My Position on the Fourth Commandment

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Day of Interment

Yes, nothing “is written” for nothing!
It also was not written for nothing that the sabbath-Feast Day was called the “In-the-Bone-of-Day day”, of the passover.

“Neither shall ye brake [‘shabar’] a bone thereof” Exodus 12:46
“They shall leave none of it … nor break any bone of it.” Numbers 9:12.
“A Bruised Reed shall He not break.” Isaiah 42:3.
“I have broken thy yoke.” Jeremiah 2:20.
“I have broken the bands of thy yoke.” Ezekiel 34:27.
“I will break his yoke from off thee.” Nahum 1: 13.
“How is the hammer broken?” Jeremiah 50:23.
I will seek that which was lost, and bring again that which was driven away, and will bind up that which was broken.” Ezeliek 34:16.
“Whithered boughs shall be broken off.” Isaiah 27:11.
“The horn of Moab is cutt off, and his arm is broken.” Jeremiah 48:25.

Instead of having been taken from the cross and cut into pieces and cast into Gehenna like the other two crucified, no bone of Jesus was either broken or severed from the body, just like the passover lamb was roasted “IN-THE-BONE” : IN WHOLE AND IN ONE, and “that which remained of it” in WHOLE and in ONE – “IN-THE-BONE” –, was “REMOVED FROM” Egypt and burned in the desert. “Leave none nor break any bone of it.” Numbers 9:12. Also Joseph’s bones were intact taken with Israel and out of Egypt. Exodus 13:19. So the WHOLE of “That Day”, in its FULL (God-given eschatological) meaning and duration, “The-In-the-Bone-of-day Day”.

‘Etsem’ – 104 x ‘bone’; 16 x ‘same / selfsame’,

‘Bone’ in connection with ‘day’, 6 times— 6 times in references to the fifteenth day of the First Month passover sabbath, Exodus 12:46; 13:19,19 Numbers 9:12 Josua 24:32 Psalm 34:20

‘Etsem’ – ‘same’ / ‘selfsame’
7 out of 16 times the fifteenth day of the First Month passover sabbath, Exodus 12:17,41,51 Leviticus 23:14 Deuteronomy 32:47,48 Joshua 5:11;
3 out of 16 times Day of Atonement, Leviticus 32:27-30;
2 out of 16 times Shavuot Leviticus 23:21 Exodus 24:10.
12 out of 16 for a ‘middle-sabbath’ [‘metaksu sabbaton’].
Geh’-tzem עצם ‘bone’, is used

The fifteenth day of the First Month is passover “sabbath” IN VERSES 6-9, and is referred BACK TO in 11b and 15a. The first sheaf was both reaped / harvested and brought and waved / offered ON SIXTEENTH Abib whatever day of the week it was, whatever day of the week came before it or whatever day of the week followed after it. Except for the two referrals to the previous day’s PASSOVER- “-sabbath”, verses 10-20 entirely are devoted to ”First Sheaf Wave Offering-day” and 49 more days to The Fiftieth Day / ‘Pentecost’— its descriptions and prescriptions. Because ”First Sheaf Wave Offering-day” was “the day AFTER the (passover) sabbath day”. The passover “sabbath” itself, or fifteenth day of the First Month however, was the day described, and for prescribed, and with finished, in verses 6-9 and summarised in verse 21.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Now I have tried with my zero knowledge of Hebrew to puzzle out how, in the single case Leviticus 23:14 where ‘selfsame day’ [‘yom hee-zeh’] is used with “that very” [‘ad’] , the “day AFTER the (passover) sabbath” is meant, and not the passover “sabbath” referred to in verse 11b and 15a, itself. “That very [‘ad’] selfsame day [‘yom hee-zeh’]” is the SIXTEENTH day of the First Month “AFTER the (passover) sabbath” the fifteenth day of the First Month. These idiomatic demonstrative and pronominal Hebrew words and word-combinations serve to make this distinction, CLEAR, even to the mind of one without any knowledge of Hebrew. Only problem is, such people do not receive the detail in their own language. They must be showed. They don’t need explanation; they only need the real facts on the pages.

The passover ‘sabbath’ of fifteen Abib is characterized by unique and specifically ‘passover’ attributes as a passover-day in its own right. But never is its characterisation illustrated, opened up, or laid bare before the eyes of believers for the truth of the Word of God it is. Has anyone of you ever heard ‘Nisan 15’ called by its most distinctive name in the entire Bible, ‘The Bone-Day’ / ‘The In-the-Bone-of-day Day’ of the passover?

Anyone?

No?

No!

Well, how is it possible?

It is inevitable NNE COULD imagine ‘Nisan 15’ is “The Bone-Day” because Christianity REDUCED Nisan the passover DAY-OF-INTERMENT, to the last few if any minutes of Nisan 14, passover SACRIFICE-DAY!

Now the essential meaning of being “in-the-bone”, is, ‘being-in-whole’!

I have always thought the Scriptures that prophesied no bone of Christ would be ‘broken’, meant no bone of his would be ‘crushed’ or ‘shattered’ or ‘broken’, like is popularly believed, the splint bones (fibula) of the crucified, were splintered with a bat stick or something. So that the chest cavity through the support of the legs couldn’t lift up for breath as the victim hung suspended, and he actually suffocated, died sooner and could be removed from the cross sooner … if permission could be obtained. Otherwise crucified hang for days before death relieved the agony. They could even hang until they rotted off from the cross.

The Jews asked Pilate that the legs of the crucified be broken so that they could be removed from the crosses where they hang as a great embarrassment for the Jews, the passover-sabbath Feast Day of Nisan 15 being the most important day to them and which they kept holy to remember their exodus from Egypt and celebrate their freedom from all oppressors like the Romans. The death of the crucified would have to be hastened; so their legs must be broken … so the Prophecies might be fulfilled. They didn’t know, of course. But Jesus’ bones would not be broken; because it was prophesied they wouldn’t. God’s Word.

And that is what it means the Burial Day is distinguished as ‘The-Bone-Day’ of the passover?

“He has broken my bones” Lamentations 3:4— physically possible, yes, but while it was said spiritually of Jeremiah, it was prophetic of Christ. It is meant spiritually because Jesus’ legs were not broken nor would be, physically broken. This, “He has broken my bones”, much rather has the sense, “He has sent fire into my bones” – Jesus’ suffering ALIVE on Nisan 14. 1:13.

Therefore, “He keepeth all my bones” Psalm 34:20,21, “That the Scriptures should be fulfilled, A bone of Him shall not be broken” John 19:36, will have another meaning than simply ‘brake’.

“The passover shall be eaten in one house; thou shalt not carry forth ought of the flesh abroad out of the house; neither shall ye break a bone of thereof.” Exodus 12:46. All of the sacrifice had to be assimilated with corruptibility, sin and sinfulness and the eater was to realise his own and corporate participation and responsibility in the sacrifice’s death and corruption.

“Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that He should be holden of it. For David speaketh concerning Him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for He is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover my flesh shall rest in hope: Because Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt Thou suffer Thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou hast made known to me the WAYS OF LIFE; Thou shalt make Me full of joy with thy countenance. … David being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to Him … that He would raise up Christ to sit on his throne, seeing this before, spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.” Acts 2:23-31 Psalm 15.

The sin and the sinners ate all of the flesh of the Passover of Yahweh and left not over nor behind any of his body … BUT HIS BONES! Not one bone was SEVERED from the whole! The carcass of the passover sacrifice was put on the spit in one piece, head and feet intact. And by the heat and the burning of the fires in hell, “My bones are burned with heat … ONE dieth in his full bones … His bones are full and young; they shall lie down with Him in the dust.” Job 30:30, 21:24, 20:11. “My bones are consumed … I will say unto God my Rock, Why hast Thou forgotten Me? … With a sword in my bones mine enemies reproach Me, “Where is thy God?” Job 7:15 Psalm 42:9,10.

Therefore, symbolically and prophetically of the LIFE’s anguish of the Lamb of God is it written of HIM, “My soul chooseth DEATH rather than my bones …that the bones which Thou hast broken may rejoice … O Lord, heal Me; for my bones are vexed” Psalm 6:2.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

“Observe ye The First Month” Deuteronomy 16:1 as and for the passover of Yahweh.

Keep in mind that in Exodus or the historic passover of Israel, the two days of the slaughter of the lamb and of the eating of the lamb were not yet clearly distinguished, and that both days of fourteen AND fifteen Abib are dated the FOURTEENTH day, Exodus 10 to 15 Deuteronomy 16:3.

These days however are being separated completely in Scriptures such as Leviticus 23:5,6 Numbers 28:16,17; 33:3, “They departed …on the fifteenth day in the morning after they had eaten the passover.” That is why in its SECOND night, the passover is made an institution of, “It is a NIGHT to be much observed unto the LORD for bringing them out from the land of Egypt: THIS IS THAT NIGHT OF THE LORD TO BE OBSERVED”. Exodus 12:42. “In the FIFTEENTH day”, “IT IS THE SELFSAME DAY IT CAME TO PASS THAT all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt”, verse 41.

“IT IS THE SELFSAME DAY IT CAME TO PASS THAT…” “… it is the _BONE-DAY_ it came to pass THAT all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt …”. “The SELFSAME day … the _BONE-day” became in the New Testament in the Gospels, specifically, “That Day” thus named that retrospectively is being looked upon for having been “The Preparation when the Sabbath Day drew near … because of the Jews’ preparations having begun.” Luke 23:54 John 19:42; and prospectively is being looked upon “It already having become evening since it was The Preparation … suddenly came the man Joseph” Mark 15:42 Matthew 27:57 Luke 23:50 John 19:31,38— and he began to undertake to get Jesus’ body interred.

Now watch!
“THAT DAY WAS GREAT DAY OF SABBATH” of the passover ON WHICH none of the Passover Lamb’s BONES would be broken or severed— John 19:31 to 37— ‘geh-tzem-’ day— “Great-day-of-sabbath-” of PASSOVER— “BONE-DAY” of INTERMENT … having started!!




‘Geh-tzem-’ “That Day”, “Self-Same Day”, “In-the-BONE Day” Abib 15—

Exodus 12:46 “neither shall ye break a bone thereof”— passover “EATEN”

Exodus 13:19,19 “Moses took the bones of Joseph … ye shall carry up my bones”— passover “OUT”

Numbers 9:12 “nor break any bone of it”— passover “EATEN”

Joshua 24:32 “bones of Joseph … that day … brought OUT”

Psalm 34:20 “He delivereth OUT … keepeth all my bones … REDEEMETH the soul”— Passover of Yahweh

2Kings 23:17-21 “the sepulchre of the Man of God … let no man move his bones … the King commanded, KEEP THE PASSOVER AS IT IS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK”

“The fifteenth day of the First Month …
THAT DAY … THE VERY … SELFSAME : BONE-DAY”
is passover, when passover is
“EATEN” and “BROUGHT OUT”—

Exodus 12:17 “in this selfsame [‘bone’] day”
Exodus 12:41 “even the selfsame [‘bone’] day it came to pass”
Exodus 12:51 “the selfsame [‘bone’] day that the Lord”
Leviticus 23:14 “neither shall ye eat leavened bread (on Abib 16 second day of Unleavened Bread, as on) the very [‘ad’] selfsame [‘bone’] day (of Abib 15)
Leviticus 23:21 “proclaim on the selfsame [‘bone’] day holy convocation”
Joshua 5:11 “ate parched corn in the selfsame [‘bone’] day”
Joshua 10:27 “which remain from that very [‘bone’] day”

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

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?
4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.
5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.


Mt. 28:1 ¶ In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it....
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.
.

1. In both texts the two Mary's came to "see" the tomb.

2........................

GE:

Re:
Dr Walter,
“1. In both texts the two Mary's came to "see" the tomb.”

Yours, is Wenham’s old trick to argue away the two angels, applied to the women.

It simply is incorrect and UNTRUE “In both texts the two Mary's came to "see" the tomb” in more respects than merely the women who REALLY and actually ARE the Subject of the actions— DIFFERENT actions that have NOTHING to do with one another.

The Matthew-text _says_, “Mary Magdalene and the other (one) Mary”. That is, TWO Marys, no more or other women, not even one, other woman.

Dr Walter, you first tell Matthew his informant(s), and his informant(s)’ informant(s) Mary or the two Marys, didn’t know what they were telling him; didn’t realise themselves they from the very same point in space, together, “departed to go see the tomb”; that they must have been in a maze or short-sighted or one-eyed or plain couldn’t count two persons while there actually were three – as Dr Walter here with authority “ABOVE WHAT IS WRITTEN” states for the truth of God’s Word itself.

Or Dr Walter must tell Mark the same sort of thing and then come tell us we Christians must still believe the Scriptures!

Now what sort of sense is therein to say “the two Mary's came to "see" the tomb” if they had come and had arrived at the tomb? If they actually came to / did arrive at the tomb, they should have seen the tomb (more or less like Mary Magdalene when she “it still being early darkness” came to the tomb and actually SAW the stone of the sepulchre moved away from it. So what was wrong that, when the two Marys – or three women according to Dr Walter – “came”, but still had “to "see" the tomb”? What was their problem that they still had “to see the tomb” or still had to decide “to come see the tomb”? When they arrived at the tomb was the tomb too far for them to see it or did they turn their faces away from it perhaps too afraid to look at it? Then why does Matthew say they wanted, “to go have a look at the grave” and in fact “set out to go have a look at the tomb”, but “In both texts the two Mary's came to "see" the tomb” AS IF THEY HAD NOT SEEN it?

If “the two Mary's” could realise what they wanted to do, why did they not? Because Dr Walter might think the “great earthquake” was of no more effect than to scare the guard a bit, and the women wouldn’t even have noticed it so they came and they saw as if NOTHING happened!? Matthew, why are you telling us these things if it’s all of no effect or importance?

That is Dr Walter’s BORROWED arguments’ worth; not worth a laugh!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Re:
Dr Walter,
“2. In both texts before they arrived at the tomb the tomb was sealed and they anticipated the problem of gaining entrance into a sealed tomb.”

GE:

In neither of these “texts”, 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”; Mt. 28:1 “In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to seethe sepulchre”, any women “arrived at the tomb”!

Where is written “In both texts”, “they arrived at the tomb”? Or, that “the tomb was sealed”? Or, that “they anticipated the problem of gaining entrance into a sealed tomb”?!

Nowhere and in no way!

It is _SIMPLY_, un-true! Then it logically is impossible.

How can it be the same WOMEN “In both texts” while
Matthew has it the women were “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary” and
Mark has it, they, “AND Salome”?

How can it be the same PLACE “In both texts” while
Matthew has it from where the two Marys “Set out to go…” and
Mark has it, the three women where they “BOUGHT spices and ointments”?

How can it be the same TIME “In both texts” while
Matthew has it “IN the Sabbath before the First Day” and
Mark has it, “When the Sabbath WAS PAST”?

How can it be the same CIRCUMSTANCE “In both texts” and
Matthew has it before or rather just as, “the angel DESCENDING and there was a great EARTHQUAKE”, and
Mark has NO angel and NO earthquake”?

How can Dr Walter speak of “In both texts” while he quotes THREE ‘texts’ or pericopes of “texts”, not only “Mark 16:1” and “Mt. 28:1”, but “Mark 16:1” and “Mt. 28:1” AND, Mark 16:2 to 6?!

Re:
Dr Walter,
“In both texts before they arrived at the tomb the tomb was sealed”

GE:

Only in Matthew was “the tomb sealed…” NOT, “… before they arrived”, but, before they “SET OUT”. And, “the tomb sealed…” NOT, “… before they arrived at the tomb”, but “the tomb sealed” the morning before already— “the morning after The Preparation Day” in fact AND “the morning after The Preparation Day … when suddenly Sabbath’s mid-afternoon there was a great earthquake” in fact!

And then in neither of the THREE Scripture Dr Walter quoted, any women “anticipated the problem of gaining entrance into a sealed tomb”. In any case WHY WOULD THEY if Mary Magdalene before, had SEEN with her own eyes that the door-stone had been moved away from the DESERTED sepulchre and had run back TO TELL everybody the news OF IT?

And again, why would they have “anticipated the problem of gaining entrance into a sealed tomb” if they “came upon the tomb and FOUND the stone moved away from the sepulchre and…” – straight away – “…entered in”— NO “problem of gaining entrance into a sealed tomb” WHATSOEVER!?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

................................
CONCLUSION: The visit in Matthew 28:1-6 discovers an OPEN TOMB and they see it plainly (Mt. 28:5-6). Therefore, the visit in Mark 16:3-4 has to be a record of their thoughts just previous to arriving at the tomb still sealed by the stone thus making Mark and Matthew descriptive of the SAME VISIT on the SAME DAY - when the sun was getting brighter ("dawn") or at the "rising of the sun" EARLY SUNDAY MORNING!

These are not two different visits but the SAME visit with differing details.

GE:

Last, first answered!

There are NO “differing details” whatsoever where so ever in the Gospels or between the Gospels or in the entire Bible or between the Old and the New Testaments as concern the prophetic fulfilment of the Passover of Yahweh in and through the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. There are, several, different events and accounts of events; but NO “differing” events or “differing” accounts, or, “differing details”.

CONCLUSION: “The visit in Matthew 28:1-6…” is non-existent in reality as in context— as non-existent as your text-division “Matthew 28:1-6” is unreal.

The real text construct is …

… the narrative-part told by the angel WHEREIN NO ‘VISIT’ REALISED, verse 1-4 …
… COUPLED BY the editorial interjection of the Gospel-writer, Matthew …
“… answering, the angel explained to the women …”,
… COUPLED TO the dialogue-part in the First Person of the angel …
… CONTINUING to address the women …
“…saying to them, Be not you afraid; I know you …”.

Therefore:

There is NO “visit in Matthew 28:1-6” OR a ‘discovery’ of “an OPEN TOMB” BUT THE ACTUAL OPENING of the tomb by the very DESCENT / “DESCENDING” of “the angel of the Lord”, ‘seen’ by NO human being whosoever (not even by an angelic being, the only one present who having turned his back towards the opened sepulchre went and “sat on the stone”. No created being “sees”, ANYTHING OF THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST IN THE POWER AND THE GLORY OF THE FATHER AND THE FULL AND EXCLUSIVE FELLOWSHIP OF _GOD_ TRIUNE INSIDE THE GRAVE!

Dr Watson, I challenge you in the Name of THIS GOD, QUOTE where in the Written Word of God IT IS WRITTEN: “… and they see it plainly (Mt. 28:5-6)”! I challenge you in the Name of THE TRUTH and THE LIFE versus the forces of hell, the devil and DEATH, present the Scripture!!


Re:
Dr Walter,
“Therefore, the visit in Mark 16:3-4 has to be a record of their thoughts just previous to arriving at the tomb still sealed by the stone …”

GE:

It is so, “the visit in Mark 16:3-4 has to be a record of their thoughts”. That’s what he’s been say'n all the time….

BUT, “the visit in Mark 16:3-4 has to be a record of their thoughts…” NOT, “…just previous to arriving at the tomb still sealed by the stone”, but, just AFTER.

“Then very early
“… they come—
“… upon the tomb
“… again— before-sunrise
“… and they said to themselves,
“… WHO will have rolled away for us the stone out of the door of the tomb?
“… Then re-inspecting, they _see_:
“… That, in fact, it has been slung up, backwards,
“… the stone, its great size despite.
“… So again, entering into the tomb,
“… they saw inside on the right (one) young man sitting
“… clothed, enfolded in whiteness.
“… Again they were utterly astonished.
“… Now this one speaks to them,
“… Don’t be so very afraid!
“… Yes, it’s Jesus the crucified Nazarene you are looking for…
“… He was raised; He is not here! (Understand?)
“… Just see the place where they put Him.
“… But go you now and tell his disciples and that Peter specifically …”

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Ituttut:

....................
Jesus said day and night, so this means He starts His complete confinement on the end of the First day (just as He says), and the third day as it ends, completes the 72 hours required to finish the complete three says.
.....................

GE:

The “three days” of Jesus’ Death, Interment and Resurrection IN THEIR ‘day’s’ and ‘night’s’ parts, are whole days each OF THE PASSOVER— the passover’s first, three days, Abib 14, 15, 16.

They are the 72 hours of THESE “three days” and of no other day or days before or after them— in other words, each of the first “three days” of the passover was one of the “three days and three nights” Matthew 12:40 mentions.

The “three days and three nights” were no arbitrary cut asunder six halves of days not one belonging to the other to make three patched-up pairs of first day then night each --- anything BUT the "three days" of the Prophecy of Jonas.

Now Jesus spoke of these three days of the passover and his experience of them, retrospectively, so that the day part of each day is seen as after its night-halve, like days are ordinarily ‘reckoned’ or ‘counted’ in the Bible and the world of the Jews and Athenians or Greeks at that time in history.

The daylight halves of the “three days” must be seen as last in time and completing each 24 hour “day” of the “three days”.
How many times is it written Jesus would rise or did rise, “on the third DAY”, meaning in the daylight-time of “the third DAY-ACCORDING-TO-THE-SCRIPTURES” the Passover-of-Yahweh Scriptures.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Ituttut:

Beginning at 6 pm Thursday no Jew could do any manual work such as this for it is now Nisan 15, the High Sabbath. These seven days of unleavened bread begins.

GE:

No, the Jews were forbidden to do any menial or secular, ordinary, ‘rewarded’ work on “the High Sabbath … Nisan 15”. But they were commanded to do those duties ‘holy’ to “the High Sabbath … Nisan 15”, like the roasting and eating of both the sacrifice and the unleavened dough— exactly THOSE DUTIES, symbolic and prophetic (of the INTERMENT of Jesus).
Which duties occupied the Israelites ALL day long night and day, just like the faithful fulfilling their duties on 14 Abib kept them occupied ALL day long, night and day.

So, "Beginning at 6 pm Thursday", "EVENING ALREADY HAVING COME IT (NOW) BEING THE PREPARATION WHICH IS THE FORE-SABBATH, JOSEPH OF ARIMATHAEA .... suddenly came there ..." and he first, but after the Jews, went to Pilate to ask him permission for what he was about to do, namely, "TO BURY HIM ACCORDING TO THE ETHICS / LAW of the Jews" THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, the PASSOVER-Scriptures!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Ituttut:

The required time for Jesus' confinement ended on that Sabbath day of Nisan 17,

GE:

From Nisan 14 to Nisan 17 is four days, DEAD, that is, four days, “in the heart of the earth”, and would He rise on the fourth, and not “on the third day according to the Scriptures”.

Just too bad for you, dear Ituttut, but praise God,not for the Scriptures!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Ituttut:

The required time for Jesus' confinement ended on that Sabbath day of Nisan 17, and His Body now again alive having connected with His Soul, and Spirit was not found in the Tomb on that Sunday morn of Nisan 18th.

In the ground for 3 days, and three nights, He arose on the fourth (4th) day as we are told in Matthew 27:63,”Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again. “
I'm stopping here so contemplation can begin on the four (days) that are necessary to understand scripture that we must bring together to remove any contradictions.

GE:

Ja, you stopped just where like clockwork, the contradictions first begin.

You do realise, that your interpretation here in this one / two places, Matthew 27:63 Mark 8:31 totally relies on a non-idiomatic and therefore wrong supposition, and that it totally contradicts

One … the MANY references to Jesus’ resurrection “ON THE THIRD DAY” and not on the day after “the third day”; and

Two … that it totally contradicts the myriads of other ways for saying Christ would and did rise “ON THE THIRD DAY” and not on the day after that “third day according to the Scriptures”.

But I don’t now feel like dictating a grammar lesson. Enough to say that no single knowledgeable person in Greek, will support your interpretation.

Forget it, Ituttut! It’s not worth your efforts which I believe are honest and sincere.

God bless
GE

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Ituttut:
............................
We know the time of His spirit, and soul leaving the Body. Scripture tells us His Body must also be sealed into the Tomb on the same day that His Soul and Spirit departed. This will keep truth with Jonas.

GE:

“We know the time of His spirit, and soul leaving the Body.”

Yes, “Scripture tells”,

“It was the Preparation of the Passover Day” John 19:14a, Abib 14

“Before the Feast” John 13:1

“When they removed leaven when always they had to kill the passover” Mark 14:12,17 Matthew 26:17,20 Luke 22:7,14

“the ninth hour” Mark 15:34 Matthew 27:46 Luke 23:44

“and there was a great earthquake” Matthew 27:54

"and all the people that came together to that spectacle ... left and returned home" Luke 23:48

…but NO single Scripture, Ituttut, you can present here, for what you allege,

“Scripture tells us His Body must also be sealed into the Tomb on the same day that His Soul and Spirit departed.”

This doesn’t “keep truth with Jonas”— this takes away all truth from Jonas and from all and every Scripture that tells us His Body must also be sealed into the Tomb on the day ORDAINED AND SOLEMNLY OBSERVED AFTER that His Soul and Spirit departed.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Ituttut:
...........................
Scripture shows the preparation day to be Nisan 14, and the next day, Nisan 15 is a High Holy Sabbath. Is there something that connects these two specific days together? Passover does this for us. Leviticus 23:5, ”In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the Lord's passover.” ...............................


GE:

Yes,
“Scripture shows the preparation day to be Nisan 14, and the next day, Nisan 15 is a High Holy Sabbath.”

BUT,
finish what “Scripture shows”!
“Scripture shows” “The Preparation Day”, “to be”, “The Preparation Day OF THE PASSOVER”, “Nisan 14”, and NOT The Preparation Day of the weekly Sabbath, “Nisan 15 … a High Holy Sabbath”. ('Friday')

And you are right,
“Is there something that connects these two specific days together? Passover does this for us. Leviticus 23:5, ”In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the Lord's passover.”

And as we just a while ago have seen,
"The Preparation Day OF THE PASSOVER" was the day
“Before the Feast” John 13:1,
indeed the day “BEFORE” “Nisan 15 … a High Holy Sabbath”,
the day “BEFORE” “… that day … The Preparation” John 19:31, “which is the Fore-Sabbath” Mark 15:42,
“and since THAT DAY" which "WAS", "was great day-of-sabbath” – OF THE PASSOVER –
“the Jews asked Pilate the legs be broken and the crucified be removed",
ON AND FOR that Feast-sabbath of the JEWS’ passover.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Dear Reader, the truth is so obvious and so clear that Gerard must play mental gynastics in order to get around it.

1. Mark 16:2 explicitly states that both Mary's came to the grave "AT THE RISING OF THE SUN" on the first day of the week and in coming to the grave they believed in their own minds that it was still sealed by the stone!


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?


2. Matthew 28:2 explicity states BEFORE both Mary's came to "SEE" the grave and when they came they SAW the stone had already been rolled away from the tomb.

came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.


CONCLUSION: IF both Mary's had already came "to see" the tomb on Saturday evening as Geradr demands that Matthew 28:1-2 describes, then on Saturday they already KNEW AND seen the stone had already been rolled away IF Mark 16:1-4 is another visit at Sunrise on Sunday Morning and thus Mark 16:3 is an absurd and rediculous statement as Mark is describing their concerns BEFORE they got to the tomb and thus on their way to the tomb "at sunrise" Sunday morning:

However, Mark 16:3 PROVES that Mark is describing the very FIRST visit to the tomb by BOTH MARY's because Mark's notation of what these women were pondering on their way to the tomb ON SUNDAY MORNING demands that both Mary's were still ignorant about any removal of the stone from the tomb. However, there can be no excuse by either Mary and no reason to ponder who would remove the stone IF Matthew 28:1-4 described a previous visit on Saturday.

This is so clear, simple, obvious and totally destructive of Gerards whole theory.


Moreover, the whole reason we have FOUR gospel account instead of just ONE is to provide DIFFERENT perpsectives and DIFFERENT details.

Just because one account says other "women" attended them and the other does not include that does not mean they are two different visits and indeed it is impossible it is two different visits because of the obvious statement by Mark in verse 3.

Just because one account refers to two angels while the other records one angel does not mean they are two different visits.

Gerard is wrong and no amount of juggling, mental gynastics and hot air can explain away the simple facts that in both accounts there are both Mary's and in both accounts they come to the grave and in the account given by Mark it is at "SUNRISE" on Sunday morning and they are pondering who will remove the stone THAT MORNING thus PROVING that Matthew 28:1-6 could not have been an earlier visit as the stone was removed already in Matthew 28 before they arrived at the tomb.


READERS, THE HARDEST THING TO DEFEND IS WHEN THE OBVIOUS IS BEING DENIED. MARK 16:3 MAKES IT OBVIOUS THAT NEITHER MARY HAD PREVIOUS TO SUNDAY MORNING SEEN THE STONE REMOVED FROM THE TOMB BUT MATTHEW 28:1-5 THE STONE IS REMOVED ALREADY BEFORE THEY ARRIVED THUS OBVIOUSLY MAKING MATTHEW 28:1-6 AND MARK 16:1-6 THE VERY SAME VISIT BUT WITH DIFFERING DETAILS.

GE:

Re:
Dr Walter,
“1. In both texts the two Mary's came to "see" the tomb.”

Yours, is Wenham’s old trick to argue away the two angels, applied to the women.

It simply is incorrect and UNTRUE “In both texts the two Mary's came to "see" the tomb” in more respects than merely the women who REALLY and actually ARE the Subject of the actions— DIFFERENT actions that have NOTHING to do with one another.

The Matthew-text _says_, “Mary Magdalene and the other (one) Mary”. That is, TWO Marys, no more or other women, not even one, other woman.

Dr Walter, you first tell Matthew his informant(s), and his informant(s)’ informant(s) Mary or the two Marys, didn’t know what they were telling him; didn’t realise themselves they from the very same point in space, together, “departed to go see the tomb”; that they must have been in a maze or short-sighted or one-eyed or plain couldn’t count two persons while there actually were three – as Dr Walter here with authority “ABOVE WHAT IS WRITTEN” states for the truth of God’s Word itself.

Or Dr Walter must tell Mark the same sort of thing and then come tell us we Christians must still believe the Scriptures!

Now what sort of sense is therein to say “the two Mary's came to "see" the tomb” if they had come and had arrived at the tomb? If they actually came to / did arrive at the tomb, they should have seen the tomb (more or less like Mary Magdalene when she “it still being early darkness” came to the tomb and actually SAW the stone of the sepulchre moved away from it. So what was wrong that, when the two Marys – or three women according to Dr Walter – “came”, but still had “to "see" the tomb”? What was their problem that they still had “to see the tomb” or still had to decide “to come see the tomb”? When they arrived at the tomb was the tomb too far for them to see it or did they turn their faces away from it perhaps too afraid to look at it? Then why does Matthew say they wanted, “to go have a look at the grave” and in fact “set out to go have a look at the tomb”, but “In both texts the two Mary's came to "see" the tomb” AS IF THEY HAD NOT SEEN it?

If “the two Mary's” could realise what they wanted to do, why did they not? Because Dr Walter might think the “great earthquake” was of no more effect than to scare the guard a bit, and the women wouldn’t even have noticed it so they came and they saw as if NOTHING happened!? Matthew, why are you telling us these things if it’s all of no effect or importance?

That is Dr Walter’s BORROWED arguments’ worth; not worth a laugh!

 

[Dr. Walter]

Reader, it does not make any difference that Mark 16:1-3 makes it impossible for Matthew 28:1-6 to be a previous visit on Saturday because Gerard DOES NOT CARE WHAT GOD'S WORD SAYS.

He has only one agenda and that is to prove his unbiblical inaccurate erroneous SATURDAYISM resurrection view no matter what God's Word says and no matter what anyone else says. He is committed to this error and has built a whole system of interpretation to support this error.

FACT: Mark 16:1-2 is AT SUNRISE ON SUNDAY MORNING

FACT: Mark 16:3 is the thinking of BOTH Mary's AT SUNRISE ON SUNDAY MORNING

FACT: That thinking is IMPOSSIBLE if Matthew 28:1-6 describes a previous visit by BOTH MARY's to this tomb.

FACT: Matthew 28:1-2 and the term "dawn" means "growing" of light (not decreasing of light) and "at Sunrise" is when the sunlight is "growing"

FACT: Matthew 28:1-4 and Mark 16:1-4 describe the very same visit when the very same stone is removed BEFORE both Mary's came to the tomb

FACT: Matthew and Mark provide different details of the SAME VISIt ON THE SAME SUNDAY MORNING.

FACT: Jesus arose from the grave sometime later than 3 am but BEFORE the women arrived on Sunday morning

Dear Reader, the truth is so obvious and so clear that Gerard must play mental gynastics in order to get around it.

1. Mark 16:2 explicitly states that both Mary's came to the grave "AT THE RISING OF THE SUN" on the first day of the week and in coming to the grave they believed in their own minds that it was still sealed by the stone!


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?


2. Matthew 28:2 explicity states BEFORE both Mary's came to "SEE" the grave and when they came they SAW the stone had already been rolled away from the tomb.

came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.


CONCLUSION: IF both Mary's had already came "to see" the tomb on Saturday evening as Geradr demands that Matthew 28:1-2 describes, then on Saturday they already KNEW AND seen the stone had already been rolled away IF Mark 16:1-4 is another visit at Sunrise on Sunday Morning and thus Mark 16:3 is an absurd and rediculous statement as Mark is describing their concerns BEFORE they got to the tomb and thus on their way to the tomb "at sunrise" Sunday morning:

However, Mark 16:3 PROVES that Mark is describing the very FIRST visit to the tomb by BOTH MARY's because Mark's notation of what these women were pondering on their way to the tomb ON SUNDAY MORNING demands that both Mary's were still ignorant about any removal of the stone from the tomb. However, there can be no excuse by either Mary and no reason to ponder who would remove the stone IF Matthew 28:1-4 described a previous visit on Saturday.

This is so clear, simple, obvious and totally destructive of Gerards whole theory.


Moreover, the whole reason we have FOUR gospel account instead of just ONE is to provide DIFFERENT perpsectives and DIFFERENT details.

Just because one account says other "women" attended them and the other does not include that does not mean they are two different visits and indeed it is impossible it is two different visits because of the obvious statement by Mark in verse 3.

Just because one account refers to two angels while the other records one angel does not mean they are two different visits.

Gerard is wrong and no amount of juggling, mental gynastics and hot air can explain away the simple facts that in both accounts there are both Mary's and in both accounts they come to the grave and in the account given by Mark it is at "SUNRISE" on Sunday morning and they are pondering who will remove the stone THAT MORNING thus PROVING that Matthew 28:1-6 could not have been an earlier visit as the stone was removed already in Matthew 28 before they arrived at the tomb.


READERS, THE HARDEST THING TO DEFEND IS WHEN THE OBVIOUS IS BEING DENIED. MARK 16:3 MAKES IT OBVIOUS THAT NEITHER MARY HAD PREVIOUS TO SUNDAY MORNING SEEN THE STONE REMOVED FROM THE TOMB BUT MATTHEW 28:1-5 THE STONE IS REMOVED ALREADY BEFORE THEY ARRIVED THUS OBVIOUSLY MAKING MATTHEW 28:1-6 AND MARK 16:1-6 THE VERY SAME VISIT BUT WITH DIFFERING DETAILS.

 

[Dr. Walter]

FACT: In the Matthew 28:1-6 visit by both Mary's, both Mary's SAW the stone had been removed already from the tomb:

1 ¶ In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.


FACT: In Mark 16:1-3 visit by both Mary's, both Mary's ON THEIR WAY to the tomb on SUNDAY MORNING believed the stone was still sealing the tomb:

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? 4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away:


FACT: In both Matthew 28 and Mark 16 they came to "see" and "looked" at a moved stone for the very FIRST TIME:

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?4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away:[


Mt. 27:66 So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.
1 ¶ In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.

So clear, so simple, so easy to see if one simply wants the truth! Both Mary's arrived at the tomb the very FIRST time in Mark 16:1-4 "at sunrise" on Sunday morning.

Reader, it does not make any difference that Mark 16:1-3 makes it impossible for Matthew 28:1-6 to be a previous visit on Saturday because Gerard DOES NOT CARE WHAT GOD'S WORD SAYS.

He has only one agenda and that is to prove his unbiblical inaccurate erroneous SATURDAYISM resurrection view no matter what God's Word says and no matter what anyone else says. He is committed to this error and has built a whole system of interpretation to support this error.

FACT: Mark 16:1-2 is AT SUNRISE ON SUNDAY MORNING

FACT: Mark 16:3 is the thinking of BOTH Mary's AT SUNRISE ON SUNDAY MORNING

FACT: That thinking is IMPOSSIBLE if Matthew 28:1-6 describes a previous visit by BOTH MARY's to this tomb.

FACT: Matthew 28:1-2 and the term "dawn" means "growing" of light (not decreasing of light) and "at Sunrise" is when the sunlight is "growing"

FACT: Matthew 28:1-4 and Mark 16:1-4 describe the very same visit when the very same stone is removed BEFORE both Mary's came to the tomb

FACT: Matthew and Mark provide different details of the SAME VISIt ON THE SAME SUNDAY MORNING.

FACT: Jesus arose from the grave sometime later than 3 am but BEFORE the women arrived on Sunday morning

 

[TCGreek]

I'm more hopeful of the rest of Hebrews 4.

 

[Dr. Walter]

I'm more hopeful of the rest of Hebrews 4.

I don' know what you are getting at by this statement. If you believe the "rest" in Hebrews 4 excludes a present day literal 24 hour Sabbath day observance then you are sorely mistaken.

On the other hand, if you believe the fourth commandment Sabbath has its ultimate fulfillment in the ETERNAL REST of a new heaven and earth then you are correct.

If you think the gospel rest terminates or fulfills the Sabbath Commandment you are sorely mistaken as Hebrew 4:2-3 tells you explicity that all Old Testament saints who believed in the SAME GOSPEL of Christ preached unto them as well as unto us STILL observed a Sabbath day keeping in spite of entering into SPIRITUAL rest in Christ.

Heb. 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. 3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

Those in the Old Testament period who believed in the gospel or had the gospel word mixed with faith in them entered into rest just as we do. However, that rest is a SPIRITUAL rest and it is not the complete fulfillment of the PROMISED rest but simply the FIRST introduction. There is a PROMISED rest (v. 11) yet future that only TRUE believers will enter. In the mean time, both Old Testament and New Testament believers still observe a Sabbath day keeping (v. 9 sabbatismos) simply because "he" who finished a GREATER work than the work of Creation as our high Priest (vv. 9, 14) commemorated that work with a Sabbath observance rest just as in creation but a BETTER sabbath day - FREE FROM ALL LEGALISM but rather observed in the spirit of joy and rejoicing in the things of the Lord (Psa. 118:20-24; Acts 4:10-11; Rev. 1:10; 1 Cor. 16:1-2; Acts 20:7; etc.).

Hence, faith in the gospel (Acts 10:43) did not do away with a Sabbath day keeping for Old Testament belivers any more than faith in the gospel does away with observance of a Sabbath ay by New Testament believers as the ultimate fulfillment of the Sabbath day has not yet occurred - the promised ETERNAL rest in a NEW HEAVEN and a NEW EARTH.

 

[TCGreek]

I don' know what you are getting at by this statement. If you believe the "rest" in Hebrews 4 excludes a present day literal 24 hour Sabbath day observance then you are sorely mistaken.

On the other hand, if you believe the fourth commandment Sabbath has its ultimate fulfillment in the ETERNAL REST of a new heaven and earth then you are correct.

If you think the gospel rest terminates or fulfills the Sabbath Commandment you are sorely mistaken as Hebrew 4:2-3 tells you explicity that all Old Testament saints who believed in the SAME GOSPEL of Christ preached unto them as well as unto us STILL observed a Sabbath day keeping in spite of entering into SPIRITUAL rest in Christ.

Heb. 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. 3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

Those in the Old Testament period who believed in the gospel or had the gospel word mixed with faith in them entered into rest just as we do. However, that rest is a SPIRITUAL rest and it is not the complete fulfillment of the PROMISED rest but simply the FIRST introduction. There is a PROMISED rest (v. 11) yet future that only TRUE believers will enter. In the mean time, both Old Testament and New Testament believers still observe a Sabbath day keeping (v. 9 sabbatismos) simply because "he" who finished a GREATER work than the work of Creation as our high Priest (vv. 9, 14) commemorated that work with a Sabbath observance rest just as in creation but a BETTER sabbath day - FREE FROM ALL LEGALISM but rather observed in the spirit of joy and rejoicing in the things of the Lord (Psa. 118:20-24; Acts 4:10-11; Rev. 1:10; 1 Cor. 16:1-2; Acts 20:7; etc.).

Hence, faith in the gospel (Acts 10:43) did not do away with a Sabbath day keeping for Old Testament belivers any more than faith in the gospel does away with observance of a Sabbath ay by New Testament believers as the ultimate fulfillment of the Sabbath day has not yet occurred - the promised ETERNAL rest in a NEW HEAVEN and a NEW EARTH.

It seems to me that the function of the 7th day sabbath was to point to that eternal rest.

Beginning with faith in Christ, we already have a foretaste of that eternal rest, thus making the 7th day sabbath obsolete.

 

[Dr. Walter]

It seems to me that the function of the 7th day sabbath was to point to that eternal rest.

Beginning with faith in Christ, we already have a foretaste of that eternal rest, thus making the 7th day sabbath obsolete.

Significantly the fourth commandment has nothing to do with the seventh day "of the week" as no such language "of the week" is ever used in Genesis or in any record of the fourth commandment.

The idea "of the week" is purely a product of human reasoning not revelation. I am not saying it contrary to revelation but the Sabbath law is not restricted to any particular day "of the week" because the Sabbath law is applied by God to longer periods of time (month, year) and to other days in the month that do not fall on the seventh day "of the week" but nevertheless are the "seventh" in a series of seven (days, months, years).

It is not wrong to APPLY the Sabbath law to the seventh day "of the week" but it is wrong to restrict it to the seventh day "of the week" as God does not restrict it to such.

Indeed, the ETERNAL REST is not the "seventh" millennium but the ETERNAL age that begins with a NEW heaven and NEW earth or the EIGHTH thousand year just as the Sabbath law is applied by God to the EIGHTH "day" in the month and EIGHTH "year" following the seventh sabbath year (50th year) or EIGHTH "day" (Pentecost) following the seventh sabbath.

No one can RESTRICT the Sabbath law to any particular day "of the week" simply Because God does not restrict it to such although it can be APPLIED to the seventh day "of the week" as well as to other days of the week because God applies it to other days of the week (Lev. 23).

However, in any series of seven regardless of the beginning point it is always the "seventh" because it either precedes or follows six (days, month, years). Therefore, the Sabbath can be the "first day of the week" as the first day of the week is preceded and followed by six days and thus in that series of seven days, Sunday is the SEVENTH of that series and thus the Sabbath. In the series of seven years, regardless of what year you begin with the "seventh" or that one which follows six years is the Sabbatical year.

New Testament revelation has fixed the Sabbath command to the "first day of the week" as the "Lord's day" thus the singular day in the week OWNED by God in contrast to the other six days and it is because of the resurrection of Jesus Christ upon that day (Mark 16:1,9; Heb. 4:9; Acts 20:7; Rev. 1:7; 1 Cor. 16:1-2; etc.)

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

IT:

Then you are saying a Thursday Nisan 14th Passover? If so you will wind up on a Monday emerging from the Tomb, if we stay with 72-hour confinement.
I have to use the premise of I find in scripture. Jesus' body had to be placed inside the Tomb by using Israel's time keeping, which I know you will agree with. About 5:5999 PM, their time, the body of Jesus had to be in the Tomb, and the stone rolled into place. This is Nisan 14, a Wednesday.

GE:

I’m afraid, or rather happy to say, there’s absolutely nothing I “agree with”.

But yes, I am “saying a Thursday Nisan 14th Passover”.

And it is so, that “if we stay with 72-hour confinement” in the grave in the earth BEFORE SUNSET “Thursday Nisan 14th”, “you will wind up on a Monday emerging from the Tomb.”

Therefore The whole debacle is based on the two false presupposition,

… one, “Nisan 14th Passover” sacrificed AND buried; and

… two, “72-hour confinement” in the grave in the earth.

But

… one, SEPARATE sacrifice and day-of-sacrifice, and interment and day-of-interment; and

… two, give the Scripture, “in the HEART of the earth” its RIGHTFUL meaning of Jesus’ LIVE and ALIVE and CONSCIOUS and WILLING and STRIVING conflict in his suffering of the dying and death of death ON “Nisan 14th Passover”,

… and “you will wind up on”,

… “a Thursday”— ‘Fifth Day-of-the-week’ “Nisan 14th Passover” “killed”, ‘night’, and, ‘day’;

… a “great day-of-sabbath…Preparation which is the Fore-sabbath” ‘Friday’ interment of “that which remain”, ‘night’, and, ‘day’;

… and

… “a Monday emerging from the Tomb” “SABBATH’S” ‘night’, and, ‘day’ “FROM THE DEAD”, “third day according to the Scriptures”, resurrection.

So, using the premise we find in Scripture that Jesus' body had to be placed inside the Tomb by Israel's time keeping which was on the passover’s “BONE-Day” and “great day sabbath”, “Feast Day”,

we “winded up on”

“14th”, 15th and 16th “Nisan” “according to the…” PASSOVER- “Scriptures”.

“He shall not hang ALL NIGHT, but before daylight be taken down and the SAME day, buried.” Deuteronomy 21:23 et al.

Anybody’s time, “Mid-afternoon That Day the Sabbath drawing near” Luke 23:54, the body of Jesus was in the Tomb, and the stone rolled into place Luke 23:53. This is Nisan 15, a Friday. And from about 12.00 PM, their time, “the women began to rest the Sabbath according to the (Fourth) Commandment.” Luke 23:56b.