Sunday vs Saturday Resurrection?

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

early morning burial theories

Not mine.

 

[vooks]

Paul “knew” nothing than “the power of His Resurrection”. He preached nothing less . . . wherever he went or stayed or preached. I need not tell you or any believer that. Jesus’ Resurrection was the subject of Paul’s EVERY SERMON. And the sermon of his sermons, was 1Corinthians 15! Jesus Christ the Dead Raised from the dead is the theme and “Substance” and “Essence” of the “solid food” Paul “ministered” to the “Body of Christ’s Own of Sabbaths’ Feast eating and drinking” the Word of Paul’s preaching and proclamation. EVERY Sabbath of his entire ministry Paul “ministered Nourishment”—“Christ given as Head to the Church”—the Church “holding to the Head while Nourishment (Substance : Christ Resurrected from the dead) being ministered, growing with the growth of God.”


If you cannot believe 1 Corinthians 15 was Paul’s choicest of Sabbaths’ sermons, it is to your own loss. I believe it was.


Then I have not repeated the implications which I stated above to the effect 1Corinthians 15 was a sermon which Paul preached on the Sabbath.

Listen Gerhard,
We don't believe things simply because you wish us to, we believe what is written, what Holy Spirit EXPRESSLY sayeth,not what Boers hallucinate.

You have ZERO proof that chapter 15 is a sermon on itself let alone that it was delivered on sabbath, and both of which are irrelevant to the subject; Charity was to be collected on Sunday. Why is this seeing they are regularly meeting on Saturdays?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

First,
'These things' are clear,there is no mention of his burial

Secondly,
His burial happened on the SAME day he died

Now, go and rehash your hare/boer-brained early morning burial theories we tear them to shreds

Worth no reply except to point out "~His burial happened on the SAME day he died~" cannot be quoted or proven from Scripture and is against Scripture.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Listen Gerhard,
We don't believe things simply because you wish us to, we believe what is written, what Holy Spirit EXPRESSLY sayeth,not what Boers hallucinate.

You have ZERO proof that chapter 15 is a sermon on itself let alone that it was delivered on sabbath, and both of which are irrelevant to the subject; Charity was to be collected on Sunday. Why is this seeing they are regularly meeting on Saturdays?

Thanks.

 

[vooks]

Worth no reply except to point out "~His burial happened on the SAME day he died~" cannot be quoted or proven from Scripture and is against Scripture.

Jesus died on Friday and was buried on the same day. Thus saith Holy Spirit.

Once again, THIRD day is the day before yesterday or the day after tomorrow.

Jesus rose again the THIRD day

 

[vooks]

Thanks.

Welcome and start using your brain

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

You are not a bright boer by any stretch of imagination.
Look at your horrible inconsistency;

First, you argue that since Sunday is the THIRD day, Saturday is the Second day, Friday is the First day, and Thursday The day. Next you argue that by 'these things' refers to Friday events(burial according to the Boer apocryphal gospel). This would necessarily make it The day, Saturday First and Sunday Second! But Sunday is the THIRD day since 'these things'

Sunday can't be the THIRD day with respect to events transpiring on two different and consecutive days simultaneously.

So, is Sunday the THIRD day from the 'Thursday crucifixion or 'Friday burial'?

This, "~Sunday is the THIRD day, Saturday is the Second day, Friday is the First day~", is not 'my' ~argu(ment)~; it is Vooks'.

This, "~Next you argue that by 'these things' refers to Friday events(burial according to the Boer apocryphal gospel)~", is simply the opposite of what I ~argue~; it is what Vooks, corrupted what I ~argue~ into his own corruption.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Jesus died on Friday and was buried on the same day. Thus saith Holy Spirit.

Thus saith Vooks!

 

[vooks]

This, "~Sunday is the THIRD day, Saturday is the Second day, Friday is the First day~", is not 'my' ~argu(ment)~; it is Vooks'.

This, "~Next you argue that by 'these things' refers to Friday events(burial according to the Boer apocryphal gospel)~", is simply the opposite of what I ~argue~; it is what Vooks, corrupted what I ~argue~ into his own corruption.

Gerhard, Sunday can't be the THIRD day since events spanning two days because if it is THIRD day with respect to the earlier of the two days, it is the SECOND with regard to the other. Stop blaspheming the Holy Spirit.

The burial of Jesus was private and how would it have caused the disciples to be downcast?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

I understand that it is an "arrangement" in regards for the collection of the saints, but it is an order to take a portion from the bounty collected for the church and take that portion aside for the ministry to the saints to "avoid" having a special collection for the saints when they come.

Have I said differently?

I have not.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

That way the church has it ready beforehand for Paul and any other minister in the field because they have been regularly taking a portion from the bounty collected for the saints that minister. The order is to avoid having a special collection when Paul or any ministering saint comes.

Have I said differently except that Paul said nothing about "~_regularly_ taking a portion from the bounty~" or rather "putting aside according to one's earning". It was a special "arrangement made" due to the famine at that time in Judea-- nothing "~regular~" about it, or "about the First Day".

 

[vooks]

Thus saith Vooks!

Joseph went to Pilate that SAME day of Preparation.
The women did what they could on the SAME day.
They rested the next day it being sabbath while the Priest requested for a watch over the sepulcher
They went to the tomb the next day being Sunday to finish what they started

Some deranged failed theologian would have you believe that Joseph went to Pilate the next day, requested and was given the body which he buried the same day, that the priests went to Pilate the day after this and requested for a guard.

Perish scatterbrains

 

[vooks]

Have I said differently except that Paul said nothing about "~_regularly_ taking a portion from the bounty~" or rather "putting aside according to one's earning". It was a special "arrangement made" due to the famine at that time in Judea-- nothing "~regular~" about it, or "about the First Day".

Point remains,
It was to be done EVERY Sunday to save Paul time. Why would a Sunday collection save him time while there were regular Saturday meetings that could do the job just as fine?

 

[Hark]

Re:

“~Paul was instructing the churches to set aside a portion from the bounty collected at church services as a collection for the saints for their ministry.~”

Paul was not “~instructing the churches~”; he made an announcement and advised the individual church attendees.

That instruction was to be carried out by the individual in church. That person is to set aside a portion from that portion he is giving to the church when the church is doing for the collection for the saints that minister.

He addressed them in the Singular on the day that Paul had preached 1Corinthians 15 on, viz. on the Sabbath Day before “the First Day of the week”—when Paul had made his announcement “concerning or about the First Day of the week”.

You want to drive to the letter about the words "instructions, arrangement, and order", but you cannot prove that Paul was giving a sermon in chapter 15 whereas chapter 16 is testifying that this is an epistle written to the believers at Corinth, thus Paul is not there.

The Book of Acts is an account of the history of the early church penned by Luke. It is not an epistle. In Acts, Luke recorded that they made and sent epistles to be read by believers elsewhere.

Paul's letters are epistles sent to churches to be read in churches.

So it was “on the First Day of the week” that they, “each one when privately at home”, “~were to set aside~”—viz., “work out” and “save” from their “private earnings”—, not “~after church service~” but “WHEN BY YOURSELF ON YOUR OWN AT HOME”.

I don't believe that when it is an epistle to be read in the church at Corinth. Every church member that has come to church, planning to give what he wants to give to the church, has to decide from that portion whether or not to set aside a small portion for the ministering saints from that portion he is giving to the church.

And as a point of interest, Paul did not say all or future or past or current First Days, of the week. He announced, “About [tomorrow then] the First Day [—Singular] of the week (the working week of each one), Let everyone then work out what he will be able to give when I come.”

The order is given to every church, including the churches at Galatia, for the first day of the week for that is when the church is to do this collecting for the saints so that there be no special collecting apart from the usual collecting for the church.

It is at the time of the collecting for the church which was the first day of every week, was when each giver was to decide from that portion that he is giving to the church to give to the ministering saints.

Paul did not say anything about him preaching on the sabbath either in 1 Corinthians 15th chapter.

May I ask if you are reading this into the verses because you want to believe we are to keep the sabbath day or are you pushing it because your teachers are pushing this on you to accept no matter what the scripture actually says?

 

[Hark]

Have I said differently except that Paul said nothing about "~_regularly_ taking a portion from the bounty~" or rather "putting aside according to one's earning". It was a special "arrangement made" due to the famine at that time in Judea-- nothing "~regular~" about it, or "about the First Day".

Again, you strain at the gnat about my use and applying "regularly" in regards to how they were to give as instructed to all the churches of the saints, but you cannot point one verse in 1 Corinthians 15 that even mentions Paul preaching on the sabbath. All you did was input a word into the beginning of the next chapter to make that fit for your sabbath point of contention.

Now I am asking you: is someone or the school/college you are attending is teaching you this or are you just wanting this to be true, because you want to believe you are supposed to keep the sabbath day?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

....
If you are thinking that Paul is reading this epistle himself originally instead of writing it, that is not a valid.
....

That does not read as if Paul was there at Corinth giving this epistle verbally.

You have to ask yourself if you are wanting those inserted words to mean that or not, or whether this thinking is due to whatever doctrinal teaching you are under for wherever you are getting your schooling at, because that cannot be the message Paul is giving in the epistle.

Chapter 15 contains Paul's usual and obviously first choice sermon which he naturally would have included in his Letter. Why not?!

There are MANY such examples like sermons of the apostles and confessions of the Church in the Letters and other documents of the New Testament. It is common knowledge and a fact recognised and admitted and exploited, by the best of New Testament scholars, illustrated in countless works of research.

And I do not in this discussion mean or refer to the whole, "~epistle~". It is Paul's Resurrection 'arguments' if you like in chapter 15, which is here the 'sermon' at the end of which he referred to the following day, "Now with regards to the First Day of the week . . . .".

 

[Hark]

Chapter 15 contains Paul's usual and obviously first choice sermon which he naturally would have included in his Letter. Why not?!

There are MANY such examples like sermons of the apostles and confessions of the Church in the Letters and other documents of the New Testament. It is common knowledge and a fact recognised and admitted and exploited, by the best of New Testament scholars, illustrated in countless works of research.

And I do not in this discussion mean or refer to the whole, "~epistle~". It is Paul's Resurrection 'arguments' if you like in chapter 15, which is here the 'sermon' at the end of which he referred to the following day, "Now with regards to the First Day of the week . . . .".

Are you paraphrasing that verse or referring to an actual Bible version?

Getting back to your point, if you accept that he was giving a sermon in the 15th chapter, what makes you think he is not giving another topic in the 16th chapter?

Granted the topic before was about Christ on what the church should be believing in that epistle, but Paul can still be seen as giving another topic about what the church should be doing in that epistle.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Again, you strain at the gnat about my use and applying "regularly" in regards to how they were to give as instructed to all the churches of the saints, but you cannot point one verse in 1 Corinthians 15 that even mentions Paul preaching on the sabbath. All you did was input a word into the beginning of the next chapter to make that fit for your sabbath point of contention.


Now I am asking you: is someone or the school/college you are attending is teaching you this or are you just wanting this to be true, because you want to believe you are supposed to keep the sabbath day?

I have not claimed Paul “~mentions preaching on the sabbath~”. I have claimed and do claim still, the fact Paul after he had preached his sermon (recorded in chapter 15), referred to, the First Day. Paul did not command the First Day or “~mentioned~” that, he preached on the First Day, or “~ordered~” or “~instructed~” that, the Church on the First Day make or practice or institutionalise “collections on the First Day”. THESE, are “~inserted words~”, ~applied~ as though “~the church has it ready beforehand for Paul and any other minister in the field because they have been regularly taking a portion from the bounty collected for the saints that minister.~” Especially _your_ inserted word, “~regularly~”!

PS
I am ~schooled~ in the Reformed Protestant Faith, and Calvinist tradition. And I can tell you, Calvin interpreted 1Corinthians 16:2 as referring to the Sabbath, the Sabbath the apostles were "accustomed with". So I differ here with Calvin as in several other respects, yet am with him in essence, that 1Corinthians 16:2 does not mean Christians met for worship on the First Day of the week in order to make collections as part of their worship. Calvin denounced the very idea; and so do I, with pride.

 

[Hark]

I have not claimed Paul “~mentions preaching on the sabbath~”. I have claimed and do claim still, the fact Paul after he had preached his sermon (recorded in chapter 15), referred to, the First Day. Paul did not command the First Day or “~mentioned~” that, he preached on the First Day, or “~ordered~” or “~instructed~” that, the Church on the First Day make or practice or institutionalise “collections on the First Day”. THESE, are “~inserted words~”, ~applied~ as though “~the church has it ready beforehand for Paul and any other minister in the field because they have been regularly taking a portion from the bounty collected for the saints that minister.~” Especially _your_ inserted word, “~regularly~”!

PS
I am ~schooled~ in the Reformed Protestant Faith, and Calvinist tradition. And I can tell you, Calvin interpreted 1Corinthians 16:2 as referring to the Sabbath, the Sabbath the apostles were "accustomed with". So I differ here with Calvin as in several other respects, yet am with him in essence, that 1Corinthians 16:2 does not mean Christians met for worship on the First Day of the week in order to make collections as part of their worship. Calvin denounced the very idea; and so do I, with pride.

I am neither Arminian nor Calvinist; just a christian by His grace & by His help in being His disciple and not a disciple of another FYI

Feel free to provide a link citing Calvin believing so. Thank you.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Are you paraphrasing that verse or referring to an actual Bible version?


Getting back to your point, if you accept that he was giving a sermon in the 15th chapter, what makes you think he is not giving another topic in the 16th chapter?


Granted the topic before was about Christ on what the church should be believing in that epistle, but Paul can still be seen as giving another topic about what the church should be doing in that epistle.

Re:

“~Are you paraphrasing that verse or referring to an actual Bible version?~”


The last words in Paul’s sermon :

1Corinthians 16:56 the last words belonging to the sermon as such;

Verses 57 and 58, Paul’s benediction prayer after his sermon;

16:1, Paul calling the attention of the congregation to his announcement he intended to make, “Now concerning the collection . . .”—‘peri de tehs logeias …’;

16:2, Paul’s actual announcement “Concerning / About the First Day of the week …”, or, “on the First Day each one …” without ado, ‘kata mian sabbatou hekastos …’.


It is no ~version~; it is the real.