in the time of Jonathan (160-143 B.C.), where Josephus refers to Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. Their good relations with the rulers ended in the time of John Hyrcanus (134-104 B.C.). They came to power again when Salome Alexandra became queen (76 B.C.)...

Sadducees The Sadducees were the aristocrats of the time. They were the party of the rich and the high priestly families. They were in charge of the Temple and its services. They claimed to be descendants of Zadok, high priest in the time of Solomon. However, the true derivation of their name is unknown.

The article WHO WERE THE PHARISEES AND THE SADDUCEES ? by Bryan T. Huie mentioned above points out that the dead sea scrolls remove any doubt that the Pharisees were in fact dominant in the affairs of the religious lives of the Jews during the time of Christ, but had suffered terribly at the hands of those supported by the Sadducees. He records:

Because of their support for the program of economic and military expansion instituted by the Hasmonean rulers, the Sadducees came to exercise considerable influence in the court of John Hyrcanus. . .

Things got much worse for the Pharisees during the reign of Hyrcanus' son, Alexander Jannaeus (103-76 BCE). One year during the Feast of Tabernacles, Alexander, performing as high priest, corrupted the libation ceremony by pouring the water over his feet instead of on the altar as the Pharisees decreed. For this, he was pelted by the religious Jews with lemons. Outraged at this affront, he had his soldiers slay 6,000 of the offenders. This brought on a civil war which lasted six years and cost 50,000 Jewish lives. When the war eventually ended, Josephus records that Alexander transported some of his Jewish prisoners of war, most of them probably Pharisees, "to Jerusalem, and did one of the most barbarous acts in the world to them; for as he was feasting with his concubines, in the sight of all the city, he ordered about eight hundred of them to be crucified; and while they were living, he ordered the throats of their children and wives to be cut before their eyes " (bk. 13, ch. 14, sec. 2, The Antiquities of the Jews).

Alexander became increasingly unpopular among the Jews because of the civil war and his pro-Sadducee, hellenizing tendencies. The influence of the Sadducees was prevalent until his death in 76 BCE. On his deathbed, Alexander encouraged his wife, Salome Alexandra, to make peace with the Pharisees, since they had influence with the majority of the population.

This trend continues with who submitted to whom on the timing of the wave sheaf.

The Pharisees Controlled the Wave Sheaf and Pentecost

The Jewish encyclopaedia online states concerning The Morrow After Sabbath.

The Morrow After Sabbath

Regarding the Biblical commandment to offer the 'omer "on the morrow after the Sabbath" = (ib. [lev. 23] verse 11), the Rabbis maintained that "Sabbath" here means simply a day of rest and refers to Passover. The Sadducees (Boethusians) disputed this interpretation, contending that "Sabbath" meant "Saturday." Accordingly they would transfer the count of "seven weeks" from the morrow of the first Saturday in Passover, so that Pentecost would always fall on Sunday. The Boethusians advanced the argument "because Moses, as a friend of the Israelites, wished to give them an extended holy day by annexing Pentecost to the Sabbath." Johanan then turned to his disciples and pointed out that the Law purposely fixed the interval of fifty days in order to explain that the seven weeks, nominally, do not necessarily begin from Sunday (Men. 65a, b). . .

By: Kaufmann Kohler, J. L. Magnus, Executive Committee of the Editorial Board., Judah David EisensteinPENTECOST ("fiftieth")http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com - The unedited full-text of the 1906 Jewish Encyclopediahttp://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12012-pentecostlast accessed Dec, 2020

The original contention of the Sadducees was one of the reasons for fixing the Christian Passover on Sunday, in the year 325 (Pineles, Darkeh shel Torah, p. 212, Vienna, 1861).

The Sadducees were the ones who proposed counting Pentecost from the weekly Sabbath making it fall on Sunday and the Pharisees used the traditional Passover. The foremost historical authorities agree that the Pharisees won over the Sadducees in both disputed festivals presented so far. It was actually 3:0 to the Pharisees because Pentecost was also done according to their requirements as we will see later. The Sadducees lost in every point. Since the Pharisees governed the religious life of the Jews at the time of Christ then the Passover is what He would have used all His life. Since Christ never sinned God would have arranged the necessary civil environment for him to live sinless from birth. It therefore cannot be wrong to celebrate the Passover as the Pharisees did.

By downgrading the importance of the high-priest, a hated Sadducee, Herod automatically raised in importance his deputy, the segan, a Pharisee, who got control over all the regular Temple functions and ensured that even the Sadducee high-priests performed the liturgy in a Pharisaical manner. (pp. 117-118, A History Of The Jews by Paul Johnson)

God went to a lot of trouble to ensure that the Pharisees were in control of religious activities during the lifetime of Jesus and the Pharisees themselves suffered tragically to uphold their beliefs and to support the Torah.

. . . Any light that might be cast on the history of the Pharisees and their teachings in the pre-destruction period would be critically important. With new evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls it is now possible to demonstrate that for much of the Hasmonean period Pharisaic views were indeed dominant in the Jerusalem Temple . . . (pp. 30-31, Bible Review, June 1992, "New Light on the Pharisees: Insight from the Dead Sea Scrolls")

Bryan T. HuieWHO WERE THE PHARISEES AND THE SADDUCEES?http://www.herealittletherealittle.nethttp://www.herealittletherealittle.net/index.cfm?page_name=Pharisees-SadduceesMarch 16, 1997 Revised: June 8, 2013

The Pharisees Controlled Atonement

The present Sunday Pentecost and the practice of keeping Passover on the beginning of the Fourteenth came out of the Sadducean practice and not the traditional one preserved by the Jews and kept by Christ. The following extract also proves a 4:0 victory for the Pharisees because they also won on the points of celebrating Atonement.

When a Sadducean high-priest, on the Feast of Tabernacles, poured out the water on the ground instead of into the silver funnel of the altar, Maccabean king though he was, he scarce escaped with his life, and ever afterwards the shout resounded from all parts of the Temple, "Hold up thy hand," as the priest yearly performed this part of the service. The Sadducees held, that on the Day of Atonement the high-priest should light the incense before he actually entered the Most Holy Place. As this was contrary to the views of the Pharisees, they took care to bind him by an oath to observe their ritual customs before allowing him to officiate at all. It was in vain that the Sadducees argued, that the daily sacrifices should not be defrayed from the public treasury, but from special contributions. They had to submit, and besides to join in the kind of half-holiday which the jubilant majority inscribed on their calendar to perpetuate the memory of the decision. The Pharisees held, that the time between Easter [Passover] and Pentecost should be counted from the second day of the feast; the Sadducees insisted that it should commence with the literal "Sabbath" after the festive day. But despite argument, the Sadducees had to join when the solemn procession went on the afternoon of the feast to cut down the "first sheaf," and to reckon Pentecost as did their opponents.

Alfred EdersheimSketches of Jewish Social LifeChristian Classics Ethereal Library - Bringing Christian Classic books to Life https://www.ccel.org/ccel/edersheim/sketches.htmllast accessed Dec 2020

We see that it was the Pharisees who won every major doctrinal battle. They controlled Moses' seat.

Paul and Gamaliel

As an introductory note on this topic let us take notice of one more comment on the Pharisees and Sadducees. Under the caption Sadducee, The Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary says:

After the day of Pentecost the Sadducees were very active against the infant Church. Along with the priests and the captain of the temple they arrested Peter and John and put them in prison. A little later, they arrested all the apostles and took counsel to slay them (Acts 5:17, 33). Their hostile attitude persisted throughout the rest of the Acts of the Apostles. There is no record of a Sadducee being admitted into the Christian Church. According to Josephus (Antiq. xx, 9, 1), they were responsible for the death of James, the brother of the Lord. (p. 742, "Sadducees")

The significance of Paul and Gamaliel is that they demonstrate a history of Pharisees that were noted for their knowledge of God's law. Two of the most famous Pharisees were Paul and Gamaliel. When brought before the council of Jerusalem Paul declared himself a Pharisee and seems to have been proud of it.

The Pharisees were the group Jews looked to as the authority on matters of law.

Paul was a disciple of Gamaliel.

This suggests that Paul's ideology was not an aberration of the group. Gamaliel was the son of rabbi Simeon, and grandson of the famous rabbi Hillel. Like Paul he was noted for his learning. Gamaliel was president of the Sanhedrim during the reigns of Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius, and died about A.D. 52.

When the apostles were brought before the council, charged with preaching the resurrection of Jesus, as a zealous Pharisee Gamaliel councelled moderation and calmness. By a reference to well-known events, he advised them to refrain from these men. If their work or counsel was of man, it would come to nothing; but if it was of God, they could not destroy it, and therefore ought to be on their guard lest they should be found fighting against God (Acts 5:34-40).

One other dynamic pair of Pharisee was the zuggot ( couples ): Shemaiah and Abtalion; Shemaiah holding the title of Nasi, whilst Abtalion holding the office of Av Beit Din. With regard to Shemaiah

. . .He was a leader of the Pharisees in the 1st century BCE and president of the Sanhedrin before the reign of Herod the Great. He and his colleague Abtalion are termed the gedolei ha-dor (the great men of the age)[6] and darshanim (exegetes).[7] Hillel the Elder was a contemporary of Shemaiah and Abtalion, and regularly attended their lectures.[8]

Of the political life of Shemaiah, only one incident is reported. When Herod on his own responsibility had put to death the leader of the national party in Galilee, Hyrcanus II permitted the Sanhedrin to cite him before the tribunal. Herod appeared, but in royal purple robes, whereupon the members of the Sanhedrin lost courage. Only Shemaiah was brave enough to say: "He who is summoned here on a capital charge appears like one who would order us to execution straightway if we should pronounce him guilty. Yet I can blame him less than you and the king, since ye permit such a travesty of justice. Know then that he before whom ye now tremble will some day deliver you to the executioner." This tradition is found twice, in Josephus[9] and the Talmud. . .

Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaShmaya (tanna)Wikipedia, the free encyclopediahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shmaya_(tanna)version 19:13, 6 December 2020

The highest ranking member of the Sanhedrin was Nasi (President). The second highest-ranking member of the Sanhedrin was called the Av Beit Din, or Head of the Court ( Av Beit Din literally means father of the house of judgment ). The office of Nasi brings us to who is considered to be the greatest Pharisee of all, Hillel the elder (consider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillel_the_Elder ). As part of the creation of the office the other presidents resigned in deference to Hillel who had shown outstanding judgement in settling a critical legal matter. Since then the office has almost invariably been held by a member of his house. Paul and Gamaliel were following in a long line of outstanding scholars who were committed to the Torah. There is no comparable record of the Sadducees that I have seen during this or any other period.

Paul on Passover

Paul was a Christian and that brought with it certain spiritual obligations. But Paul was also a Pharisee of Pharisees and he claimed that his observance of the law was flawless. That means that he kept all the Jewish law without exception. From Paul that is no mean statement.

Was Paul a liar? Was he in fact to be blamed in how he kept Passover? Paul had several opportunities to set the record straight but he just focused on how, not when, it was to be kept but people read their own biases into what he said.

Why would Paul want to go to Jerusalem to keep the Feast if the Jews were in conflict with them over keeping it? The Jews never changed anything. Paul never stopped being a pharisee as well as a Christian.

It appears that this feast was either Passover or Pentecost but I would think it to be Passover. The objection made to Passover is that it would have been dangerous to sail at that time but things like that did not deter Paul. James remained at Jerusalem with the Church and they continued to practise as Jews in so far as there was no clear distinction between the requirements of a Jew and of a Christian, but they kept both in harmony. Paul returned there to celebrate with them.

Can you even remotely imagine that the Christian Jews did their own thing in Jerusalem under the prevailing environment? They would all be dead if they had ventured to touch the Jew's Passover (the Seder and related activities), nevertheless Paul eagerly wanted to keep Passover there. In other words the prevailing environment in Jerusalem in the time of Christ made it impossible to live other than by the rules of the Pharisees. The regular citizens would kill you. They would not have to wait for any state authority.

Were the Sadducees Right?

We have already seen that they lost 4:0 but were they right? What I will be attempting to show from Scripture here is that the Pharisees were diligent about the Law (the scriptures) but were blinded by their attitude of putting a hedge around the Law while the Sadducees were not primarily concerned about anyone but themselves. Earlier I showed that they were both in Moses' seat but that it was controlled by the Pharisees i.e. they were in charge. The official line at the time came from the Pharisees and this can be confirmed from history but now we focus on the Bible.

When we are introduced to the Sadducees and Pharisees in the Gospels they are lumped together as a generation of vipers.

Vipers are very colourful and therefore attractive snakes which, in spite of this, can camouflage themselves and their deadly attacks until too late. They will lie in wait and pounce unsuspectingly. When they do attack their fangs lock in and it impossible to escape their venom. The venom will work even if they are no longer present. This is what both the Sadducees and Pharisees did with unsuspecting converts.

They were both too interested in supernatural signs. Notice what they both wanted.

And were both actively involved in the crucifixion. Focussing on the Pharisees, our Lord was very concerned that they paid too much attention to form. The ritual was paramount.

History shows that oral traditions were essential to them both for interpreting the Law.

In the passage above it is a gift is the equivalent of saying it is for the Church. So whatever benefit parents would have profited by me I have already committed to the Church. We are warned about their form of righteousness but also notice what is said of the Scribes and the Pharisees alone.

They had righteousness just that it was not good enough. Their righteousness was flawed however they spoke what was right.

Here you have it from Christ's own mouth. They said what was right! But they were shallow

On the other hand the Sadducees ridiculed the resurrection; note:

The facts show that their belief system was out of sync with the Law. The resurrection is essential for understanding the Torah. Take Job for example.

Or many places in the Psalms including these:

There are many other examples. The Bible shows that the Sadducees were dead wrong on the fundamentals of salvation. They did not understand the scriptures.

From Secular Sources

Secular sources shed more light on the matter, <http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=252&letter=P>

Aristocracy of the Learned .

Most of these controversies, recorded from the time previous to the destruction of the Temple, are but faint echoes of the greater issues between the Pharisaic and Sadducean parties, the latter representing the interests of the Temple, while the former were concerned that the spiritual life of the people should be centered in the Torah and the Synagogue. While the Sadducean priesthood prided itself upon its aristocracy of blood (Sanh. iv. 2; Mid. v. 4; Ket. 25a; Josephus, "Contra Ap." i., 7), the Pharisees created an aristocracy of learning instead, declaring a bastard who is a student of the Law to be higher in rank than an ignorant high priest (Hor. 13a), and glorying in the fact that their most prominent leaders were descendants of proselytes (Yoma 71b; Sanh. 96b). For the decision of their Scribes, or "Soferim" (Josephus, ; N. T., ), consisting originally of Aaronites, Levites, and common Israelites, they claimed the same authority as for the Biblical law, even in case of error (Sifre, Deut. 153-154); they endowed them with the power to abrogate the Law at times (see Abrogation of Laws), and they went so far as to say that he who transgressed their words deserved death (Ber. 4a). By dint of this authority, claimed to be divine (R. H. 25a), they put the entire calendric system upon a new basis, independent of the priesthood. They took many burdens from the people by claiming for the sage, or scribe, the power of dissolving vows (Hag. i. 8; Tosef., i.).

On the whole, however, they added new restrictions to the Biblical law in order to keep the people at a safe distance from forbidden ground; as they termed it, they made a fence around the Law (Ab. i. 1; Ab. R. N. i.-xi.), interpreting the words "Ye shall watch my watch" (Lev. xviii. 30, Hebr.) to mean "Ye shall place a guard around my guard" (Yeb. 21a). Thus they forbade the people to drink wine or eat with the heathen, in order to prevent associations which might lead either to intermarriage or to idolatry (Shab. 17b)...

Kaufmann KohlerPHARISEESJewishEncyclopedia.com - The unedited full-text of the 1906 Jewish Encyclopediahttp://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12087-phariseeslast accessed Dec, 2020

The general mood of the readings regarding the Sadducees and the Pharisees appear to me to be reflected above. Christ chided the Pharisees for being picky about the law and adding unnecessary burdens but their human motivation appeared to be sound except the extremes to which they went. They were trying to empower Jews to know the law and keep it while the Sadducees appear to be more interested in elitism and the here-and-now. When compared any error of the Pharisees would lead them to stricter enforcement of the Law whereas the Sadducees would tend to be materialistic.

From Christ Himself

What did Christ think about the biblical knowledge of the Sadducees and Pharisees? In Matt 22 and Mark 12 we see parallel accounts of an incident that occurred between Christ, the Sadducees and the Pharisees.

Three verses are of particular importance because they show the difference in the perception Christ had of the two groups. First look at what he said to the Pharisee

Next, what he said to the Sadducee is repeated in Matthew and Mark.

There is a clear distinction. He told the Sadducees that they did not know the scriptures, they did not know the power of God and they were in error,  while he told at least one Pharisee that he was not too far away from the Kingdom of God. The evidence of this is seen in the likes of Paul.

Next we look at the question that each group asked. The focus of the Pharisees' question was priorities in keeping the Law while the Sadducees were about pedigree.

From these I have come to the conclusion that God prepared an environment where Christ could be sinless from birth and that environment was supported by the Pharisees. This group was zealous for the Law, knowledgeable and not far from the Kingdom of God but the same could not be said of the Sadducees. It appears to me that God put the Pharisees in Moses' seat because it is far more likely that the Pharisees would be correct in their choice of the correct day for Pentecost or on any matter of Law than the Sadducees. This ensured that the environment in which Christ lived allowed for the opportunity to obey the Law so that He could condemn the world for ignoring it.

Everyone was agreed

Everyone agreed on this date for Passover. It was on the Fourteenth because we already proved that the Pharisees were in charge but how was there no disagreement between the Pharisees and Sadducees on the timing of the sheaf offering? We would expect this disparity in views to impact on the date for Pentecost.

The Pharisees interpreted the morrow after the Sabbath, in (Lev. 23:11-15) to mean the day after the First day of unleavened bread.

The Sadducees believed that the morrow after the Sabbath must mean that the Sheaf Offering was on the day after the first weekly Sabbath that occurred after Passover.

It so happened that because of the day on which Passover came that year both of these views coincided. If Passover fell on the Thursday or Friday, the Pharisees and Sadducees would be in agreement that the Sheaf offering was on Sunday. A Friday Passover however creates problems with three days and three nights. This leaves only Thursday.

• Preparation = Preparation day i.e. the real Passover
• day 1, day 2, day 3 = daylight 1 etc.
• night 1, night 2, night 3 = after sunset 1 etc.
• UB 1, UB 2 = Unleavened Bread day 1, day 2.
  

As you can see this would mean the day when the sickle was put to the corn would be Sunday and that is when Christ was waved to God. It would not necessarily be because it was the day after the weekly Sabbath but the first non-Sabbath after Unleavened Bread. This makes it impossible to determine who was dominant based on the wave sheaf.

The Pharisees' Passover

To understand how that corresponds to the dates in the month of Nisan under the system of the ancient Jews we must recognise that days in the Bible begin at sunset not midnight as in the Gregorian calendar that we use. If the Jews took the view of the Pharisees, that the regular First of Omer was 16^th Nisan, the story of the burial and resurrection of Jesus (Yeshua) from a Jewish perspective looks like this:

14^th Nisan - Jesus died around 3:00 p.m. and was buried before sunset (Luke 23:56). The couple of hours of daytime left after the burial says that He was in the grave on Nissan 14 hence it counts as one day.

15^th Nisan First day of unleavened bread, a holy day. One night and one day.

16^th Nisan Weekly Sabbath. One night and one day. Regular first Omer but the harvest could not start because it was a Sabbath.

17^th Nisan - First of Omer or Wave Sheaf day. One night, on the basis that He rose before sunrise.

Also there is no problem with the phrase in the end of the sabbaths in Matt. 28:1 (the word translated Sabbath there is sabbaton which is plural). There has to be more than one Sabbath, The First Day of Unleavened Bread and the weekly Sabbath.

The Sadducees Passover

If the Jews adopted the view of the Sadducees, that the First of Omer was the day after the first weekly Sabbath after Passover (i.e. the first Sunday), then the time between the burial and resurrection of Jesus depends on which day of the week was Passover. The only day that fits is Thursday, so it works out as follows:

Thursday 14^th Nisan - Jesus died at 3pm and was buried before sunset. The couple of hours of daytime left after the burial counts as one day.

Friday 15^th Nisan First day of Unleavened Bread. One night and one day.

Saturday 16^th Nisan - Shabbat. One night and one day.

Sunday 17^th Nisan - First of Omer. One night, on the basis that he rose before sunrise.

Modern-day Judaism does not allow Yom Kippur (Atonement) to be on a Monday, Wednesday or Friday (see wikipedia article Days of week on Hebrew calendar , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Days_of_week_on_Hebrew_calendar) because it would cause problems with the requirements for celebrating this and other festivals which are determined by using the Hillel II calendar that was implemented in the fourth century. Before the time of Hillel, the feast dates were determined by observation of the new moon and there would be no problem having Passover on any day, but with the above reasoning none of this matters. Everyone would still have been there in Acts 2. As far as Passover not allowed to be a Monday, Wednesday or Friday. Adjustments are also made to shift Yom Kippur (Atonement). I find the situation very difficult to work around since it requires an understanding of what the Jewish authorities call gates for the calendar. My first reaction was that this was intolerable, however there are some practical reasons: (1) the arrangement is used in order to average out the difference between the mean and true lunar conjunctions; (2) If corpses are allowed to remain unburied for three days then they would putrefy. Refrigeration makes (2) no longer applicable but some arrangement would have to deal with (1). As long as the present one is not being abused then I have no real complaint.

Getting back to my main point, however you look at it Christ rose from the dead on the annual festival when the Sheaf of Firstfruits of Barley was waved before the Lord. The importance of this is explained in 1 Corinthians.

Cut off in the middle of the week

But we are told that that Christ had to die in the middle of the week. How much evidence is there for this? There is only one place that I have seen people refer to.

What it does imply is that the confirming of the covenant for this age will stop in the middle of the prophetic week i.e. 3½ years. Daniel 9 introduces the famous 70 weeks prophecy. The interpretation is NOT talking about a literal week and that can easily be checked by looking up even a bad interpretation.

What Really Happened

We know from above that Christ died and was buried on the preparation day. So what did happen after He died?

From Matthew 27 we learn that Joseph begged for Jesus' body and buried it in a new tomb. The Marys had waited around for some time after (v61 and Mark 15:47).

Even though Luke appears to say that the Lord’s Supper was during the days of unleavened bread that was not the case.

The instruction in the Torah clearly shows when Unleavened Bread started and ended, so this was a generalisation. The Passover was on the Fourteenth, the same Day as the Lord’s Supper, and the following day is when Unleavened Bread began.

It seems to have been a common way of referring to the Period because Matthew also uses the expression.

As well as Mark:

Earlier I insisted that it had to be a Thursday. This is how I know for sure. John says . . .FOR THAT SABBATH DAY WAS AN HIGH DAY. The next day was a Special Sabbath but it was not he regular Sabbath. That is why the Marys could not visit the tomb and that was followed by the regular weekly Sabbath.

The the day following the funeral (v62) the Marys did nothing but the chief priests went to set a watch. The Marys did nothing because it was the First Day of Unleavened Bread. In chapter 28 v1, this period that they waited is referred to as until the end of the Sabbath (weekly Sabbath) but they had earlier been talking about the day after the preparation i.e. the First Day of Unleavened Bread. This actually shows two separate intervening days following each other and even with the incorrect English translation the solution is obvious. Matthew is actually accounting for all the days although this is not clear in the English. In chapter 28:1 the word translated Sabbath is Greek: Sabbaton (plural), so what Matthew is saying is after the rests or Sabbaths (plural) and that accounts for all of the days.

From Matthew 28:1 and John 20:1 we find that Mary came to the tomb while it was still dark and in the end of the weekly Sabbath and dawning toward Sunday.

Now in Mark 16:1 the Marys had already bought the spices and since there were a series of Sabbaths (holy days of rest) from Matthew they must have bought them on the preparation day.

Luke now adds that the women prepared the spices after they had seen the burial but before the Sabbath. This means that Christ was buried long enough before the Sabbath that they could go to the burial and still go shopping after. There is no accounting for a time lapse between leaving the tomb and preparing the spices.

Putting this all together we can at least propose that Joseph buried Christ's body after preparing it with spices. The Marys watched and later went to procure some more but they did not have time to come back before the holy day so they had to wait until Sunday. They perhaps went very early because they were concerned about the state of the body. 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.

That is one possibility but it is more likely that Joseph had provided more than enough spice as can be seen when the weight is converted to modern usage. What the Marys actually had was very little spice but they wanted to go as early as they could to privately say farewell.

Clearly being Pharisee or Sadducee would not have made any real difference.

Conclusion

The Pharisees were far superior to the Sadducees in matters of Old Testament Law and controlled the environment in which Christ was born and raised. Christ HImself vouched for their righteousness as far as what they said of the Law was concerned and history shows towering examples of people of that sect but the Sadducees had neither control of affairs nor moral standing. They were wrong doctrinally and and morally.