The disputed ending of Mark 16.

[Ruiz]

Ruiz,

re: " I will provide them again, and in context they are all talking about the Resurrection."

But you haven’t explained how they prove a first day resurrection.

RS,

Simply, in I Co it says that Christ rose on the third day and appeared. It is highly unlikely he rose the day before or the day after, but appeared the same day he rose. Turning to the Gospels, we see affirmation of this fact. Thus, we must negate Christ's Resurrection as occurring after the first day of the week, and because of I CO we must negate a resurrection occurring before that date.

Yet, let's say I am wrong, then how else could you interpret these texts?

 

[rstrats]

freeatlast,

re: "Also scripture never says He rose on Sunday."

No, but Mark 16:9 - as the KJV has it - says that it was on the first (day) of the week.

 

[rstrats]

Ruiz,

re: "...in I Co it says that Christ rose on the third day and appeared."

I’m going to guess "I Co" is referring to 1 Corinthians 15:4 and 5. In looking at it, I don’t see where it says that the Messiah appeared on the day that He rose.

 

[Ruiz]

Ruiz,

re: "...in I Co it says that Christ rose on the third day and appeared."

I’m going to guess "I Co" is referring to 1 Corinthians 15:4 and 5. In looking at it, I don’t see where it says that the Messiah appeared on the day that He rose.

Again, you are resorting to super literalism. Like the Trinity, you do not need to have a super literal statement to see that this is the only option and the likely option.

 

[rstrats]

Ruiz,

re: "...likely option."

But it is still just a guess. Only Mark 16:9 - as it is rendered in the KJV - specifically places the resurrection on the first of the week.

 

[Tom Bryant]

I have not read the whole thread, but is there a point you are trying to make, rstrats?

Or is this just a theological question without any real point? I am not saying that being pure theoloigcally is unimportant - it is vitally important - but is there a point you are trying to make?

 

[rstrats]

Tom Bryant,

re: "I have not read the whole thread, but is there a point you are trying to make, rstrats?"
　
The OP has everything you need to know as to why I started this topic.

 

[Tom Bryant]

Tom Bryant,

re: "I have not read the whole thread, but is there a point you are trying to make, rstrats?"
　
The OP has everything you need to know as to why I started this topic.

So you think we ought to go back to a 7th day observance? Any other areas we ought to go back to observing the OT law?

 

[preacher4truth]

So you think we ought to go back to a 7th day observance? Any other areas we ought to go back to observing the OT law?

As I suggested to him, and in highly doubting him being "Baptist" due to what is being said herein, let's then go back to the 613, not just the 10.

We are clearly taught we aren't able to pick and choose, but that we instead fall under complete obligation to do the entire Law.

It's a yoke of bondage and this judaizing is nothing but a snare.

 

[Tom Bryant]

As I suggested to him, and in highly doubting him being "Baptist" due to what is being said herein, let's then go back to the 613, not just the 10.

We are clearly taught we aren't able to pick and choose, but that we instead fall under complete obligation to do the entire Law.

It's a yoke of bondage and this judaizing is nothing but a snare.

I would agree about picking and choosing which laws you ought to carry over.

I do know there is a 7th day Baptist group. There are probably some areas of their doctrinal statement that I wouldn't agree with, but I didn't find major issues with them except the Sabbath Day issue that seems like their one distinguishing mark.

 

[preacher4truth]

I would agree about picking and choosing which laws you ought to carry over.

I do know there is a 7th day Baptist group. There are probably some areas of their doctrinal statement that I wouldn't agree with, but I didn't find major issues with them except the Sabbath Day issue that seems like their one distinguishing mark.

Thanks for the link.

The problem I see within all of this is if and when this becomes salvation conditional. One way this is brought in is if you don't believe this, then you were never saved, and that if you're truly saved you'll eventually observe this.

I'm also aware that at times there is a front saying that "Jesus is the only way" yet on the inside, those who are not observing are talked about as not truly being saved.

Then there is the further trouble with this, Sermons, teachings all become central and thematic to Sabbath observance.

 

[rstrats]

Tom Bryant,

re: "So you think we ought to go back to a 7th day observance?"

I don’t see what I said in the OP that would cause you to ask that question. I wonder if you might explain?

 

[Tom Bryant]

Tom Bryant,

re: "So you think we ought to go back to a 7th day observance?"

I don’t see what I said in the OP that would cause you to ask that question. I wonder if you might explain?

I don't know... maybe it was something you said in the OP. But maybe I read your words wrong. I have been mistaken before and I might even be mistaken sometime in the future.

I made the mistake of sticking my nose into the discussion by pointing out that actually there is a statement in verse 9, as the KJV and similar versions have it, that is used for a doctrinal teaching that is to be found nowhere else in Scripture. As the KJV translates it, it is the only place that puts the resurrection on the first day of the week. I then suggested that whenever the discussion of seventh day observance versus first day observance comes up, first day proponents usually use the idea of a first day resurrection to justify the change, and when questioned about the day of resurrection, frequently quote Mark 16:9. The poster came back with: "Quote a published author who has done that." - I have not yet been able to come up with one. Does anyone here know of one?

 

[rstrats]

Tom Bryant,

re: "I don't know...maybe I read your words wrong.

That would certainly seem to be the case.

 

[Tom Bryant]

Tom Bryant,

re: "I don't know...maybe I read your words wrong.

That would certainly seem to be the case.

Actually I was being sarcastic. You brought up the issue of saventh day observance. I just read them. You told me to read the OP, I did. It was still unclear what you meant, so I asked.

So what then is your reason for taking all the time and effort in this?

 

[rstrats]

Tom Bryant,

re: "So what then is your reason for taking all the time and effort in this?"

To find an author and a quote with which to get back to the poster on the other board.

 

[matt wade]

Tom Bryant,

re: "So what then is your reason for taking all the time and effort in this?"

To find an author and a quote with which to get back to the poster on the other board.

So basically you came here to have other people do your research so you can win an argument?

 

[preacher4truth]

I gave you authors.

I believe your intent is not for authors, but another agenda.

So, I have sincere doubts your objective is what you say it is.

Surely by now you could have found an author on your own. It's not what you're after.

Please provide the link to the forum/site where this alleged argument can be viewed that way we can see both your arguments, and the others.

 

[rstrats]

matt wade,

re: "So basically you came here to have other people do your research..."

That would be incorrect. I asked if anyone KNOWS of an author. I’m not asking anyone to do any research.

BTW, I see that you have made over 3,500 posts. I find it hard to believe that you haven’t asked for any information in at least one of them.

 

[matt wade]

That would be incorrect. I asked if anyone KNOWS of an author. I’m not asking anyone to do any research.

BTW, I see that you have made over 3,500 posts. I find it hard to believe that you haven’t asked for any information in at least one of them.

I certainly haven't started a thread asking for others to provide me with the necessary information to win an argument on another forum. If you can't manage to provide a solid argument for your side on the other forum, maybe you should refrain from debating over there?