tomndebb,
re: “ If you think that the seventh day starts on Saturday evening, (against all Jewish tradition), then you are simply misinformed about the numbering of the days of the week.
I think that the seventh day starts at sundown at the end of the sixth day of the week and that the first part of the new calendar day is referred to as “evening”. You can call it Saturday (Sunday if you’re in Europe) or Bob or anything else that you like. It is still the seventh day.
The Flying Dutchman ,
re: “…if you believe every thing that has been written you’d bet that God wouldn’t keep Jesus cooling his heels in the tomb on the Jewish [Biblical] sabbath…”
I don’t understand what your point is. Could you elaborate?
re: “Are you Jewish ?”
No; why do you ask?
Alessan,
re: “ ‘Saturday evening’ is on Saturday.”
Agreed. And your point would be?
Crucifixion was horrible because the body was left up there for the crows to pick at, which was an offense to everyone’s sensibilities. Jesus was taken down from the cross at sundown on Friday, the beginning of the Passover Sabbath, because the Romans felt the need to respect the Jewish holiday, otherwise he would have just been left hanging (sort of a little plot hole in the story, I always thought). If he rose again on Sunday, that is surely not 3 days but more like a day and a half. I have seen people explain that it was actually Tuesday, or that the crucifixion was actually on Wednesday, and we are misunderstanding the language or usage, but I shall not be bothered to try to find a cite.
I responded to your suggestion that Jesus may have arisen the previous day but that the stone was rolled away the following day.
I was trying to understand where you were coming from with the claim that Saturday evening starts off the seventh day.
Who else might refer to friday evening as Saturday ?
What “new calendar” are you talking about?
Yes, the seventh day in Jewish observance starts at evening of the sixth day.
So, Jesus is buried before sundown on the sixth day.
Evening comes and morning follows, the seventh day, during which time Jesus remains buried.
Evening comes and morning follows the first day, at which point Jesus is raised on the first day.
Re-reading your posts, (in which you are really not being clear what you are trying to say), it would seem that you are making some big deal that Mark 9 says that “Jesus was risen early the first day of the week.” Now, if you are trying to argue that Jesus probably rose on the seventh day, the Sabbath, and his resurrection was simply discovered on the first day, then you are going to have to come up with a bit of a better, (and clearer), argument.
In that culture, that counted days beginning with the day during which one was speaking, Jesus rose on the third day:
Friday/sixth day of week/first counting day/death and burial.
Saturday/seventh day of week/second counting day/remains in tomb
Sunday/first day of week/ third counting day/resurrection.
The earliest reference to the resurrection is Paul’s letter to the Corinthians 15:4, “And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day. . .” Regardless of any passages of scripture to which Paul alludes, Paul’s claim was “the third day” and Mark 16:9 corresponds with that. Similarly, Mark 9:31 and Mark 10:34 refer to being raised on the third day, so the author of Mark 16:9 is consistent with the story he is continuing.
If you are making some other argument, you need to lay it out in such a way that we can understand what you are claiming.
The ISO 8601 week is defined as starting on Monday and ending with Sunday. In that system the 7th day is Sunday.
Not that it relates to the bible in anyway.
True, it does not relate to the bible. In addition, I have seen calendars in which Sunday was 0 and Saturday was 6. (Since the business week has begun on Monday in Europe for several centuries, Monday winds up as day 1 by default in business-based calendars. That, however, is based upon Christianity moving its day of worship to the first day of the week, Sunday, based on the belief that the Resurrection occurred on that day, so the “Monday is Day 1” is actually a change that proceeds from the discussion of this thread.)
Yes, Just a common point of confusion, the only reason I mentioned it.
,
The Flying Dutchman,
re: “ I responded to your suggestion that Jesus may have arisen the previous day but that the stone was rolled away the following day”
I still don’t see your point.
re: “Who else might refer to friday evening as Saturday ? “
No one that I know of.
re: “…trying to understand where you were coming from with the claim that Saturday evening starts off the seventh day.”
I’m coming from the generally accepted position that the scriptural new day starts at sundown of the previous day and begins the evening portion of the new day.
Matthew 12:40
“For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”
tomndebb,
re: “What ‘new calendar’ are you talking about?”
Not a new calendar, but the new (next) calendar day.
re: “So, Jesus is buried before sundown on the sixth day.”
Matthew 12:40 and Luke 24:21 indicate that the crucifixion could not have occurred any later than the fifth day.
re: “… it would seem that you are making some big deal that Mark 9 says that ‘Jesus was risen early the first day of the week’”.
Put in the phrase: “is the only scripture that” between “Mark 9" and the word “says”, and you’ve got it.
re: “Now, if you are trying to argue that Jesus probably rose on the seventh day…”
I’m not.
Wait, this isn’t about Mark’s new TV set?
My reply is what is the relevance of a published author over the word of God? Is not putting the credibility of a published author over the word of God as putting a lesser god over God? What biblical authority can he cite that instructs the people to place any faith in published authors instead of in God.
Isaac Asimov said it, I believe it, that settles it.
Nope. Matthew has a number of references to things happening for three days, but they are contradicted by his other statements that refer to things happening “on the third day.” In fact, the only reference to “three days” that Matthew attributes to Jesus is the analogy to Jonah. The other “three day” references are to other people misquoting him.
vs
Aside from the allusion to Jonah, Matthew consistently points to a resurrection “on the third day.” His other references to “three days” are quotes from people slandering or taunting Jesus.
Luke, however, follows the normal reckoning, referring each time to the first day of the week as the third day:
**Luke 24 **
I don’t know anyone who quotes Mark 16:9 to show that the resurrection occurred on the first day, since that belief, supported by all the internal evidence of the gospels, already points to Sunday as the day of the resurrection.
Despite Mt 24:40, (an analogy contradicted by Mt 16:21, Mt 17:23, and Mt 27:64), and in accord with Luke 24:21–indeed the entire narrative of Luke 24–the entire history of the church has accepted the first day of the week as the day of resurrection and the new day of worship.
Well, nobody but Matthew seems to have noticed all the zombie saints walking around Jerusalem after the alleged resurrection.
Discussion over then, thank you for playing and enjoy your consolation prise. 
Some Evangelicals in the 1800s, followed by Armstrongists, took Jesus’ “three days in the heart of the Earth” as necessitating three actual days of burial, with a Thursday afternoon Death & Burial and a Sunday pre-Dawn Resurrection OR in the Armstrongist case, a Wed afternoon D&B with a Sat night Resurrection.
However, I recently read a good Friday-to-Sunday traditional argument that “the heart of the Earth” was not a reference to death, burial, or Hades but a reference to the Hebrew Bible terms for Jerusalem being “the center of the Earth”, also “the apple of God’s eye” (KJV)- and since Jesus was referencing Jonah & the Whale & perhaps Sheol, the beginning of His own ordeal from His Thursday night arrest onward.
Well, jesus’ suffering was meant as a redemption for all mankind, or at least for those willing to accept it. So, if in death he were not consigned to wrestle with Phil (the prince of insufficient light) but instead got to have a beer with dad, does that diminish his sacrifice?
Really, he suffered for a day or two, with an predestined end readily in sight. What is that to an immortal? Seems like a pretty pathetic excuse for suffering and and sacrifice.