<<<How nonsensical can it get?>>>

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Gehard is a sabbatarian.
Sabbatarians usually try to validate their sabbath beliefs by claiming that Jesus resurrected on a Saturday and not Sunday.
They do this by the most dishonest and retarded harmonization attempt of the resurrection accounts on the 4 gospels.

Re:
<<<the most dishonest and retarded harmonization attempt of the resurrection accounts on the 4 gospels.>>>

Read this <<<most dishonest and retarded harmonization attempt>>> FROM THE 4 GOSPELS, each and every word and none other than each and every word FROM THE 4 GOSPELS . . . http://www.baptistboard.com/showthre...=1#post2218866

 

[vooks]

Am still waiting for a brief paragraph of the visit to the tomb son

Keep your Madiba rants to yourself

 

[vooks]

I am jealous of the truth and very thankful for the very few of <Sabbatarians> who pride themselves of Jesus Christ who rose from the dead : "in the end and fullness of the Sabbath's-PURPOSE and TIME" <to validate their Sabbath beliefs>. Sola gratia; sola fidei; sola Scriptura : solus Christus for every speck of my—and our, faith in the Faith of Christ.

You just wish we would thaw our brains and believed in your trash.
You are incapable of holding a sober debate. Are you a drunk?

Get us a brief paragraph of the visits to the tomb. No verses, nothing just the visits. Questions will be aksd later

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

John 20:1-3 (KJV)
The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre. 2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him

On this verse, Gehard has insisted that Mary Magdalene visited the tomb FIRST and ALONE, and upon finding the stone rolled, she quickly concluded that Jesus' body must have been moved from the tomb, never bothers to confirm her assumptions by peeping in, and she runs and reports her missing body assumptions to Peter and John. These two run to the tomb, find the stone rolled and they get in and believe for themselves.

This verse <insists> that Mary Magdalene "comes to" the tomb, ALONE.
The time given of her "coming to the tomb", IMPLIES it had to be the FIRST “SIGHT / SEEING of the STONE-ROLLED-AWAY from the tomb". That is what this texts states—<insists>— “she sees the ROLLED-AWAY-STONE”. That was Mary’s ONLY and first observation—her sight from where she was “coming”-“comes”. Not at the grave <stooping> or <peeping> in ---those are Vooks’ corruptions.

SEEING the “stone-rolled-away FROM the tomb, means Mary saw the stone FAR “AWAY” from the tomb as far as the angel of the Lord was able to fling the thing away as were it a pebble. Mary therefore SAW, far away from the tomb, the stone rolled or cast or flung AWAY.

Vooks the liar now thinks I am going to put my trust in HIS, lying <report> and submit myself to his perversions of what went on in Mary’s mind AFTER she had run back and was talking with Peter and John, as if she was talking to others she hallucinated were with her <stooping> and <peeping> into the tomb, and in Vooks’ own emphatic words elsewhere, “ENTERED IN” with into the sepulchre?

Who here is the person hallucinating blaming others –me—they are <<hallucinating>>?!

Mary did NOT <<<upon finding the stone rolled away … quickly conclude… that Jesus' body must have been moved from the tomb>>>. She said that as she concluded that when she got back to Peter and John, in Vooks’ estimation at least one mile’s sprint after!

Exactly Vooks, Mary <<<… never bothers to confirm her assumptions by peeping in>>>, how can she if she’s one mile away from the tomb.

And what sense is there in <<report(ing) … her missing body assumptions to Peter and John>>. Any sane person <reports> real findings; not <<missing>> things and those things, mere <assumptions>.

Mary in fact reported her real findings, as John recorded them “(I saw with mine own eyes) THE STONE ROLLED AWAY FROM the tomb.”

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Am still waiting for a brief paragraph of the visit to the tomb son

Keep your Madiba rants to yourself

I am now beginning to form an idea of who this 'Vooks' person really is. One thing is for sure, he is an ex South African (as anybody can see) -- a 'whitie' and fellow Boertjie like meself ... and we know one another and last have met in a bushveld lodge and conference facility. I may be wrong, but am prepared to bet on it. So you have also aged, brother, I see, like meself. Eish!

PS
A second thing of course has long since been clear, that he is an ex-Adventist.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

You just wish we would thaw our brains and believed in your trash.
You are incapable of holding a sober debate. Are you a drunk?

Get us a brief paragraph of the visits to the tomb. No verses, nothing just the visits. Questions will be aksd later

Principles A and B

 

[vooks]

This verse <insists> that Mary Magdalene "comes to" the tomb, ALONE.
The time given of her "coming to the tomb", IMPLIES it had to be the FIRST “SIGHT / SEEING of the STONE-ROLLED-AWAY from the tomb". That is what this texts states—<insists>— “she sees the ROLLED-AWAY-STONE”. That was Mary’s ONLY and first observation—her sight from where she was “coming”-“comes”. Not at the grave <stooping> or <peeping> in ---those are Vooks’ corruptions.

SEEING the “stone-rolled-away FROM the tomb, means Mary saw the stone FAR “AWAY” from the tomb as far as the angel of the Lord was able to fling the thing away as were it a pebble. Mary therefore SAW, far away from the tomb, the stone rolled or cast or flung AWAY.

Vooks the liar now thinks I am going to put my trust in HIS, lying <report> and submit myself to his perversions of what went on in Mary’s mind AFTER she had run back and was talking with Peter and John, as if she was talking to others she hallucinated were with her <stooping> and <peeping> into the tomb, and in Vooks’ own emphatic words elsewhere, “ENTERED IN” with into the sepulchre?

Who here is the person hallucinating blaming others –me—they are <<hallucinating>>?!

Mary did NOT <<<upon finding the stone rolled away … quickly conclude… that Jesus' body must have been moved from the tomb>>>. She said that as she concluded that when she got back to Peter and John, in Vooks’ estimation at least one mile’s sprint after!

Exactly Vooks, Mary <<<… never bothers to confirm her assumptions by peeping in>>>, how can she if she’s one mile away from the tomb.

And what sense is there in <<report(ing) … her missing body assumptions to Peter and John>>. Any sane person <reports> real findings; not <<missing>> things and those things, mere <assumptions>.

Mary in fact reported her real findings, as John recorded them “(I saw with mine own eyes) THE STONE ROLLED AWAY FROM the tomb.”

You are extremely silly or senile or both
How did she see a stone rolled off the mouth of the borrowed tomb in the dark from a mile away?

So Mary in total darkness finds not the tomb open but a stone which she positively identified as the one that had been used to seal the tomb, lying a mile from the tomb??

Matthew 28:2-6 (KJV)
for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. 3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: 4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. 5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. 6.He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay

HARD FACTS;
1. The angel ROLLED not flunged the stone
2. The angel sat on the stone
3. The angel spoke to the women
4. 'He is not HERE...'
These 4 obviously mean the stone was right NEXT to the tomb not miles away, else how could he sitting on the stone miles away speak to the women? And 'here' obviously means where they expected to find the body; the tomb not a mile away

Admin should ban willful senility on this forum. It's disgusting. But worse than that is blasphemy by this Boer who has no regard for scriptures or the Truth

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Am still waiting for a brief paragraph of the visit to the tomb son

Keep your Madiba rants to yourself

Principles A and B

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

You are extremely silly or senile or both
How did she see a stone rolled off the mouth of the borrowed tomb in the dark from a mile away?

So Mary in total darkness finds not the tomb open but a stone which she positively identified as the one that had been used to seal the tomb, lying a mile from the tomb??

Admin should ban willful senility on this forum. It's disgusting. But worse than that is blasphemy by this Boer

So Mary not only “sees the stone rolled off the mouth of the tomb”, she <<in the dark … peeps in>> and <<in total darkness … finds>> : <<the tomb empty>>!

Everything I can do, you can do better chum! What a song!!

 

[vooks]

So Mary not only “sees the stone rolled off the mouth of the tomb”, she <<in the dark … peeps in>> and <<in total darkness … finds>> : <<the tomb empty>>!

Everything I can do, you can do better chum! What a song!!

Incorrigibly daft.
Which manuscript have the stone flunged as a pebble a mile away?
They left their homes for the tomb while it was yet dark, by the time they arrived at the tomb, light had broken. Simple

 

[Sapper Woody]

I'm beginning to see the picture, here. Gerhard, I'll be honest, I'm trying to make out your argument, but your posts are difficult to read.



For clarity, do you think you could acquiesce to Vooks' request of posting a timeline of visits you believe happened?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

I'm beginning to see the picture, here. Gerhard, I'll be honest, I'm trying to make out your argument, but your posts are difficult to read.

For clarity, do you think you could acquiesce to Vooks' request of posting a timeline of visits you believe happened?

Nothing can give me greater pleasure, Sapper Woody than to place it again. Please refer http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=2229960&posted=1#post2229960
Allow me, Ten Visits at the tomb, http://www.baptistboard.com/showthre...=1#post2218866

Condensed:

Visits at the tomb “on the First Day”

1) “Mary sees the stone removed”, “while being early darkness still”, dusk. Then Peter and John go to the tomb to see what Mary has told them. (Jn20:1-10)

2) “Earliest morning- darkness”, just after midnight, “the two women” (variant – the two Marys), “and certain others with them”, for the first time, “came to the sepulchre, bringing the spices they had prepared”. (Lk24:1) “They returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things to the eleven and to all the rest.” (“Then Peter stood up and ran to the tomb; and bending low over, he saw the linen clothes. He went back, wandering by himself about that what had happened.” (Lk24:9-12) Cf. John's account in 20:1-10. I can't say Luke talks of another visit by Peter, but it seems true because Luke doesn't mention John.)

3) These women to make sure, a second time came to the tomb “very early before sunrise”. (Mk16:2)

4) Mary from after the others had fled in fear (Mk16:8) “had had stood without at the grave” (Jn20:11). At the time a gardener should begin work, about sunrise, Jesus “early … first appeared to Mary”. (Mk16:9)

5) Soon after – after they a third time have visited the tomb and “the angel explained” to them what had happened during the Resurrection – Jesus appears to the other women “as they went to tell his disciples”. (Mt28:5, 9)

Mary went to the tomb, three times, Jn20:1, Lk24:1, Mk16:2, and Mk16:9 when she “had remained standing behind” until, Jn20:11, Jesus appeared to her, “first”, Mk16:9, and alone, “at the grave”, Jn20:16.
The other women also went to the tomb, three times, Lk24:1, Mk16:2, and Mt28:5 when “the angel explained” to them what had happened during the Resurrection, and Jesus, as “they went to tell his disciples”, appeared to them. (Mt28:5, 9)
The answer to the ‘Easter enigma’ (John Wenham) is simple: Each Gospel contributed to the whole with one of several sources; each added a personal part that, put together, will bring the whole story of the Resurrection into proper perspective.

Tradition – that is, the Sunday-resurrection approach – makes of these 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 just to protect Sunday’s presumed status of being the day of the Resurrection. It became a comedy of tragic proportions when Sunday-protagonists began to defend their presumptuousness through unlawful improvements on the Scriptures.

. . . with a praying heart . . .

What have I just heard announced on my little radio next to me as I wrote, 3.24 p.m. Classic FM, 'Two days and one night', a film ... "a thought-provoking film ...???? Must go see it.

 

[Sapper Woody]

Gerhard, thank you for your response. I am on my phone right now, but plan on referencing the accounts in the gospels with your list once I get home. I look forward to continued discussion.

 

[vooks]

Nothing can give me greater pleasure, Sapper Woody than to place it again. Please refer http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=2229960&posted=1#post2229960
Allow me, Ten Visits at the tomb, http://www.baptistboard.com/showthre...=1#post2218866

Condensed:

Visits at the tomb “on the First Day”

1) “Mary sees the stone removed”, “while being early darkness still”, dusk. Then Peter and John go to the tomb to see what Mary has told them. (Jn20:1-10)

2) “Earliest morning- darkness”, just after midnight, “the two women” (variant – the two Marys), “and certain others with them”, for the first time, “came to the sepulchre, bringing the spices they had prepared”. (Lk24:1) “They returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things to the eleven and to all the rest.” (“Then Peter stood up and ran to the tomb; and bending low over, he saw the linen clothes. He went back, wandering by himself about that what had happened.” (Lk24:9-12) Cf. John's account in 20:1-10. I can't say Luke talks of another visit by Peter, but it seems true because Luke doesn't mention John.)

3) These women to make sure, a second time came to the tomb “very early before sunrise”. (Mk16:2)

4) Mary from after the others had fled in fear (Mk16:8) “had had stood without at the grave” (Jn20:11). At the time a gardener should begin work, about sunrise, Jesus “early … first appeared to Mary”. (Mk16:9)

5) Soon after – after they a third time have visited the tomb and “the angel explained” to them what had happened during the Resurrection – Jesus appears to the other women “as they went to tell his disciples”. (Mt28:5, 9)

Mary went to the tomb, three times, Jn20:1, Lk24:1, Mk16:2, and Mk16:9 when she “had remained standing behind” until, Jn20:11, Jesus appeared to her, “first”, Mk16:9, and alone, “at the grave”, Jn20:16.
The other women also went to the tomb, three times, Lk24:1, Mk16:2, and Mt28:5 when “the angel explained” to them what had happened during the Resurrection, and Jesus, as “they went to tell his disciples”, appeared to them. (Mt28:5, 9)
The answer to the ‘Easter enigma’ (John Wenham) is simple: Each Gospel contributed to the whole with one of several sources; each added a personal part that, put together, will bring the whole story of the Resurrection into proper perspective.

Tradition – that is, the Sunday-resurrection approach – makes of these 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 just to protect Sunday’s presumed status of being the day of the Resurrection. It became a comedy of tragic proportions when Sunday-protagonists began to defend their presumptuousness through unlawful improvements on the Scriptures.

. . . with a praying heart . . .

What have I just heard announced on my little radio next to me as I wrote, 3.24 p.m. Classic FM, 'Two days and one night', a film ... "a thought-provoking film ...???? Must go see it.

This is a classic post. Thank you Gerhard

 

[vooks]

Questions
1. Do you believe Jesus FIRST appeared to Mary Magdalene as per Mark 16:9?

2. Peter's second trip to the tomb alone. It is at the women's report.
Luke 24:8-13 (KJV)
And they remembered his words, 9 And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest. 10 It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles. 11 And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not. 12 Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre

Your 'harmony' claims that Peter made a second errand BEFORE the angels spoke to any woman but it is clearly AFTER. What could possibly prompt Peter to dash to the tomb again? Is it a 'new' report of an empty tomb, something he already knew and had seen for himself? Is it not rather the additional information of the vision from angels and possibly an encounter with the risen Christ recorded in Matthew?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Incorrigibly daft.
Which manuscript have the stone flunged as a pebble a mile away? . . . Simple

'apokulindoh' > 'apokulioh' < 'apo' + 'kulioh' . . . interesting word. In the NT used for three things,

A) the stone door of the grave “rolled away” . . .

1) "rolled away" in action as "explained (by) the angel to the women" in Matthew, “late on the Sabbath”;

2) first “see(n) taken / forced / cast [‘ehrmenon’]
out and away from the tomb” [‘ek tou mnehmeiou’]

3) afterwards by "the women found / confirmed rolled away" in Luke “deepest morning of dark”. But this time the women were more interested in what they might find inside the tomb than the stone outside which Mary must have told them about already;

4) finally “inspected / looked at again [‘anablepsasai’] and seen / concluded [‘theohrousin’] was rolled / cast UPWARDS and away” [‘anakekulistai’] the stone [‘ho lithon’] for it was extremely big.” No neat round little primitive stone-wheel was that massive shapeless ROCK! “WHO will roll away [‘apokulisei’] for us (such a) stone out of and up-hill away from the door of the tomb [ek tehs thuras t.m.’]!? Amazing! Absolutely intriguing! Impossible! NOBODY—NO MAN could do that for our lives not!

B, C) 'kulioh' / ‘kuliomai’ - “rolled”, “to wallow (in the ground)” Mark 9:20 2Pete 2:22. No neat sight, but one can see the disc-shaped rock hitting the ground and like a plate on the floor spin and wobble and stop, spun / rolled half-way into the ‘garden-soil’ “about” / “round-about” [‘kuklo-oh’].

So the angel went and SAT on the rock’s upper part still sticking into the air. A more likely scenario as “suddenly there was a great earthquake” I dare say— “like lightning at the angel’s appearing”, and all “in the twinkling of an eye and The Dead ROSE from the dead incorruptible”.

The angel of the Lord, a great earthquake, and lightning the works and the stone was carefully unsealed, and one hundred guards inch by inch helped the strange gentleman to “roll” the stone downhill into the place Joseph had designed for it to rest in when the grave would be opened for some reason or other.

 

[vooks]

'apokulindoh' > 'apokulioh' < 'apo' + 'kulioh' . . . interesting word. In the NT used for three things,

A) the stone door of the grave “rolled away” . . .

1) "rolled away" in action as "explained (by) the angel to the women" in Matthew, “late on the Sabbath”;

2) first “see(n) taken / forced / cast [‘ehrmenon’]
out and away from the tomb” [‘ek tou mnehmeiou’]

3) afterwards by "the women found / confirmed rolled away" in Luke “deepest morning of dark”. But this time the women were more interested in what they might find inside the tomb than the stone outside which Mary must have told them about already;

4) finally “inspected / looked at again [‘anablepsasai’] and seen / concluded [‘theohrousin’] was rolled / cast UPWARDS and away” [‘anakekulistai’] the stone [‘ho lithon’] for it was extremely big.” No neat round little primitive stone-wheel was that massive shapeless ROCK! “WHO will roll away [‘apokulisei’] for us (such a) stone out of and up-hill away from the door of the tomb [ek tehs thuras t.m.’]!? Amazing! Absolutely intriguing! Impossible! NOBODY—NO MAN could do that for our lives not!

B, C) 'kulioh' / ‘kuliomai’ - “rolled”, “to wallow (in the ground)” Mark 9:20 2Pete 2:22. No neat sight, but one can see the disc-shaped rock hitting the ground and like a plate on the floor spin and wobble and stop, spun / rolled half-way into the ‘garden-soil’ “about” / “round-about” [‘kuklo-oh’].

So the angel went and SAT on the rock’s upper part still sticking into the air. A more likely scenario as “suddenly there was a great earthquake” I dare say— “like lightning at the angel’s appearing”, and all “in the twinkling of an eye and The Dead ROSE from the dead incorruptible”.

The angel of the Lord, a great earthquake, and lightning the works and the stone was carefully unsealed, and one hundred guards inch by inch helped the strange gentleman to “roll” the stone downhill into the place Joseph had designed for it to rest in when the grave would be opened for some reason or other.

idiotic glib
Your Greek is horrendous but not as sick as your logic. Be wise, quit flossing your illiteracy and stick to the Truth
Matthew 28:2-6 (KJV)
rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. 3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: 4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. 5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. 6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay

Am not disputing whether he dragged, kicked or commanded to stone to move. Am saying the stone was not a mile away from the tomb for these reasons;
1. He rolled it
2. He sat on it
3. He spoke to the women
4.In #1 to #3 he is quite near the tomb enough to say, 'he is not HERE'. 'Here' is where the angel was. 'Here' is where the body OUGHT to have been. 'Here' is at the tomb not a mile away.

Withdraw that statement and apologize and repent for reading your fantasies into the Holy Scriptures.

Or explain what sane man believes the angel kicks a stone a mile away, flies/runs and sits on it, then returns to the tomb running/flying and addresses the women.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Questions
1. Do you believe Jesus FIRST appeared to Mary Magdalene as per Mark 16:9?

Yes.

And Mark 16:9 is as per John 20:11-17.

These are the only two passages with exactly the same persons, place, time of day ---with the same EVENT, the event of Jesus' first appearance, his appearance to Mary Magdalene early on the First Day of the week; to Mary first of anybody and therefore Jesus' first appearance to her, ALONE-- He alone and she alone-- He appearing the first time and Mary seeing Him appearing the first time ---while two angels sat inside the tomb and could see nothing (unless angels can see round corners) where Jesus and Mary were because, remember, John tells us Mary TURNED towards Jesus when she first saw Him, He, AWAY FROM the tomb coming towards her and the tomb where she had had stood after at the tomb after the other women had fled from the tomb and didn't return to or told anybody anything.

 

[vooks]

Yes.

Good. Thank you Gerhard. I like such simple answers
Answer question 2

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Peter's second trip to the tomb alone. It is at the women's report.
Luke 24:8-13 (KJV)
And they remembered his words, 9 And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest. 10 It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles. 11 And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not. 12 Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre

Your 'harmony' claims that Peter made a second errand BEFORE the angels spoke to any woman but it is clearly AFTER. What could possibly prompt Peter to dash to the tomb again? Is it a 'new' report of an empty tomb, something he already knew and had seen for himself? Is it not rather the additional information of the vision from angels and possibly an encounter with the risen Christ recorded in Matthew?

Re:
<<<Peter's second trip to the tomb alone>>>

Peter's second trip was his only trip to the tomb alone. Peter’s first trip to the tomb was he and John together.

Peter and John were the first to enter the tomb and find it empty. That was after Mary had told them that she had seen the stone was cast away from the tomb. John 20:1-10.

Peter went to the tomb a second time, alone.
He went after and because all the women had “astonished” him with what the TWO ANGELS had told them that Jesus had raised. Compare that with the initial information of an opened tomb which Mary singlehandedly had given him.
One can understand that Peter didn’t hurry this time. He went slowly, all the way puzzled, thinking. But he STILL could not understand or believe. I think either the women could not. Anyway they were the women who brought Peter and the other men the new news about the angels’ story that He had raised from the dead as He had told his disciples before his death.

So you are quite right, Peter made his second errand AFTER the angels had spoken to the woman (in Luke 24:3 further).

I must go check on my mistake. I can’t say more before I have checked. So for now, I’m going to have a look . . .