Easter

[BreadOfLife]

You and others have the right to believe what you like, but I choose not to believe something simply because the majority of people believe it.
Contextual evidence indicates that “the Lord’s day” of Revelation 1:10 is not a particular 24-hour day. Since it was “by inspiration” that John came to be “in the Lord’s day,” the reference could not be to some particular day of the week. It would not have been necessary for John to have been inspired to come to a specific day of the week. Therefore, “the Lord’s day” must be that future time during which events that John was privileged to see in vision would occur. This included such happenings as the war in heaven and the ouster of Satan, the destruction of Babylon the Great and the kings of the earth and their armies, the binding and abyssing of Satan, the resurrection of the dead, and Christ’s Thousand Year Reign.

The context points to Jesus Christ as the Lord whose “day” it is. Immediately after coming to be “in the Lord’s day,” John heard, not the voice of Almighty God, but that of the resurrected Son of God. (Re 1:10-18) Also, the ‘day of the Lord’ mentioned at 1 Corinthians 1:8; 5:5; and 2 Corinthians 1:14 is that of Jesus Christ.

Soooooo - ALL of the Protestant scholars that I listed are dead wrong - but YOU are right because YOU say so?

EVERY ONE of those scholars agreed with the position that "The Lord's Day" spoken of in Rev. 1:10 is talking about Sunday -= not Judgement Day.

Can YOU say, "Spiritual pride"??

 

[BreadOfLife]

Sunday belongs indeed to the Lord, but the Scriptures nowhere call it ‘the Lord’s day.’ None of the Christian writings, for 100 years after Christ, ever call it ‘the Lord’s day.’ . . . I can see no essential difference between ἡ Κυριακη ἡμερα [hē Kyriakē hēmera] —the Lord’s day,— and ἡ ἡμερα Κυριου [hē hēmera Kyriou] —the day of the Lord. They are simply the two forms for signifying the same relations of the same things. . . . And when we come to consider the actual contents of this book, we find them harmonizing exactly with this understanding of its title. It takes as its chief and unmistakable themes what other portions of the Scriptures assign to the great day of the Lord.”—J. A. Seiss, The Apocalypse: Lectures on the Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1966), 18.

6 Jerome Smith, The New Treasury of

That's a LIE - and I've already addressed this.

I gave you the following information:
From the 1st century document, The Didache (Teachings of the Twelve Apostles), which was written while most of them were still alive. The Didache dates back to 50 AD - which is BEFORE most of the Bible was written - a mere SEVENTEEN YEARS after Christ ascended to the Father:
"But every LORD'S DAY gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving";


From Ignatius of Antioch's Letter to the Magnesians, written in about 107 AD. Ignatius was a disciple of the Apostle John. This is SEVENTY FOUR years after Christ ascended to the Father and the Apostle John was STILL ALIVE:
"If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of THE LORD'S DAY, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death ..."

Again - you LOSE because you LIE instead of doing your homework . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Pity though the above are Sunday Resurrection BIASED, COMMENTARIES; not one is an actual (unbiased) Translation.

Yup - every time you get Historically or Scripturally SPANKED - it's because everybody else is wrong.

Grow up, sparky . . .

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

I also have a problem with Easter bunnies.
I don't have a problem with Easter eggs, in their proper context - as I edcuated you about them earlier.

Here's where you fall off the rails . . .

The "Lord's Day" as named in Rev. 1:10 and by the Early Church refers to Sunday because that was the day that the Lord rose from the dead. I gave you multiple testimonies from the Early Church Fathers on this fact, including a passage from The Didache (Teachings of the Twelve Apostles), which is a document written alongside the Gospels and Epistles.

The "Day" or the "Day of the Lord" spoken of in Scripture is the Day of Judgement which is different
(Isa. 24:21-22, Mal. 4:5, Zeph. 1:14-18, 1 Cor. 1:8, 1 Cor. 3:13). This is a SINGLE event - not a weekly event.

The consensus of your Protestant scholarship agrees that the "Lord's Day" refers to Sunday . . .
- Geneva Study Bible
- Barnes' Notes on the Bible
- Vincent's Word Studies
- Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
- Pulpit Commentary
- Benson Commentary
- Bengel's Gnomen
- Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
- Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
- Expositor's Greek Testament
- MacLaren's Expositions
- Meyer's NT Commentary

- Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers states emphatically about YOUR erroneous conclusion:
There is no ground whatever for the futurist interpretation that this expression refers to the “Day of the Lord,” as in 2 Thessalonians 2:2. The phrase in this latter passage is totally different. The phrase here is. en te kuriake hemera. The adjective is applied by St. Paul (perhaps coined by him for the purpose) to the Lord’s Supper: from the Supper it came to be applied to the day on which Christians met for the breaking of bread. The day is still called κυριακὴ (kuriake) in the Levant.

You LOSE.

Soooooo - ALL of the Protestant scholars that I listed are dead wrong - but YOU are right because YOU say so?

EVERY ONE of those scholars agreed with the position that "The Lord's Day" spoken of in Rev. 1:10 is talking about Sunday -= not Judgement Day.

Can YOU say, "Spiritual pride"??

What I say is that all these imperfect men you seem to care so much about, like them you care little about scripture. In scripture the day we call Sunday is called, " the first day of the week," it's never called, " the Lord's day." So ask yourself why would God inspire his servants in the other books of the new testament to record Sunday as , " the first day of the week, never, "the Lord's day" but have John record the phrase, "the Lord's day" in Revelation 1:10. For you and others to say the scriptures are talking about a 24 hour day such as Sunday, you have no scriptural proof, instead you believe what imperfect men say, and that's your right. It doesn't mean I have to agree with these imperfect men. As I said scripture doesn't record Sunday as the lord's day, so when John records Revelation 1:10 he wasn't talking about some 24 hour day, meaning Sunday.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

That's a LIE - and I've already addressed this.

I gave you the following information:
From the 1st century document, The Didache (Teachings of the Twelve Apostles), which was written while most of them were still alive. The Didache dates back to 50 AD - which is BEFORE most of the Bible was written - a mere SEVENTEEN YEARS after Christ ascended to the Father:
"But every LORD'S DAY gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving";


From was a disciple of the Apostle John. This is SEVENTY FOUR years after Christ ascended to the Father and the Apostle John was STILL ALIVE:
"If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of THE LORD'S DAY, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death ..."

Again - you LOSE because you LIE instead of doing your homework . . .

Still not listening the didache you talking about nowhere is there evidence that God used any of them to record any of the new testament books. Nowhere in my Bible do I come across any letter Ignatius of Antioch's Letter to the Magnesians, in the New testament books. The New testament books, that's what God is saying and nowhere in any of those New testament books does God inspire any of his servants to record Sunday as, " the Lord's day." Instead God inspires them to record Sunday as, " the first day of the week." I understand that you don't get that, that you believe what imperfect men say about scripture rather than what God himself is showing us in scripture, that's on you.
As long as scripture shows me that God Inspired his servants to record Sunday as the first day of the week rather than the Lord's day then I'll continue to believe in scripture that Sunday was always referred to as the first day of the week and not as you and other imperfect men say.

 

[BreadOfLife]

What I say is that all these imperfect men you seem to care so much about, like them you care little about scripture. In scripture the day we call Sunday is called, " the first day of the week," it's never called, " the Lord's day." So ask yourself why would God inspire his servants in the other books of the new testament to record Sunday as , " the first day of the week, never, "the Lord's day" but have John record the phrase, "the Lord's day" in Revelation 1:10. For you and others to say the scriptures are talking about a 24 hour day such as Sunday, you have no scriptural proof, instead you believe what imperfect men say, and that's your right. It doesn't mean I have to agree with these imperfect men. As I said scripture doesn't record Sunday as the lord's day, so when John records Revelation 1:10 he wasn't talking about some 24 hour day, meaning Sunday.

Tell you what - why don't you refute the Protestant Scholars I presented who ALL say YOU are wrong?

Here's what THEY say about YOUR interpretation of Rev. 1:10 . . .

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
There is no ground whatever for the futurist interpretation that this expression refers to the “Day of the Lord” in Rev. 1:10, as in 2 Thessalonians 2:2.
Meyer's NT Commentary

The κυριακὴ ἡμέρα[712] is the first day of the week, the Sunday, which was celebrated as the day of the Lord’s resurrection.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
the Lord’s day] Undoubtedly here used (though for the first time) in the sense now traditional throughout Christendom. Many of the early Fathers, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, &c. use the word of the First Day of the week.

Bengel's Gnomen
Ἐγενόμην) A sentence consisting of three members: ἐγενόμην· ἐγενόμην· καὶ ἤκουσα: Revelation 1:9-10.—ἐν τῇ κυριακῇ ἡμέρᾳ, on the Lord’s day) That there is a Lord’s day, and that it is so called, is plain even from this passage: moreover, that the Lord’s day is that day which was called by the Gentiles the day of the Sun, which is the first day of every week, and which is opposed to the Sabbath, the seventh day of the week, is clear from the universal stimony of Christian antiquity.

Benson Commentary
On the Lord’s day — On this our Lord rose from the dead.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
The day and time when he had this vision was the Lord's day, the Christian sabbath, the first day of the week, observed in remembrance of the resurrection of Christ.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
The term was used generally by the early Christians to denote the first day of the week. It occurs twice in the Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians (about 101 a.d.), who calls the Lord's day "the queen and prince of all days."

Geneva Study Bible
(i) He calls it the Lord's day, which Paul calls the first day of the week; 1Co 16:2.


You LOSE again . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Still not listening the didache you talking about nowhere is there evidence that God used any of them to record any of the new testament books. Nowhere in my Bible do I come across any letter Ignatius of Antioch's Letter to the Magnesians, in the New testament books. The New testament books, that's what God is saying and nowhere in any of those New testament books does God inspire any of his servants to record Sunday as, " the Lord's day." Instead God inspires them to record Sunday as, " the first day of the week." I understand that you don't get that, that you believe what imperfect men say about scripture rather than what God himself is showing us in scripture, that's on you.
As long as scripture shows me that God Inspired his servants to record Sunday as the first day of the week rather than the Lord's day then I'll continue to believe in scripture that Sunday was always referred to as the first day of the week and not as you and other imperfect men say.

Soooooo, can YOU show me where the Bible states emphatically that the Bible is the ONLY source we are supposed to listen to?

When YOU can do that - then you can discount and disregard all of the other Church documents that destroy your erroneous position. UNTIL then, however - you've LOST this debate on the evidence alone . . .

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Tell you what - why don't you refute the Protestant Scholars I presented who ALL say YOU are wrong?

Here's what THEY say about YOUR interpretation of Rev. 1:10 . . .

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
There is no ground whatever for the futurist interpretation that this expression refers to the “Day of the Lord” in Rev. 1:10, as in 2 Thessalonians 2:2.
Meyer's NT Commentary

The κυριακὴ ἡμέρα[712] is the first day of the week, the Sunday, which was celebrated as the day of the Lord’s resurrection.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
the Lord’s day] Undoubtedly here used (though for the first time) in the sense now traditional throughout Christendom. Many of the early Fathers, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, &c. use the word of the First Day of the week.

Bengel's Gnomen
Ἐγενόμην) A sentence consisting of three members: ἐγενόμην· ἐγενόμην· καὶ ἤκουσα: Revelation 1:9-10.—ἐν τῇ κυριακῇ ἡμέρᾳ, on the Lord’s day) That there is a Lord’s day, and that it is so called, is plain even from this passage: moreover, that the Lord’s day is that day which was called by the Gentiles the day of the Sun, which is the first day of every week, and which is opposed to the Sabbath, the seventh day of the week, is clear from the universal stimony of Christian antiquity.

Benson Commentary
On the Lord’s day — On this our Lord rose from the dead.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
The day and time when he had this vision was the Lord's day, the Christian sabbath, the first day of the week, observed in remembrance of the resurrection of Christ.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
The term was used generally by the early Christians to denote the first day of the week. It occurs twice in the Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians (about 101 a.d.), who calls the Lord's day "the queen and prince of all days."

Geneva Study Bible
(i) He calls it the Lord's day, which Paul calls the first day of the week; 1Co 16:2.


You LOSE again . . .

You think I don't know what other people think about what I believe. I care what scripture shows me and yet none of what these Protestant scholars say convinces me they're right in what they say. They have a right to believe as they wish but I don't have to agree with everything they say or believe. You seem to believe just because people have titles or a education in some University they can't possibly be wrong, I don't believe that way myself. I think scriptures trump titles and Universities. Like I said the scriptures show me that God Inspired his servants to record Sunday as the first day of the week, not as the Lord's day. You see I know God is very capable of communicating clearly with his servants, so ask yourself why is it that God Inspired them to record Sunday as the first day of the week, not as the Lord's day when God is completely capable of having them record it as the Lord's day if that is what God meant?

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Soooooo, can YOU show me where the Bible states emphatically that the Bible is the ONLY source we are supposed to listen to?

When YOU can do that - then you can discount and disregard all of the other Church documents that destroy your erroneous position. UNTIL then, however - you've LOST this debate on the evidence alone . . .

But you think it's ok that you and these Protestant scholars say to be more important than what God shows us in his scripture. As I said before I will agree with anyone if I believe what they say agrees with scripture, but I'm not going to apologise to anyone for putting scripture first. People whoever they are can say what they believe, feel, or think about me what they want to. It's not going to stop me from agreeing with what the scriptures show me.

 

[FHII]

The pagan cultures that started using wedding rings placed the ring on the woman as a sign that the man owned her

This doesn't seem like a religious issue, but a cultural one. Again there is nothing here that suggests false worship. Furthermore, Christianity (especially modern Christianity) wasn't around then, but Judiasm was. I won't say that a husband actually owned her, but it is pretty close.

Pagans placed the ring on the left hand because the left side was considered "weaker".
This is NOT true for Christian marriages.

1 Peter 3:7 KJV
Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

 

[FHII]

Marriage in Christ is MUCH more equitable because in Christ, we are EQUAL.
In Christ, there is no male or female or Greek or Jew, or slave or free man. We are all ONE in the Lord (Gal. 3:28).

When it comes to salvation, that is true. But have you not read Ephesians 5?

Ephesians 5:22-23 KJV
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. [23] For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

 

[marksman]

Come on marksman.....Seriously????

Never been so serious in all my life.

 

[marksman]

You said you attend Christian weddings. There is nothing in scripture that says HOW to perform a wedding so any ceremony performed is done by “tradition”.

I will look into the avatar thing and let you know what I find out.....IT specialist Mary

No, I didn't. I said I attended weddings of Christians.

 

[marksman]

Sooooo your wife doesn't have any fingers on her hands? You can't simply look at her hand to see if you gave her a ring?? Let me help you then - you probably did. Just about EVERYBODY exchanges rings in a wedding ceremony.
This is a ritual that has PAGAN origins which was later "normalized" by non-pagans.

I guarantee yo that all of the Christian weddings you claim to have gone to also included rings.
Why don't you "boycott" weddings or force your wife to flush her wedding ring down the toilet?

Why don't you mind your own business and stop being so petty?

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

The Day Christ Died as Our Passover: A Harmony of Events at the Death of ...

Jack W. Langford

The subject of which day Christ died began to be hotly debated a few hundred years after His death. In the council of AD 325, the leaders of the Roman ?Imperial Church? thought it to be in the best interest of the Church to disassociate their ritual celebration of the death and resurrection of Christ, which they now called ?Easter,? away from the annual Jewish Passover event. They actually wanted to divert attention from the Jewishness of Jesus. In doing so, these ?fathers? guided Christendom away from the biblical reality as expressed by Paul??Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us? (1 Corinthians 5:7). This error has been locked into the celebration for over 1,600 years, not only by the Roman Catholics, but also by most of Protestantism. This is a fresh study which will have some surprises for most students of the subject, due to the controversy surrounding the chronology. It will re-align the death of Jesus Christ squarely upon the biblical setting of the Passover theme as presented in the gospels. Above all, it will demonstrate beyond any shadow of a doubt that the four gospels harmonize perfectly on the subject. It also establishes that Christ died precisely on the eve of Passover, when the lambs were being sacrificed in the Temple services. This Bible study will ? Enrich our appreciation of the Divine arrangement in redemption. Demonstrate the flawless consistency of the biblical record. Correct Christendom?s traditional day celebrating Christ?s death. Strengthen the Christian?s new freedom in Christ.

The Day Christ Died as Our Passover

Comment:
GE:
Jesus was BURIED on the day after the day on which He DIED. Can it be so difficult to understand? If you will to believe antichrist tradition rather than Scripture, yes!

 

[BreadOfLife]

You think I don't know what other people think about what I believe. I care what scripture shows me and yet none of what these Protestant scholars say convinces me they're right in what they say. They have a right to believe as they wish but I don't have to agree with everything they say or believe. You seem to believe just because people have titles or a education in some University they can't possibly be wrong, I don't believe that way myself. I think scriptures trump titles and Universities. Like I said the scriptures show me that God Inspired his servants to record Sunday as the first day of the week, not as the Lord's day. You see I know God is very capable of communicating clearly with his servants, so ask yourself why is it that God Inspired them to record Sunday as the first day of the week, not as the Lord's day when God is completely capable of having them record it as the Lord's day if that is what God meant?

No Barney - you apparently DON'T care what Scripture says.

Scriptures DOESN'T tell us that Scripture is our SOLE rule of faith - but Barney Bright does.
Scripture tells us that Christs's Church is our earthly authority and we must submit to it (Matt. 16:18, 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23) - but Barney Bright doesn't think so.

You are one of those "Lone Ranger" believers who thanks that simply because he "professes" Christ according to his own terms, he can reject some of what Christ taught. You CAN'T.
You either accept ALL of what He taught - or you reject it.

The Bible NEVER condones "Lone Rangers" (1 Cor. 12).

 

[BreadOfLife]

When it comes to salvation, that is true. But have you not read Ephesians 5?
Ephesians 5:22-23 KJV
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. [23] For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

Have YOU not read Ephesians 5 in CONTEXT??

You started with verse 22 - but left OUT verse 21:
Eph. 5:21
SUBMIT TO ONE ANOTHER out of reverence for Christ.

If YOU think that husbands aren't supposed to also submit to their spouse - then I pity your wife . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

This doesn't seem like a religious issue, but a cultural one. Again there is nothing here that suggests false worship. Furthermore, Christianity (especially modern Christianity) wasn't around then, but Judiasm was. I won't say that a husband actually owned her, but it is pretty close.

Ummmmm, when did I say that a pagan wedding ring was an issue of "worship"??
Once again - you take things a step too far . . .

1 Peter 3:7 KJV
Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

This verse is talking about PHYSICAL strength - not inner strength or spiritual strength.

Many women are MUCH stronger than their husbands - even if their husbands can beat them in arm wrestling . . .

 

[FHII]

Have YOU not read Ephesians 5 in CONTEXT??

You started with verse 22 - but left OUT verse 21:
Eph. 5:21
SUBMIT TO ONE ANOTHER out of reverence for Christ.

If YOU think that husbands aren't supposed to also submit to their spouse - then I pity your wife . . .

that doesn't change who is the head of who. the HUSBAND is the head.

 

[FHII]

Ummmmm, when did I say that a pagan wedding ring was an issue of "worship"??
Once again - you take things a step too far . . .

When you said "pagan".

This verse is talking about PHYSICAL strength - not inner strength or spiritual strength.

Oh really? Prove it! This verse doesn't say "which" strength it is talking about either way. But whatever way it is talking about, they are the weaker vessel and your comments about wedding rings being pagan are false.