Just as a reminder...

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

It seems to me that Thursday evening (our Wednesday evening) the passover supper was partaken of by Christ and the night of judgements occurred. Thursday prior to 6 pm He was buried thus He was in the grave on Nisan 14th the day of his crucifixion. Friday was the "high Sabbath" or first day of unleavened bread - the 15th of the month. He rested in the grave on Saturday the 16th. He arose from the grave on Sunday the 17th the day after the Sabbath when the sheaf offering was presented in the temple or "the firstfruits of the resurrection."

The sheaf offering was to be offered the morrow "after the sabbath" the regular Sabbath and thus fixed on the first day of the week as the day of resurrection. Friday was the "high sabbath" or the first day of unleavened bread and therefore a double Sabbath occurred that year with Friday landing on the 15th of Nisan and the sheaf offering on the 17th of Nisan. All the Scripture says is that the sheaf offering occurs "on the morrow after the Sabbath" rather than on any DATE! You want to fix the date to be the 16th but the Scripture does not do so! Only your theory does so.

However, fixing the sheaf offering to occur every year "on the morrow after the sabbath" the regular Sabbath fixed the sheaf offering every year to occur on the "first day of the week" or the day after the regular Sabbath. This fits perfectly with the emphasis upon the "first day" of the week Sabbaths that characterize Leviticus 23 and the feasts that picture the New Covenant work of Christ.

GE:

“Thursday evening (our Wednesday evening)”
What is this???
“Thursday evening” is NOT “our Wednesday evening”; it is ‘our “Thursday … evening”!

“(O)ur Wednesday evening” is the Bible and ‘Jewish’ Fifth Day’s evening or beginning-part.

You are partially right, that “our Wednesday evening”, “the passover supper was partaken of by Christ and the night of judgements occurred.” Only, this “passover supper” was the NEW Testament 'passover supper' that must be eaten by the disciples in and with FAITH (which they at first lacked and still had no concept of) partaking of “our Passover”, Christ’s “body and “blood” and sacrifice of Him for our sin(s).
Therefore it is called “The _Lord’s_ Supper”, or “The Meal of the _Lord’s_” body and blood symbolised with the bread and wine of the Christian 'Passover Meal'.

“Wednesday evening … the night of judgements occurred.” Christ lived, and lived through, those very “judgements”, and DYING, died the death of death “That Night”— “That Night” so-called in the Old Testament, because “it was night” for the lost (Judas) as for Jesus who became and suffered the death of the lost, “That Night” the first night of “THREE DAYS THICK DARKNESS” OF THE “PLAGUE” wherein all “FIRSTBORN”, DIED in the “judgment” of the Only Begotten Son of God.

Every “night” of every “day” of the “three days thick darkness” constituted the first halve PART OF THE “DAY” itself— its first, and beginning, and OWN!
Not like you PERVERT TRUTH by making it the night of the NEXT day that NO LONGER was part of the particular day every of the “three nights”, belonged to! That’s how you smuggle ‘Saturday night’ in, as were it THE “third” of THE “three nights” of THE “three days and three nights”.

No! Christ was crucified on the Fifth Day of the Bible-week that BEGAN with its own night (the equivalent of “our Wednesday evening”), and He accordingly rose “on the third day” after, the Seventh Day of the Bible-week that also, BEGAN, with its own night (the equivalent of “our”, ‘Friday’ night.

Thus Jesus “was buried” AFTER “our”, “Thursday”; NOT “prior to 6 pm” but MUCH LATER AFTER “6 pm”; and NOT “on Nisan 14th the day of his crucifixion”, but on Nisan 15th the day of his BURIAL that “HAD HAD BEGUN ALREADY” “according to the Scriptures” the Scriptures Mark 15:42 Matthew 27:57 John 19:31,38 Luke 23:50 which was NOT and NO LONGER “the SAME night in which He was betrayed (and) took bread” “BEFORE the Feast” 1Corinthians 11:23 John 13:1, but which was the NEXT and FOLLOWING “day’s” night, “it having had BECOME the Preparation which is the Fore-Sabbath” and Sixth Day of the Bible-week.

“Friday was the "high Sabbath" or first day of unleavened bread - the 15th of the month…” “mid-afternoon” prior to 6 pm its end Luke 23:54 John 19:42. He thus was put in the grave and the grave was closed and Joseph “left and went home”, “and the women also, went home and prepared spices and ointments”— all BEFORE “they started to rest the Sabbath”.

Jesus ‘rest’ was NOT that “He rested in the grave on Saturday the 16th”, BUT, that He from the grave on Saturday the 16th when the sheaf offering before the LORD was presented, “MID-AFTERNOON IN THE Sabbath Day’s FULLNESS”, arose from the grave.

He – Jesus – “in the GARDEN”, “AS-THE-RISEN-ONE” and "Firstborn from the dead", “early on the First Day of the week” Sunday the 17th day of the First Month, “first APPEARED to Mary Magdalene …”.

“The sheaf offering was to be offered the morrow "after the sabbath"”, But not as you are fraudulently asserting, “"after the sabbath" the regular Sabbath and thus fixed on the first day of the week as the day of resurrection.” Yours is sacrilegious manhandling and desecration of the Holy Scriptures.

Shame on you!

Let this stand for a monument of your audacity:
“Friday was the "high sabbath" or the first day of unleavened bread and therefore a double Sabbath occurred that year with Friday landing on the 15th of Nisan and the sheaf offering on the 17th of Nisan. All the Scripture says is that the sheaf offering occurs "on the morrow after the Sabbath" rather than on any DATE! You want to fix the date to be the 16th but the Scripture does not do so! Only your theory does so.
However, fixing the sheaf offering to occur every year "on the morrow after the sabbath" the regular Sabbath fixed the sheaf offering every year to occur on the "first day of the week" or the day after the regular Sabbath. This fits perfectly with the emphasis upon the "first day" of the week Sabbaths that characterize Leviticus 23 and the feasts that picture the New Covenant work of Christ.”

What weird self-fabricated concoction of a flying machine …! wherein you try to lift yourself above and over God’s Written as well as Living Word.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

The above verses deal with the HIGH Sabbath not the weekly seventh day Sabbath.




No sir! The sabbath in verse 10-11 is not the "HIGH Sabbath" but the regular weekly Sabbath. He has changed subjects. He is no longer talking about the first day of unleavened bread but the offering of firstfruits which is the "morrow after" the REGULARLY weekly Sabbath which serves as the Beginning point for counting 50 days to Pentecost.

The counting method here takes into consideration that the harvest does not come exactly on the same day every year. Hence, the sheaf offering is offered after the regular Sabbath when it does come. Your theory would demand that no other day but the 16th could be used to offer first fruits. Well, harvest time does not operate every year upon that kind of rigidness. The firstfruit offering is to be offered the "morrow after" the regular Sabbath whenever harvest could be gathered and from that starting point they began to count toward Pentecost using REGULAR weekly Sabbaths.

Therefore, Friday served as the HIGH sabbath but Sunday served as the "morrow after the" REGULAR weekly Sabbath and thus the day of offering the firstfruits - the resurrection of Christ.

GE:

JUST LOOK, how you confirm what I said, that you IGNORE, DENY, DEFY, and REPLACE the true Scripture, with your own and vain, fallacy.

"No sir!" --- "No sir!" God, it's His Word, not mine!

"The sabbath in verse 10-11" and in fact every 'sabbath' in the verses FROM verse 4 including every word and sentence and section up to and including verse 44 - the WHOLE CHAPTER 23 with the exception of verse 3 - is about 'sabbaths' OTHER than the "Sabbath" mentioned in verse 3 only.

The WHOLE CHAPTER is about 'sabbaths', at least TWO of, were distinguished according to one single text in all the Bible and that from the NEW Testament, as "great day sabbaths" John 19:31. NOT about "the regular weekly Sabbath" which you are again, and over and over again, lying!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Yes a pre-school toddler could count and tell but you can't! Your position would make the text read "Today ISN'T the third day" since/from/away from the crucifixion day but today is the FOURTH day since the crucifixion day.

Luke does not include the crucifixion day in his counting but you do. Luke begins count "away from" the crucifixion day not inclusive of the crucifixion day.

This is so easy, so simple and yet so hard for you because of your theories.

1. TODAY IS the third day and TODAY IS the first day of the week

2. YESTERDAY IS the second day and YESTERDAY is the Seventh day of the...

3. FRIDAY IS the first day of these THREE DAYS which day (Friday) is the BEGINNING POINT in counting THREE DAYS as they are all counted AWAY FROM the crucifixion day and therefore do not include but exclude the crucifixion day.

In other words Luke does not begin with Thursday saying this is DAY ONE and then proceed to Friday and say this IS DAY TWO and then to SATURDAY and say this IS THE THIRD DAY because Saturday is NOT the Third day since the crucifixion day or away from the crucifixion day but "TODAY" which is "the first day of the week" IS THE THIRD DAY since the crucifixion day. It is not the FOURTH day "from" the crucifixion week. It is not the FOURTH day inclusive of the crucifixion day BECAUSE Luke does NOT INCLUDE the crucifixion day but starts his counting "AWAY FROM" outside the boundary of the crucifixion day and that is why SUNDAY - the first day of the week is "TODAY" and "TODAY IS THE THIRD DAY" since/away from the exterior closure of the crucifixion day.
...................

GE:

And you can’t hear or read.
Again, you are telling me what you would like I do, I do. Well I don’t. Read my lips, Do, not, tell, me, what, I, do!!
Every time you tell me what I do, a lie protrudes from your month.

I WROTE my position, you READ it, and your ‘position’ and my ‘position’ agreed. How many times now? I cannot remember.
But my ‘position’ is sane; yours, is crazy.

Mine is sane, because there are three ‘positions’ from which to perceive the working out of our little adding / subtracting sum.
Two are real and true; and the third, which is yours attempted, fraudulently.

One,
To ‘count’ “backwards” / retrospectively from “today is …”
Today is … (and like you have counted every time so far),

1) Today (Sunday) is the third day since crucifixion;
2) yesterday (Sabbath) is / was the second day since crucifixion;
3) the-day-before-yesterday (Friday) is the first day since crucifixion;
4) Thursday is the day OF crucifixion.

Your ‘position’ and mine agreed and were almost verbally identical.

Your ‘position’ and mine counted prospectively, even agreed:

1) Thursday was Crucifixion-day [[and was the fourteenth day of the First Month]];
2) Friday was the first “day after / since / away from” Crucifixion-day [[and was the fifteenth day of the First Month]];
3) “Saturday” / Sabbath was the second “day after / since / away from” Crucifixion-day [[and was the sixteenth day of the First Month]];
4) “Sunday”, “today”, was “the third day after / since / away from” Crucifixion-day [[and was the seventeenth day of the First Month]].

Voila! TWO methods of counting … and … agreement every way!
Therefore, if I ‘cannot count’, neither can you.

But, agreement every way?
O no!

Just look at the NUMBERING!
Even when counted “backwards”, there is disagreement.
Because, viewed prospectively – EXCUSE THE PUN – Sunday is the FOURTH day since Crucifixion-day.

Now how did that happen?

Because both the backward and forward methods of counting, count DAYS-ORDINARY!
But not Dr Walter!
Dr Walter does not count or consider or even suppose, days-ordinary; he reckons Luke presupposes “THE third day” “of the prophesy”.

But there is NO ‘counting’ or ‘reckoning’ or ‘considering’ or ‘account’ of OTHER kinds-of-days than plain, mentally supposed, counted or added or subtracted ‘days’, _IN LUKE 24:21B,20_.

But you, Dr Walter, PERVERT things.
You refuse to acknowledge Luke / Cleopas presupposed and intended simply four days counted of which Sunday was “the third day since” the first one, on which Jesus was crucified.

Luke 24:21b,20 does NOT speak about THE “third day according to the Scriptures Christ rose again”.

Luke 24:21b,20 speaks and presupposes and relies on reckoning ordinary – that is – COUNTED / RECKONED, ‘days’. Yes! … of which FOUR days that are IMPLICATED and INCLUDED as well as actually RECKONED / THOUGHT OF, “_SINCE_ and AWAY FROM” the first one of them—‘them’, the four days, for WITHIN these FOUR, ordinary counted days, “today” “Sunday”, “is the third day since” the first one of them, Thursday— the first day “FROM” which, Sunday, was “the third day AWAY”.

Luke does not say, “Today, Resurrection-day, is the third day”! What an arrogant LIE!

So counting to or fro, or, ‘exclusively’ or ‘inclusively’, the ‘days’ which Luke 24:21,20 is about, are “the third day since crucified” or since Crucifixion-day, PLUS the two days in between them.

It will never come out on Resurrection-day which was THE “SABBATH’S-DAY”, BEFORE!

All the while, “the third day” mentioned in Luke 24:21b,20 not for one moment was about THE “three days” or “THE third day on” which “Christ according to the Scriptures rose from the dead again”.

That is your problem, that you illegitimately IDENTIFY “the third day since … crucified” / “the third day away from … (day) crucified” in Luke 24:21b,20, with Resurrection-day “THE third day” “of” (as you put it) “the prophesy”.

Dr Walter avers,
“Luke does not include the crucifixion day in his counting”.

But of course he does! Luke presupposes “the crucifixion day” as ‘event-of-day’, “crucified”, “from” which 'day' and event-of-day, “today (Sunday) is the third day”!

Just listen to yourself, “Luke does not include the crucifixion day … Luke begins his count "away from" the crucifixion day ….”

That is saying – yourself – Luke takes cognisance of / takes account of / takes into consideration / MEANS, the Crucifixion-event’s ‘day’, not 'inclusive', but “away from” or ‘exclusive’.

But the crucifixion-day IS THERE. Though not mentioned as the ‘day’, it is implied as the day COUNTED “FROM”. 'Apo' is a 'Preposition' of reference; it virtually relates as a Pronoun does. It relates and refers to or implies and presupposes the day’s EVENT, in fact, that “our leaders delivered Him to be condemned and crucified Him”.

That Luke DOES “include the crucifixion day in his counting”, is undeniable. But you, Dr Walter, you do deny it. A toddler would not; even though he would not know it his innocence would not allow him.

Therefore, Dr Walter, that you conclude, “It …”, Luke’s “today” (Sunday), “… is not the FOURTH day inclusive of the crucifixion day…” is ABSOLUTE NONSENSE as it is ABSOLUTE DISHONESTY. “BECAUSE Luke does NOT INCLUDE the crucifixion day but starts his counting "AWAY FROM" outside the boundary of the crucifixion day and that is why SUNDAY - the first day of the week is "TODAY" and "TODAY IS THE THIRD DAY" since/away from the exterior closure of the crucifixion day.”

You, Dr Walter, has said it; YOU, PROVED “It …”, Luke’s “today” (Sunday), IS, “the FOURTH day inclusive of the crucifixion day.”

Not I or no toddler could have done it better.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

.....................
Remember your prepositional chart using a circle????? Eis begins WITHIN the circle to the outside but apo begins from the OUTSIDE EXTERIOR of the circle and Thursday is the circle and Luke begins "AWAY FROM" the exterior of this circle in his counting of first, (Friday) second (Saturday) and third (Sunday).

Could not be more simpler!

GE:

Yes! “Could not be more simpler!”
Again you yourself have made it so simple and clear.
But misunderstanding and lack of understanding could not be simpler.
Because Dr Walter ‘remembers’, but ‘remembers’, wrong.
I remember Dana and Mantey’s ‘circle’, yes. You do not remember it, Dr Walter; anyway, you do not remember it correctly.
It must have been an accident, Dr Walter, this, you’re saying, “prepositional chart using a circle … Eis begins WITHIN the circle to the outside”.
But that is forgivable from the context of the present discussion.
But it is UNFORGIVABLE in the context of another discussion about Matthew 28:1 which you and I engaged in. Remember that discussion?????
What you bring this matter up here, I wouldn’t know.

 

[Dr. Walter]

If your counting method that INCLUDES the crucifixion were true Luke would have used the preposition "ek" not "apo." Apo starts outside the object not inside the object. Luke counts "from" OUTSIDE the crucifixion day not "ek" inclusive of the crucifixion day. It is just that simple.

GE:

And you can’t hear or read.
Again, you are telling me what you would like I do, I do. Well I don’t. Read my lips, Do, not, tell, me, what, I, do!!
Every time you tell me what I do, a lie protrudes from your month.

I WROTE my position, you READ it, and your ‘position’ and my ‘position’ agreed. How many times now? I cannot remember.
But my ‘position’ is sane; yours, is crazy.

Mine is sane, because there are three ‘positions’ from which to perceive the working out of our little adding / subtracting sum.
Two are real and true; and the third, which is yours attempted, fraudulently.

One,
To ‘count’ “backwards” / retrospectively from “today is …”
Today is … (and like you have counted every time so far),

1) Today (Sunday) is the third day since crucifixion;
2) yesterday (Sabbath) is / was the second day since crucifixion;
3) the-day-before-yesterday (Friday) is the first day since crucifixion;
4) Thursday is the day OF crucifixion.

Your ‘position’ and mine agreed and were almost verbally identical.

Your ‘position’ and mine counted prospectively, even agreed:

1) Thursday was Crucifixion-day [[and was the fourteenth day of the First Month]];
2) Friday was the first “day after / since / away from” Crucifixion-day [[and was the fifteenth day of the First Month]];
3) “Saturday” / Sabbath was the second “day after / since / away from” Crucifixion-day [[and was the sixteenth day of the First Month]];
4) “Sunday”, “today”, was “the third day after / since / away from” Crucifixion-day [[and was the seventeenth day of the First Month]].

Voila! TWO methods of counting … and … agreement every way!
Therefore, if I ‘cannot count’, neither can you.

But, agreement every way?
O no!

Just look at the NUMBERING!
Even when counted “backwards”, there is disagreement.
Because, viewed prospectively – EXCUSE THE PUN – Sunday is the FOURTH day since Crucifixion-day.

Now how did that happen?

Because both the backward and forward methods of counting, count DAYS-ORDINARY!
But not Dr Walter!
Dr Walter does not count or consider or even suppose, days-ordinary; he reckons Luke presupposes “THE third day” “of the prophesy”.

But there is NO ‘counting’ or ‘reckoning’ or ‘considering’ or ‘account’ of OTHER kinds-of-days than plain, mentally supposed, counted or added or subtracted ‘days’, _IN LUKE 24:21B,20_.

But you, Dr Walter, PERVERT things.
You refuse to acknowledge Luke / Cleopas presupposed and intended simply four days counted of which Sunday was “the third day since” the first one, on which Jesus was crucified.

Luke 24:21b,20 does NOT speak about THE “third day according to the Scriptures Christ rose again”.

Luke 24:21b,20 speaks and presupposes and relies on reckoning ordinary – that is – COUNTED / RECKONED, ‘days’. Yes! … of which FOUR days that are IMPLICATED and INCLUDED as well as actually RECKONED / THOUGHT OF, “_SINCE_ and AWAY FROM” the first one of them—‘them’, the four days, for WITHIN these FOUR, ordinary counted days, “today” “Sunday”, “is the third day since” the first one of them, Thursday— the first day “FROM” which, Sunday, was “the third day AWAY”.

Luke does not say, “Today, Resurrection-day, is the third day”! What an arrogant LIE!

So counting to or fro, or, ‘exclusively’ or ‘inclusively’, the ‘days’ which Luke 24:21,20 is about, are “the third day since crucified” or since Crucifixion-day, PLUS the two days in between them.

It will never come out on Resurrection-day which was THE “SABBATH’S-DAY”, BEFORE!

All the while, “the third day” mentioned in Luke 24:21b,20 not for one moment was about THE “three days” or “THE third day on” which “Christ according to the Scriptures rose from the dead again”.

That is your problem, that you illegitimately IDENTIFY “the third day since … crucified” / “the third day away from … (day) crucified” in Luke 24:21b,20, with Resurrection-day “THE third day” “of” (as you put it) “the prophesy”.

Dr Walter avers,
“Luke does not include the crucifixion day in his counting”.

But of course he does! Luke presupposes “the crucifixion day” as ‘event-of-day’, “crucified”, “from” which 'day' and event-of-day, “today (Sunday) is the third day”!

Just listen to yourself, “Luke does not include the crucifixion day … Luke begins his count "away from" the crucifixion day ….”

That is saying – yourself – Luke takes cognisance of / takes account of / takes into consideration / MEANS, the Crucifixion-event’s ‘day’, not 'inclusive', but “away from” or ‘exclusive’.

But the crucifixion-day IS THERE. Though not mentioned as the ‘day’, it is implied as the day COUNTED “FROM”. 'Apo' is a 'Preposition' of reference; it virtually relates as a Pronoun does. It relates and refers to or implies and presupposes the day’s EVENT, in fact, that “our leaders delivered Him to be condemned and crucified Him”.

That Luke DOES “include the crucifixion day in his counting”, is undeniable. But you, Dr Walter, you do deny it. A toddler would not; even though he would not know it his innocence would not allow him.

Therefore, Dr Walter, that you conclude, “It …”, Luke’s “today” (Sunday), “… is not the FOURTH day inclusive of the crucifixion day…” is ABSOLUTE NONSENSE as it is ABSOLUTE DISHONESTY. “BECAUSE Luke does NOT INCLUDE the crucifixion day but starts his counting "AWAY FROM" outside the boundary of the crucifixion day and that is why SUNDAY - the first day of the week is "TODAY" and "TODAY IS THE THIRD DAY" since/away from the exterior closure of the crucifixion day.”

You, Dr Walter, has said it; YOU, PROVED “It …”, Luke’s “today” (Sunday), IS, “the FOURTH day inclusive of the crucifixion day.”

Not I or no toddler could have done it better.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Do you remember the "ek" versus "apo" picture?????? Your position, your false theory that must include the crucifixion day would call for "ek" not "apo." Ek necessary includes that day if used, but "apo" excludes it as it "apo" starts from the EXETERIOR while ek starts from the INTERIOR. Luke uses "apo" not "ek" - your wrong - case closed.

GE:

Yes! “Could not be more simpler!”
Again you yourself have made it so simple and clear.
But misunderstanding and lack of understanding could not be simpler.
Because Dr Walter ‘remembers’, but ‘remembers’, wrong.
I remember Dana and Mantey’s ‘circle’, yes. You do not remember it, Dr Walter; anyway, you do not remember it correctly.
It must have been an accident, Dr Walter, this, you’re saying, “prepositional chart using a circle … Eis begins WITHIN the circle to the outside”.
But that is forgivable from the context of the present discussion.
But it is UNFORGIVABLE in the context of another discussion about Matthew 28:1 which you and I engaged in. Remember that discussion?????
What you bring this matter up here, I wouldn’t know.