Saturday night and Sunday morning After Passover

[GerhardEbersoehn]

 

[BlessedCreator]

Can you explain what your trying to convey here?

 

[Joseph77]

Simply Obvious (from the last few lines)


God's Word is Truth, with no contradictions at all.

All other stories have contradictions, opposed to Jesus, contrary to God's Word.

 

[BlessedCreator]

If you think there are discrepancies in the word of God, the Holy Bible, you simply have not done enough study on the matter. At first glance there may seem to be many discrepancies but if you diligently study the verses and the gospels you will find that there are none. I suggest reading commentaries on what verses you think may line up correctly with the other gospels on BibleHub from all the great theologians such as Ellicott, Barnes & Meyers etc.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

"Easter Enigma' - one of your 'great theologians' Wenham. Also a 'great Greek Scholar' .... let me give you all in a nutshell,
Tradition's approach makes of the several stories of several VISITS, the one and simultaneous occasion of Jesus’ RESURRECTION. Contradictions, discrepancies and total confusion are the inevitable result! It was bad enough that this ‘solution’ to a self-created ‘riddle’ was ever offered. It became a comedy of tragic proportions when protagonists began to defend their presumptuousness through unlawful improvements on the Scriptures.

First thing ever and always:
No Scripture speaks directly of Jesus' resurrection.

Next thing ever and always first:
Matthew supplies the Only circumstantial 'evidence' surrounding the Resurrection. No other Gospel does.

Third thing of first importance:
The Gospels don't give a single 'eye-witness' or 'eye-witness account' of the Resurrection as such. No human being saw, and not even "the angel of the Lord" looked on and saw Jesus rise inside the grave. No; the record states he cast the stone out of the door-opening of the grave and then went and sat on it, outside. For what happened in the grave with The Dead was God in full fellowship of the Trinity (Klaas Schilder) raising Him from the dead. (So if the dead could see, the dead would have been the only ones who saw live how God raised Christ from the dead.)

Following fact of first importance:
God revealed to the angel and / or angels and gave them command to go witness to human beings the Truth and Reality of Jesus' resurrection.

Therefore it is the report or 'witness' of the angel/s and ultimately the witness of God which we believe. Paul says, "Great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified (confirmed true) in the Spirit, Seen of Angels, Preached, unto the Gentiles, Believed on, in the world, received up, into glory." 1Tm3:16. This is all, speaking of Jesus in resurrection from the dead! Only now, does the revelation of the mystery of godliness become clear to human beings where, when, and as, the angel and or angels actually Tell the women that Jesus had been raised from the dead. The angels tell the women at different events in time of Their, Several, Visits, At, the grave during Saturday night-Sunday morning. And this single witness of the angels Repeated at Several encounters at the tomb all Only tell of the Fact that Jesus did rise; no instance of the angel/s 'witness' contained more 'information' than the statement of the fact of the Resurrection --- except the Last 'witness', where in Mt28:5a, 1-4, "The angel explained / answered and told the women ...." the circumstantial 'evidence' that surrounded the Resurrection "On the Sabbath" as per verses 1-4.

 

[101G]

"Easter Enigma' - one of your 'great theologians' Wenham. Also a 'great Greek Scholar' .... let me give you all in a nutshell,
Tradition's approach makes of the several stories of several visits, the one and simultaneous occasion of Jesus’ resurrection. Contradictions, discrepancies and total confusion are the inevitable result! It was bad enough that this ‘solution’ to a self-created ‘riddle’ was ever offered. It became a comedy of tragic proportions when protagonists began to defend their presumptuousness through unlawful improvements on the Scriptures.

First thing ever and always:
No Scripture speaks directly of Jesus' resurrection.

lets look at each of your claims.

#1. "No Scripture speaks directly of Jesus' resurrection." Revelation 1:17 "And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:
Revelation 1:18 "I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

well the Lord Jesus said it right out of his own mouth.

so what's your response?

PICJAG.

 

[DPMartin]

well there's bible study, and then there's bible stupidity. the OP isn't a bible study. it falls under the media ruling if it scares grandma or tick off grandpa its news worthy. hence the same line of thinking here if it ticks off those who care about what is true then it will get a response. and note they just keep posting one nonsense after another once they have your attention.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

lets look at each of your claims.

#1. "No Scripture speaks directly of Jesus' resurrection." Revelation 1:17 "And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:
Revelation 1:18 "I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

well the Lord Jesus said it right out of his own mouth.

so what's your response?

PICJAG.

I'm not saying Jesus did not rise from the grave and the dead and death. I'm not saying that the bible does not say that Jesus rose from the grave and the dead and death. HERE, I am saying there is NO Scripture that tells the actual EVENT OF Jesus' Resurrection except Matthew who recorded the day and time of day and the circumstances and circumstantial events of, Jesus' Resurrection -- THE THINGS YOU NEVER SEE BEING GIVEN CREDENCE BY THE VERY SORT OF SCHOLARSHIP THAT YOU ARE SHOWING OFF WITH.

 

[BlessedCreator]

No need to argue or strive. The truth will stand out to those that care.

2 Timothy 2:24 KJB
"And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient"

John 16:13 KJB
"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

well there's bible study, and then there's bible stupidity. the OP isn't a bible study. it falls under the media ruling if it scares grandma or tick off grandpa its news worthy. hence the same line of thinking here if it ticks off those who care about what is true then it will get a response. and note they just keep posting one nonsense after another once they have your attention.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

 

[101G]

I'm not saying Jesus did not rise from the grave and the dead and death. I'm not saying that the bible does not say that Jesus rose from the grave and the dead and death. HERE, I am saying there is NO Scripture that tells the actual EVENT OF Jesus' Resurrection except Matthew who recorded the day and time of day and the circumstances and circumstantial events of, Jesus' Resurrection -- THE THINGS YOU NEVER SEE BEING GIVEN CREDENCE BY THE VERY SORT OF SCHOLARSHIP THAT YOU ARE SHOWING OFF WITH.

First thanks for the reply, and second, I know you know, but I was addrsssing the unbelieving scholars of their points, as to whom you said this was about, not you. but just in case if you wen't sure, hence the reason that I addressed it. for many are not that assured.

so no, I was not addressing you. ok. just for those scholars, you may come in contact with, and maybe some here on the forum.


be blessed. no worries.

PICJAG.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

First thanks for the reply, and second, I know you know, but I was addrsssing the unbelieving scholars of their points, as to whom you said this was about, not you. but just in case if you wen't sure, hence the reason that I addressed it. for many are not that assured.

so no, I was not addressing you. ok. just for those scholars, you may come in contact with, and maybe some here on the forum.


be blessed. no worries.

PICJAG.

Copied and saved with post #6

 

[101G]

Copied and saved with post #6

thanks good teaching tools

PICJAG

 

[marksman]

lets look at each of your claims.

#1. "No Scripture speaks directly of Jesus' resurrection." Revelation 1:17 "And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:
Revelation 1:18 "I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

well the Lord Jesus said it right out of his own mouth.

so what's your response?

PICJAG.

My response is that passage has nothing at all to do with the resurrection of Jesus from the tomb.

 

[marksman]

View attachment 9068

The word day does not appear in the original greek. In Mark 16 v 9 it is the first of the Sabbath.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

The word day does not appear in the original greek. In Mark 16 v 9 it is the first of the Sabbath.

Thanks. and welcome

You're right, <<In Mark 16 v 9 it is the first of the Sabbath>> does not appear in any Greek, never and nowhere and nohow. Because πρωῒ πρώτῃ σαββάτου is non-Hebrew, non-OT (See A.T. Robertson et al.), 1) Hellenistic 2) New Testament, PURE GENUINE LASTING, ASSAYED, coined and STANDARD CHRISTIAN and UNIVERSAL and globally ACCEPTED, IDIOM for the unit of days "OF-THE-WEEK" in this phrase meaning "on the First Day, of-the-WEEK"... and nothing else whether the CHRISTIAN NEW TESTAMENT Greek word 'sabbaton' occurs in the GENITIVE Singular or Plural. The Plural became the preferred and is today the only one in common use and in translations.

When on its own and by itself the Genitive σαββάτων indicates the 'weekly Sabbath' - the Seventh Day Sabbath of the LORD GOD.

Great men like Calvin (my hero incidentally) - Young is another - for lexical composition purpose solely, refer to 'the first of the sabbath/s'.

Using 'Sabbatohn' like you do proves nothing than ignorance and bias.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

The word day does not appear in the original greek. In Mark 16 v 9 it is the first of the Sabbath.

It is - as good and better perhaps - which is, by Ellipses.
Also Case, proves the word 'day' is implied. It would have to be 'proht-ehi sabbat-ohi' - Dative and Dative, were it <on the first sabbath>; but now it is "on the First-Prohtehi Day (Hehmerai)— OF the-tou Sabbath-day-Sabbatou" - Dative and Genitive.
'Prohtos' Adjective is used for the name-of-the-day and is perfectly synonymous with the numeral 'mia' in meaning and form - Dative, Accusative, Genitive, whichever.

The problem for the Wednesday crucifixionists is not the phrase πρωῒ πρώτῃ σαββάτου, but the Verb of the sentence, simply! "He as the risen APPEARED"! How could He "as the Risen", 'rise' supposed to be? πρωῒ πρώτῃ σαββάτου does not tell when Jesus rose; it tells of when He "appeared": "early on the First-Day-of-the-week".

 

[marksman]

Thanks. and welcome

You're right, <<In Mark 16 v 9 it is the first of the Sabbath>> does not appear in any Greek, never and nowhere and nohow. Because πρωῒ πρώτῃ σαββάτου is non-Hebrew, non-OT (See A.T. Robertson et al.), 1) Hellenistic 2) New Testament, PURE GENUINE LASTING, ASSAYED, coined and STANDARD CHRISTIAN and UNIVERSAL and globally ACCEPTED, IDIOM for the unit of days "OF-THE-WEEK" in this phrase meaning "on the First Day, of-the-WEEK"... and nothing else whether the CHRISTIAN NEW TESTAMENT Greek word 'sabbaton' occurs in the GENITIVE Singular or Plural. The Plural became the preferred and is today the only one in common use and in translations.

When on its own and by itself the Genitive σαββάτων indicates the 'weekly Sabbath' - the Seventh Day Sabbath of the LORD GOD.

Great men like Calvin (my hero incidentally) - Young is another - for lexical composition purpose solely, refer to 'the first of the Sabbath/s'.

Using 'Sabbatohn' like you do proves nothing than ignorance and bias.

In its literal translation, it reads like this Mar 16:9 And having risen early on the first of the sabbath, He first appeared to Mary Magdalene, from whom He had cast out seven demons.

And I don't use the word Sabbatohn. I just quote what the Greek says in its context. And I have no bias as I do not study topics that I have already worked out and got organised. I study because I want to learn and discover.

 

[marksman]

It is - as good and better perhaps - which is, by Ellipses.
Also Case, proves the word 'day' is implied. It would have to be 'proht-ehi sabbat-ohi' - Dative and Dative, were it <on the first sabbath>; but now it is "on the First-Prohtehi Day (Hehmerai)— OF the-tou Sabbath-day-Sabbatou" - Dative and Genitive.
'Prohtos' Adjective is used for the name-of-the-day and is perfectly synonymous with the numeral 'mia' in meaning and form - Dative, Accusative, Genitive, whichever.

The problem for the Wednesday crucifixionists is not the phrase πρωῒ πρώτῃ σαββάτου, but the Verb of the sentence, simply! "He as the risen APPEARED"! How could He "as the Risen", 'rise' supposed to be? πρωῒ πρώτῃ σαββάτου does not tell when Jesus rose; it tells of when He "appeared": "early on the First-Day-of-the-week".

Who is Case?