Sunday vs Saturday Resurrection?

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

His

Friday. It takes far less than common sense to figure it out. And it takes exceptional obtuseness to miss it


THIRD day is the day before yesterday or the day after tomorrow.


His FIRST day in death was the very day he died.

Your FIRST day in school was the very day you went to school,


-President Obama is serving his SECOND not his FIRST term


-The FIRST day of creation was the VERY day God commenced creation. Can you that it is the FIRST day SINCE creation? That's not English



it is self-evident that Saturday resurrection hinges on idiotic semantics

Vooks, you have at last verbalised your logic needed for your viewpoint. You must be given credit for at last having very clearly defined and explained through what only your understand of the 'three days issue', is possible. You wrote, "~it is self-evident that Saturday resurrection hinges on idiotic semantics~". "~Semantics~"! That's it!


No Vooks; it is not on semantics that your definition and explanation of the 'three days issue' and a Sunday resurrection hinges. It hinges on VOOKS' ~semantics~.


VOOKS' Semantics illustrated ...


“~THIRD day is the day before yesterday or the day after tomorrow.

His FIRST day in death was the very day he died.

Your FIRST day in school was the very day you went to school,

-President Obama is serving his SECOND not his FIRST term

-The FIRST day of creation was the VERY day God commenced creation. Can you that it is the FIRST day SINCE creation? That's not English~”


Yes! In VOOKS’ semantics, exactly!


But in English—“~common sense~” English, it looks a little bit—one word different—, as follows . . .

THIRD day is the day before yesterday or the day after tomorrow.

But “third day SINCE” the day before yesterday is “today”!

And SINCE yesterday today is the first day;

and SINCE the day after tomorrow will be 3 days later : tomorrow (1 day) and the day after tomorrow (2 days), and the third, from or since or on which it will be the first day later of an undetermined period of days after.


It only takes VOOKS’ common sense English that has the distinguishing characteristic that when it doesn’t suit it, it hasn’t got in its vocabulary the word or concept of “SINCE”.


Therefore it is true Jesus’ “~FIRST day in death was the very day he died.~”


So “according to the Scriptures” Jesus was ~serving~, NOT his first day in death, but his SECOND day “SINCE evening had come The Preparation which is the Fore-Sabbath” until “mid-afternoon That Same Day The Preparation the Sabbath nearing”.


So, the FIRST day of creation was the VERY day God commenced creation. Can you see that it is the FIRST day SINCE creation? That's not the creation story! Can you see that the creation story in Genesis, has the word “~SINCE~” in it? Can you see the VOOKS’ common sense here? Who cannot help but see the VOOKS’ common sense in all of this? It only takes VOOKS’ common sense semantics that has the distinguishing characteristic that when it suits it, it inserts into its vocabulary the word or concept of “SINCE”.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

The Greek word "kata" defers from the sabbath day.

That's what I said!

 

[Hark]

That's what I said!

But you were insinuating that in relation to Paul giving a sermon on a sabbath when it just doesn't follow that at all in that epistle as it is given.

The order was given on how to collect for the saints to avoid a special collection for Paul or any visiting ministering saint which means out of the time when the church does her usual collecting ( which was the first day of the week ) was when each individual in that assembly at the time he is giving what he wants to give to the church, out of that portion he is giving, he was to decide to give or not and if he does, it was to be a small portion out of what he was giving to the church.

This was for all churches to follow as an ordinance because the churches in Galatia is a region; Galatia is not a city as opposed to what Corinth is.

It is an oder being given as he was not in Corinth yet, but heading there as the epistle said. He was not giving a sermon on the sabbath when he was writing that epistle to be read at Corinth for what they are to do.

To insinuate that a sermon was just given on the sabbath at evening and then came the first day of the week at sunset to do the collecting is just wanting it to be that way when there is nothing to say that sermon was just given on a sabbath when it is within an epistle to be read.

James was rebuking a church for disrespecting the poor. This church was even trying to get out of helping the poor from the bounty collected after church service by voicing faith in God's Providence to the poor to avoid meeting their immediate needs of those starving and freezing from the elements.

There is no way a church would give to the poor at night where they will more than likely be robbed of what they have been given. Not to mention the church too once most of everybody had departed.

There is no way they would stay there till daylight before giving what the poor needed before departing.

Just pray about it, brother. If the sabbath day is to be kept, you need not make a point of it in a place where 1 Corinthians 16:1-2 does not really support as plain as day as you would like.

If you are striving because 1 Corinthians 16:1-2 clearly cites when church services were held because that was when the collection was done, then you can understand why to the most of us, we see Sunday services only.

We know you don't see it that way yet, but if a case is to be won that the sabbath day is to be kept, God would make it easier elsewhere in the N.T., but there isn't any.

Which is why I point you to Matthew 12:1-8 because I think that is the crux of the argument there as Jesus will either support the sabbath day or lift your sights higher as to why His disciples are blameless and so are you for not keeping the sabbath day any more.

Do not be afraid to be wrong, brother. We cannot grow unless we learn from Him the truth in His words rather than what the Reformed Protestant Theology or any one else would teach us.

 

[vooks]

vooks,

Today is Saturday. If I said that today is the first day since I had my car repaired, would you think that I meant that I had the car repaired today?

of course!

Saturday resurrection is horrendous idiocy.

questions for you.
1. If you reported to work today, what is your FIRST Day at work?

2. If God started creation on Wednesday, what would be the FIRST and THIRD day of creation respectively?

3. What if he started creation on Thursday, what would be the FIRST and THIRD day?

 

[vooks]

Vooks, you have at last verbalised your logic needed for your viewpoint. You must be given credit for at last having very clearly defined and explained through what only your understand of the 'three days issue', is possible. You wrote, "~it is self-evident that Saturday resurrection hinges on idiotic semantics~". "~Semantics~"! That's it!


No Vooks; it is not on semantics that your definition and explanation of the 'three days issue' and a Sunday resurrection hinges. It hinges on VOOKS' ~semantics~.


VOOKS' Semantics illustrated ...


“~THIRD day is the day before yesterday or the day after tomorrow.

His FIRST day in death was the very day he died.

Your FIRST day in school was the very day you went to school,

-President Obama is serving his SECOND not his FIRST term

-The FIRST day of creation was the VERY day God commenced creation. Can you that it is the FIRST day SINCE creation? That's not English~”


Yes! In VOOKS’ semantics, exactly!


But in English—“~common sense~” English, it looks a little bit—one word different—, as follows . . .

THIRD day is the day before yesterday or the day after tomorrow.

But “third day SINCE” the day before yesterday is “today”!

And SINCE yesterday today is the first day;

and SINCE the day after tomorrow will be 3 days later : tomorrow (1 day) and the day after tomorrow (2 days), and the third, from or since or on which it will be the first day later of an undetermined period of days after.


It only takes VOOKS’ common sense English that has the distinguishing characteristic that when it doesn’t suit it, it hasn’t got in its vocabulary the word or concept of “SINCE”.


Therefore it is true Jesus’ “~FIRST day in death was the very day he died.~”


So “according to the Scriptures” Jesus was ~serving~, NOT his first day in death, but his SECOND day “SINCE evening had come The Preparation which is the Fore-Sabbath” until “mid-afternoon That Same Day The Preparation the Sabbath nearing”.


So, the FIRST day of creation was the VERY day God commenced creation. Can you see that it is the FIRST day SINCE creation? That's not the creation story! Can you see that the creation story in Genesis, has the word “~SINCE~” in it? Can you see the VOOKS’ common sense here? Who cannot help but see the VOOKS’ common sense in all of this? It only takes VOOKS’ common sense semantics that has the distinguishing characteristic that when it suits it, it inserts into its vocabulary the word or concept of “SINCE”.

[SNIPPED]

from scriptures, THIRD day is the day after tomorrow. This makes tomorrow SECOND day and not FIRST.

Today is the THIRD day since the day before yesterday. This makes yesterday the SECOND and not the FIRST! How would yesterday be the FIRST and the day after, today be THIRD?

[SNIPPED]

God created everything IN 6 days and He finished creation ON the 6th day. So 6th=6days. Similarly, if Jesus rose on the THIRD day, He rose AFTER/IN THREE days

It is true that Jesus died and was buried in the evening. But this was BEFORE Sabbath for Sabbath labor was precisely what was being avoided. So while evenings mark beginning of the next day, all evening is not next day. This is why the disciples were walking to Emmaus on the SAME day but in the evening

 

[vooks]

question
If God commenced creation on Friday. What would be the THIRD of creation?
(a) Saturday
(b) Sunday?

 

[rstrats]

vooks,

Strong's defines the word "since" as meaning away from or after. Christmas was on Friday last year. What was the first day away from or after Friday?

 

[vooks]

vooks,

Strong's defines the word "since" as meaning away from or after. Christmas was on Friday last year. What was the first day away from or after Friday?

so according to rastrat, this is Obama's first term since he became president.

[SNIPPED]

 

[rstrats]

vooks,

re: "so according to rastrat [sic], this is Obama's first term since he became president."



What???? How on earth have you arrived at that by anything that I've written? You're going to have to explain that one.

 

[rstrats]

vooks,

re: " 1. If you reported to work today, what is your FIRST Day at work?"

Today.



re: " 2. If God started creation on Wednesday, what would be the FIRST and THIRD day of creation respectively?"

First day, Wednesday; second day, Thursday; third day, Friday.



re: " 3. What if he started creation on Thursday, what would be the FIRST and THIRD day?"

First day, Thursday; third day, Saturday.



How is any of this analogous to Luke 24:21?

BTW, you have a question directed to you in post #127.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Calvin, Chrysostom and ALL history records that the Lord's Day is Sunday


Why would one of the sabbath in 1 Cor 16:2 mean something different from every other instance in the NT? That is a contradiction right there.

Statement, "~Calvin, Chrysostom and ALL history records that the Lord's Day is Sunday~" is purely unbased bias. We have discussed this false assumption. You of course, just pretend it wasn't discussed. No need to talk about it here now.


Statement, “~Why would one of the sabbath in 1 Cor 16:2 mean something different from every other instance in the NT?~” Who speaks of “~the sabbath in 1 Cor 16:2~” as “~something different from every other instance [of ‘Sabbath’] in the NT~”? Vooks, not GE. Was it Calvin? Hahahaha.

‘Of a sabbath’—‘sabbatou’ in 16:2 does not mean ‘the Sabbath, Seventh Day of the week’; it simply means, “of the week”—“the Of-the-week-First-Day”

And it means “ABOUT the Of-the-week-First-Day” because of the meaning of the Preposition ‘kata’ demanding the Accusative which Paul obliged.

And ‘On the First Day-of-the-week’ would have demanded a Dative or some Genitive, like for example respectively, ‘Miai-sabbatou’ or ‘Prohtehs sabbatou’, which Paul did not oblige.


But you are right, Vooks, “~That is a contradiction right there~” of Calvin’s indeed!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

My point is; the source you provided at that link was misrepresenting Calvin by taking his words and wresting them out of context to mean something else with all of their commentaries ( opinions ) around it.

Could we please refrain from discussing NOW "~the source~" I provided in a book of mine of more than 30 years ago?

 

[Hark]

Here is why we should just read this in English and trust that God has led the translators rightly, so that this first day of the week is a Sunday as the day after the sabbath.

If we remember that a Jewish day starts at sunset to sunset, then we can understand this below that this was the early morning hours before sunrise as it was yet still dark.

John 20: 1The 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.

It cannot be the sabbath day when no one is allowed to move the stone from the tomb so then the whole point to anoint Jesus would be moot if it was on the sabbath day.

Mark 16: 1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. 2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun. 3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?

If the Jews were so religious as to hurry the death of Jesus, because the sabbath was coming, but found that He was already dead, you better believe he was buried on that day of preparation before the sabbath.

Mark 15: 42 And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath, 43 Joseph of Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus. 44 And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead. 45 And when he knew it of the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph. 46 And he bought fine linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre. 47 And Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses beheld where he was laid.

So evening had come and that was after sunset on Friday, meaning starting the day of the Jewish Friday at the first sunset; which was a whole day before the next sunset before it ends Friday to start the sabbath day.

That would mean Jesus was crucified on Thursday as the sunset had approached; and He was buried on Friday after sunset that evening.

Sabbath day did not start until the next sunset that Friday.

If people have a hard time understanding when John 20:1 was, then Mark 16:1-3 should clear it up that it was not on the sabbath day at all.

Jesus was in the tomb, Friday sunset to sunset; Saturday sunset to sunset, and that is two days of the three in the earth as prophesied.

The third day started at sabbath day ending at sunset.

Jesus had risen on the third day; the first day of the week; which is Sunday before sunrise apparently that Sunday.

It doesn't matter how many visits there was to the tomb because John 20:1 places that visit on Sunday before sunrise and the other visit of Mark 16:1-3 was also on that Sunday.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

It is an oder being given as he was not in Corinth yet, but heading there as the epistle said. He was not giving a sermon on the sabbath when he was writing that epistle to be read at Corinth for what they are to do.

To insinuate that a sermon was just given on the sabbath at evening and then came the first day of the week at sunset to do the collecting is just wanting it to be that way when there is nothing to say that sermon was just given on a sabbath when it is within an epistle to be read.

Correct, 1Corinthians 16:2 is an order being given as Paul was not in Corinth yet, but heading there as the epistle said.
And yes, he was not giving a sermon on the sabbath when he was writing that epistle to be read at Corinth for what the Congregations were to do and read the Letter as Paul’s sermon to them. Sure!

So 1Corinthians 15:1 to 16:2 was Paul’s ONLY message he EVER “declared and preached by which ye also are saved …” which he wrote again as for the umpteenth time he actually “declared and preached” it in PERSON to the Christian congregations EVERYWHERE—in his Letter to the Corinthian believers inter alia—, who, all of them, were to receive the sermon-Letter and were to listen to it read out loud before the whole congregation in all the then known world AS PAUL’S SERMON TO THEM.

All the believers had to receive Paul’s only Good News to them on “A DAY THEY WERE ACCUSTOMED TO” to listen to the apostles’ Letters being read aloud before them— the Seventh Day of the week Sabbath.

THAT was what CALVIN concluded in his comment on 1Corinthians 16:2 and context. NOT GE!

Because the ONLY day according to Calvin’s own REASON was that the congregations were USED TO ASSEMBLE on it—WERE ACCUSTOMED TO ASSEMBLE on it, THAT day, according to Calvin’s own reasoning, was NOT SUNDAY, but was “the First (one) of the sabbaths”—, inescapably the weekly Sabbath. But Calvin did NOT admit the inescapable inevitability of the Seventh Day Sabbath. Calvin was not prepared to do it, because Calvin was in a straight here which the whole church of his time was in a straight about. There is no way about this implication so frantically and desperately being attempted to deny by the church since the Reformation and to today . . . as if Calvin like a Mrs E.G. White, to the Church had become ‘God’s chosen messenger’ and was ‘the voice of the Spirit-of-prophecy’ himself. Calvin erred; but the Church IS DISHONEST AND IN ERROR about Calvin as “about” this day. It is a crass and gross injustice done to and disrespect shown Calvin by the CHURCH ---the great man and hero of mine among all the truly great men. I am a Calvinist, and as proud of it, humbled by it. But facts are facts and pathetic apologetics is clouds of suffocating smoke and dust.

I never with regards to 1Corinthians 15,16 ~insinuated~ ANYTHING LIKE these ridiculous scraps of vomited tripe allegation, “~that a sermon was just given on the sabbath at evening and then came the first day of the week at sunset to do the collecting is just wanting it to be that way when there is nothing to say that sermon was just given on a sabbath when it is within an epistle to be read~” I apologise to nothing and no one in this world so low, so groundless and so weightless bluffing fluff of humbleness.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Here is why we should just read this in English and trust that God has led the translators rightly, so that this first day of the week is a Sunday as the day after the sabbath.

Exactly ---THAT'S WHAT I SAID!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

If we remember that a Jewish day starts at sunset to sunset, then we can understand this below that this was the early morning hours before sunrise as it was yet still dark.

What are you supposed to be talking about?! Supposed to be 1Corinthians 16:2 ---not Acts 20:7, dear man . . .

PS. My apologies, I see now that Vook's post landed in between my post and yours.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

If we remember that a Jewish day starts at sunset to sunset, then we can understand this below that this was the early morning hours before sunrise as it was yet still dark.

John 20: 1The 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.

If we remember that a Jewish day starts at sunset, then we can understand John 20:1 that this was, literally correctly, Quote~being the early of dark still~EQ = 'prohi SKOTIAS eti ousehs' ---before proper night had set in, so that Q~it was evening or dusk still~EQ.
This was the opposite of "~the early morning hours before sunrise as it was yet still dark~" in John 20:1,2.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

John 20: 1The 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.

The translation is wrong. 'prohï SKOTIAS eti ousehs' means "early-OF-DARK still being" ---not, "~early, when it was yet dark~". 'Skotias' in not a Nominative and subject of the adverbial Participle 'ousehs'. The 'early-of-dark' -- 'prohï-skotias' is the subject of the adverbial Participle, 'eti ousehs' -- "was / having been still"

The grave had not been entered yet nor the missing body discovered yet. Mary only, for the first time since the burial "sees the stone away from the sepulchre; runs back". Mary's discovery of the moved away stone is the first visit to the tomb which yet produced nothing but her surmising about a reburied body of Jesus. All the rest in all the four Gospels about further visits recorded, had to be of later visits after Mary's discovery of the cast away stone door.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

John 20: 1The 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.
It cannot be the sabbath day when no one is allowed to move the stone from the tomb so then the whole point to anoint Jesus would be moot if it was on the sabbath day.

"The angel of the Lord" cast the stone away from the tomb-door. Angels have only one Law and one Lawgiver ---God Himself. Angels don't keep Sabbath-rest. Only God does ---through "the all-exceeding exercise of his mighty power having raised Christ from the dead" -- HIS HOLY REST. Ephesians 1:19,20. The Resurrection of Christ from the dead was God's ULTIMATE REST on the Sabbath.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

If the Jews were so religious as to hurry the death of Jesus, because the sabbath was coming, but found that He was already dead, you better believe he was buried on that day of preparation before the sabbath.

Maybe if what you allege here were true. But it all is o so pot-pour-i of false and true it's nauseating.
In fact "~he was buried on that day of preparation before the sabbath~"; like fact is it He was not also killed on the day He was buried on, because He was killed on the day BEFORE "evening was now come and the Preparation which is the Fore-Sabbath had begun. Mark 15:42 Matthew 27:57 John 19:31 Luke 23:50, "That Day having begun ending mid-afternoon before the Sabbath" and "the Jews' preparations (for the Sabbath) were due to begin" Luke 23:54-56 John 19:42.