Bible Dictionary
SABBATH, SECOND AFTER THE FIRST
The second-after-the-first Sabbath is a difficult expression in Luke 6:1. Proposed explanations connect it with a Sabbath in the sabbatical cycle or with the period of counting from Passover to Pentecost, but the exact meaning remains uncertain.
Definition
The expression “second after the first Sabbath” is a difficult phrase in Luke 6:1. It has been understood in several ways, including the first Sabbath of the second year in a sabbatical cycle, the first Sabbath after Passover, or the first Sabbath of a Jewish year. Its precise meaning remains uncertain.
Biblical Usage
The phrase occurs in Luke 6:1 in the account of the disciples’ activity on the Sabbath.
Historical Background
Some manuscripts omit the unusual word deuteroprotos, and some have regarded it as a copyist’s combination or alteration. If retained, the explanation involving the first Sabbath in the second year of a seven-year cycle has been considered the most natural.
Related Figures
Historical Bible Dictionaries
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (ISBE)
<p>(sabbaton deuteroproton (Lu 6:1), literally, "the second-first sabbath," of the Revised Version margin): We will mention only a few of the explanations elicited by this expression.</p><p>(1) It was the first Sabbath in the second year of a 7-year cycle comprising the period from one Sabbatic year to the other;</p><p>(2) the first Sabbath after the second day of Passover, i.e. the first of the seven Sabbaths the Hebrews were to "count unto" themselves from "the morrow after the sabbath" (the day after Easter) until Pentecost (Le 23:15);</p><p>(3) the first Sabbath in the Jewish ecclesiastical year (about the middle of March), the first Sabbath in the civil year (about the middle of September) being counted as the "first-first" Sabbath;</p><p>(4) the term deuteroprotos, is a monstrous combination of the words deuteros, "second," and protos, "first," attributable to unskillful attempts at textual emendation on the part of copyists. This supposition would, of course, render unnecessary all other efforts to unravel the knotty problem, and, as a matter of fact, deuteroprotos is omitted by many manuscripts (including Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus). To those not feeling inclined to accept this solution we would suggest the first of the above-named explanations as the most natural and probable one.</p><p>William Baur</p>