The Fourth Commandment

[Dr. Walter]

"having been the First Day of the week" - Gerhard

This is an impossible translation for John 20:19. You cannot make the two perfect participles modify the day. The perfect participles may refer to actions that began prior to the stated day but they cannot be used to modify the stated day.

Luke may be referring to Roman time instead of Jewish time. However, if he is, then he is emphasizing that the Roman day Sunday is to be understood as equal to the Jewish first day of the week in regard to the Christian Sabbath. Therefore, here is a transition from Jewish to Roman in counting the Christian Sabbath to be the Roman day Sunday. Hence, by Roman counting if you begin with Sunday as equal to the jewish first day of the week and start counting the Roman Sunday as the first of eight days it brings you to the next Sunday.

This was a worship service conducted by Christ on this first Christian Sabbath ("protos tou sabbatou" - Mk. 16:9).

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

GE:
Let’s see….

Every single account uses the SAME day of arrival to the tomb:………

GE:
Say, ‘Every single account uses the same DAY ….’— change your emphasis…. and call a spade a spade and say, ‘Every single account uses the same DAY of a VISIT AT the tomb’.
Then,
In Luke 24:1, Yes;
In Mark 16:2, Yes;
In John 20:11-17, Yes;
In Mk 16:9, Yes.

In “Mark 16:1”, NO!
In “Joh 20:1”, NO!
In “Mt 28:1”, NO!

Why NO! in “Mark 16:1”, NO! in “Joh 20:1”, NO! in “Mt 28:1”?

NO! in “Mark 16:1”— I have already said enough on this one. But….
The Text states, “When the Sabbath was past / has gone through”. That would be sunset and the evening-dusk afterwards. Not “at sunrise” or near ““proii” or the fourth watch between 3am to 6am.”

In “Mark 16:1” the Text states, “Mary Magdalene and Mary of James and Salome”; in Luke 24, it states, “It was Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary of James, AND OTHERS WITH THEM”.

In “Mt 28:1” the Text states, “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary”.

In “Joh 20:1” the Text states, “Mary Magdalene”.

Clearly in “every single account” the PERSONS are different, so it could not have been the same time – not to mention day – that things happened in “Mark 16:1”, in “Joh 20:1”, in “Mt 28:1”.

In “Mark 16:1” the Text states, the women “bought spices”. Clearly in “every single account” the ACTIONS are different, so it could not have been the same time – not to mention day – that things happened in “Mark 16:1”, in “Joh 20:1”, in “Mt 28:1”.

No wonder therefore, in “Mark 16:1” the Text states nothing about “DAY of arrival to the tomb” or at the tomb.

Conclusion:
This, “Every single account uses the SAME day of arrival to the tomb”, is an UNTRUTH.

So what does the Text say in “Joh 20:1”?
First, what it does not say or “use”,
“deep(est) morning (after midnight)” in “Luke 24:1”;
“very early before sunrise” in “Mark 16:2”;

“Mary … supposing Him to be the gardener” in ‘Joh 20:11,15’ or,
“early (on the First Day of the week)” in “Mark 16:9”;

“the angel explaining to the women” or,
“as they went to tell his disciples” in “Mt 28:1”.

Then, what it DOES say or “use” in “Joh 20:1”—
NOT, ““proii” or “early” when it was yet “dark” on the first day of the week”;
NOT, “that same morning ... the first day of the week”;
NOT, “at the same time in that day - proii - early morning - rising of the sun - dawn (getting brighter) or “early””;
NOT, “They GOT THERE at Sunrise while it was twilight, saw it was empty and all the women BUT Mary Magdalene RAN BACK to tell the apostles.” — blatant UNTRUTH!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Then, what it DOES say or “use” in the actual Text “in Joh 20:1”—
1) “On the First Day of the week …
2) Mary Magdalene COMES …
3) being EARLY darkness still …
4) TOWARDS the sepulchre and …
5) SEES …
6) the STONE …
7) taken AWAY FROM the sepulchre …
8) THEN she RUNS and comes TO Simon Peter and the other disciple…”

Mary saw only what John tells, she saw: “the STONE”, “taken AWAY FROM the sepulchre”. What she told the two disciples, “They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid them”, is no more than what she suspected; not what she had seen. If it had been what she had seen then Mary had seen ‘them’, ‘taking away the Lord’, and would not have wondered but would have known exactly what happened; which in any case was not the case so she could not have known anything really, because she did NOT “SEE”, the inside, of the grave, but, only, “the STONE”, outside, it.

But the grave WAS empty --- which we, know, but Mary, did not know. Mary therefore, STILL THINKING THE BODY WAS IN THE GRAVE, “came unto / arrived at / got to the sepulchre”, “with others”, “carrying spices ready and prepared” Lk24:1,10, TO SALVE THE BODY! It MUST be the women’s first and earliest REALISED VISIT AT the tomb, and it just makes sense that Luke ‘uses’ ANOTHER time-indicator than any of the other Gospels to tell that the women “came earliest / deep(est) morning” just after midnight – ‘orthrou batheohs’.

Noticed that there is no story of a “trip” to the tomb here?

Therefore John 20:1 in time and event and logic, comes BEFORE Luke 24:1, and before midnight. So what is “used” “in Joh 20:1”?— Literally the above, “On the First Day of the week Mary Magdalene COMES being EARLY darkness still TOWARDS the sepulchre and SEES the STONE taken AWAY FROM the sepulchre. She RUNS and comes TO Simon Peter and the other disciple…”

“Being early darkness still”, but Sunday-resurrectionists HATE it because they worship Sunday; so they CHANGE it to, “Being darkness still”, which is in the morning before dawn, and no longer in the evening before dark. Only leave out, “early” and say only, “dark” or “darkness”. Innocently, oh, so piously….

Further notice that in John20:1-10 no angel or angels feature; no women than Mary Magdalene; no interior description of the tomb; no ‘message’ or ‘witness’ like in Luke 24:1-11, Mark 161-8 or Mt28:5-10; no mention of the women’s reactions to it.

Notice the story of Peter and John’s race to the grave at the news it was opened and their “return home”, in between Mary’s first glimpse of the OPENED tomb and her having “had had stood after without at the sepulchre-door”. Mary standing, weeping, talking to the angels inside; whereas in Jn20:1 she ‘saw’ ‘then ran back’. That in 20:11-17 Jesus appeared to Mary, whereas in 1-10 all were exited about an opened grave and disappeared body.

Then talk of “1. Every text above gives the day they came - the first day of the week”, and “2. Every text above gives the time they came to the tomb was at sunrise”; “Every single account uses the SAME day of arrival to the tomb”.

Notice “1. Every text”, “2. Every text”, “Every single account” included --- dotted down: 1) “Joh 20:1 ¶”; 2) “4. John 20:1”; 3) “3. They started while it was yet “dark””; 4) “4. They got their at Sunrise while it was twilight, saw it was empty and all the women but Mary Magnalene ran back to tell the apostles.”; 5) “the sunlight was just beginning to dawn or in the twilight of morning ………Joh 20:1 ¶ The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre……”— FIVE TIMES!

Then five times, with reference to “Joh20:1”, talk of “Every text above gives THE DAY THEY CAME - the first day of the week”, and “2. Every text above gives THE TIME THEY CAME TO THE TOMB was at sunrise”; “Every single account uses THE SAME DAY OF ARRIVAL TO THE TOMB” (Emphasis GE)— then five times, Dr Walter, you abuse and corrupt the Word of God with reference to but this one reference of yours, “Joh20:1”.

Matthew 28:1 next, though I don’t feel like it for fear of words thrown at the wind.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Dr. Walter,

re: "Correct Luke not me, because I am just following how he counted the prophesy of three days."

But we’re talking about John here - not Luke. Luke and John don’t exactly see time in the same way. John says it was about the 6th hour when the Messiah was before Pilate waiting to hear His fate. And Luke says it was about the 6th hour when the darkness began which was 3 hours after the start of the crucifixion.
　
　
re: "He [Luke] started his counting with the first day as day one."

What scripture says that?

GE:
John views the time on the clock as it were the 'Roman way' midnight to midnight; he still views the cycle of days according to the 'week' - 'sabbatohn' / 'sabbatou', the 'Jewish way'.

The other Gospels view the reckoning of time or hours the Hebrew and or Greek way, from sunrise to sunset and from sunset to sunrise.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

If not, then why did you say the following:

The day” is not “the only time question”; “the day” is NO ‘question’. Have we not agreed upon it already? We did. “That it happened in the morning of that day” is not ‘the question’; What is ‘it’; WHAT “happened in the morning of that day”, is the question— the very question I have been asking you from that I entered this conversation. - Gerhard

Let us start again and clarify the issue.

1. Do you believe Christ rose from the grave Sunday morning?

2. Do you believe the passages I have given concerning all the women coming to the grave occurred on Sunday Morning WITH THE EXCEPTION of Mary Magdalene?

3. Do you believe Mary Magdalene came on a different day OR a different time on Sunday morning to the grave?

GE:
Question 1. I believe Mt28:1, "Sabbath's fullness of day mid-afternoon as it began to dawn towards the First Day of the week" ('dawn' - Tyndale, KJV - equivalent of 'eve' BEFORE, like in Lk23:54: "That day was The Preparation ('Friday afternoon') as it began to dawn towards the Sabbath" ('Saturday').

Question 2. I believe the passages concerning all the women and Jesus’ first two appearances portrays a condition or circumstance – a VISIT AT the grave – or and, leaving from, the grave, on different times of morning after midnight until after sunrise on Sunday Morning.

Question 3. I believe Mary Magdalene got her first sight of the OPENED tomb on Saturday evening "while yet EARLY darkness" - 'proh-i skotias eti ousehs'.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

John is merely giving the Roman time instead of the Jewish time when it came to the hours of the day not when it comes to counting days.

GE:
Perfect!
(I wrote my answer to Strats before I read your response to him, Dr Walter. I would not have bothered to answer him had I read your post first.)

 

[Dr. Walter]

Sorry I don't buy it! John 20:1; Mat. 28:1 and Mark 16:1-2 are the same not different accounts.

Mark 16:1-2 describe the same coming to the tomb. Verse one simply notes the Jewish Sabbath was over. Verse 2 simply notes what day after the Jewish Sabbath they commenced to the tomb. Mark 16:8 is qualified by Matthew 28:9-10 but same return trip to disciples.

Matthew 28:1 is the very same account of Luke 24:1 and John 20:1 as well as Mark 16:1-2.

Matthew 28:1 places the Sabbath "behind" them and they went to the tomb "INTO" (Gr. eis) first day of the week when the light was getting brighter NOT DIMMER.

Mark 16:9 occurs on the first day of the week, Sunday morning AFTER Jesus rose that morning between 3am to 6am BEFORE sunrise and BEFORE the women came with Mary Magdalene the first time. Verse 9 marks the return trip of Mary with disciples that same day.

Then, what it DOES say or “use” in the actual Text “in Joh 20:1”—
1) “On the First Day of the week …
2) Mary Magdalene COMES …
3) being EARLY darkness still …
4) TOWARDS the sepulchre and …
5) SEES …
6) the STONE …
7) taken AWAY FROM the sepulchre …
8) THEN she RUNS and comes TO Simon Peter and the other disciple…”

Mary saw only what John tells, she saw: “the STONE”, “taken AWAY FROM the sepulchre”. What she told the two disciples, “They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid them”, is no more than what she suspected; not what she had seen. If it had been what she had seen then Mary had seen ‘them’, ‘taking away the Lord’, and would not have wondered but would have known exactly what happened; which in any case was not the case so she could not have known anything really, because she did NOT “SEE”, the inside, of the grave, but, only, “the STONE”, outside, it.

But the grave WAS empty --- which we, know, but Mary, did not know. Mary therefore, STILL THINKING THE BODY WAS IN THE GRAVE, “came unto / arrived at / got to the sepulchre”, “with others”, “carrying spices ready and prepared” Lk24:1,10, TO SALVE THE BODY! It MUST be the women’s first and earliest REALISED VISIT AT the tomb, and it just makes sense that Luke ‘uses’ ANOTHER time-indicator than any of the other Gospels to tell that the women “came earliest / deep(est) morning” just after midnight – ‘orthrou batheohs’.

Noticed that there is no story of a “trip” to the tomb here?

Therefore John 20:1 in time and event and logic, comes BEFORE Luke 24:1, and before midnight. So what is “used” “in Joh 20:1”?— Literally the above, “On the First Day of the week Mary Magdalene COMES being EARLY darkness still TOWARDS the sepulchre and SEES the STONE taken AWAY FROM the sepulchre. She RUNS and comes TO Simon Peter and the other disciple…”

“Being early darkness still”, but Sunday-resurrectionists HATE it because they worship Sunday; so they CHANGE it to, “Being darkness still”, which is in the morning before dawn, and no longer in the evening before dark. Only leave out, “early” and say only, “dark” or “darkness”. Innocently, oh, so piously….

Further notice that in John20:1-10 no angel or angels feature; no women than Mary Magdalene; no interior description of the tomb; no ‘message’ or ‘witness’ like in Luke 24:1-11, Mark 161-8 or Mt28:5-10; no mention of the women’s reactions to it.

Notice the story of Peter and John’s race to the grave at the news it was opened and their “return home”, in between Mary’s first glimpse of the OPENED tomb and her having “had had stood after without at the sepulchre-door”. Mary standing, weeping, talking to the angels inside; whereas in Jn20:1 she ‘saw’ ‘then ran back’. That in 20:11-17 Jesus appeared to Mary, whereas in 1-10 all were exited about an opened grave and disappeared body.

Then talk of “1. Every text above gives the day they came - the first day of the week”, and “2. Every text above gives the time they came to the tomb was at sunrise”; “Every single account uses the SAME day of arrival to the tomb”.

Notice “1. Every text”, “2. Every text”, “Every single account” included --- dotted down: 1) “Joh 20:1 ¶”; 2) “4. John 20:1”; 3) “3. They started while it was yet “dark””; 4) “4. They got their at Sunrise while it was twilight, saw it was empty and all the women but Mary Magnalene ran back to tell the apostles.”; 5) “the sunlight was just beginning to dawn or in the twilight of morning ………Joh 20:1 ¶ The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre……”— FIVE TIMES!

Then five times, with reference to “Joh20:1”, talk of “Every text above gives THE DAY THEY CAME - the first day of the week”, and “2. Every text above gives THE TIME THEY CAME TO THE TOMB was at sunrise”; “Every single account uses THE SAME DAY OF ARRIVAL TO THE TOMB” (Emphasis GE)— then five times, Dr Walter, you abuse and corrupt the Word of God with reference to but this one reference of yours, “Joh20:1”.

Matthew 28:1 next, though I don’t feel like it for fear of words thrown at the wind.

 

[Dr. Walter]

GE:
Perfect!
(I wrote my answer to Strats before I read your response to him, Dr Walter. I would not have bothered to answer him had I read your post first.)

Better read my other post because it won't sound to "perfect" for you then! John is clarifying that the Roman Sunday is EQUAL to the first day of the week in regard to the resurrection and counting SUNDAY as the first day in his eight day count which ends up on the next SUNDAY.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Discussion about Mary was not part of the discussion I entered into concerning the resurrection time of Christ. However, I agree that Mary Magdalene in John 20 made two trips to the tomb on Sunday morning. First, with all the women (Mt. 28:1; Mk. 16:1-2; Lk. 24:1). Then they went back and told the apostles and she came back with them and that is when Christ appeared to her (Jn. 20:2-17).

However, I do not believe that the texts I gave including John 20:1 refer to another visit to the tomb apart from the rest of the women but that John 20:1 is synonomous with Mark 16:1-2; Mt. 28:1; Luke 24:1. John 20:1 gives the condition “dark” when the women left for the tomb including Mary Magdalene and they arrived at the tomb at the rising of the sun.

GE:
Re:
“Mary Magdalene in John 20 made two trips to the tomb on Sunday morning. First, with all the women (Mt. 28:1; Mk. 16:1-2; Lk. 24:1). Then they went back and told the apostles and she came back with them and that is when Christ appeared to her (Jn. 20:2-17).”

Mary Magdalene in John 20 made ONE “trip to the tomb”, not “on Sunday morning”, but “On the First Day”, yes, but “while early darkness still” (as explained above), which means during the First Day of the week’s first- and beginning-part— its ‘evening’ part before dark and “while it is early darkness still”— whereas in ‘Roman time-reckoning’, ‘evening’ of night until midnight is the last and CLOSING part of a day. Now you yourself in this discussion have stated, “John is merely giving the Roman time instead of the Jewish time when it came to the hours of the day not when it comes to counting days.” Therefore John in 20:1 is speaking about ‘Saturday evening’.

Mary Magdalene therefore, made
1) one ‘trip to the tomb’ “on the First Day”, in John 20:1, on ‘Saturday evening’, alone; “she came back”, alone; “and told the apostles”, herself only;
2) a second ‘trip to the tomb’ “on the First Day deepest morning of night”, NOT MENTIONED OR IMPLIED in John 20:1, but mentioned by only Luke in 24:1, when Mary ‘with all the women’ named in Lk24:10, in verse 1 “came unto / arrived at the sepulchre” (described above);
3) a third ‘trip to the tomb’ “on the First Day very early before sunrise”— NOT MENTIONED, BUT IMPLIED through the word ‘heistehkei’- “had had stood after / stayed behind” in John 20:11-17— the ‘trip’ or rather VISIT AT the tomb mentioned in Mark 16:2-8, when Mary together with any number of women but more likely together with only the other two women named in verse 1, must have had gone back to the tomb after their first visit acc. to Lk24:1-10, to ascertain their findings (at discovering the EMPTY tomb earlier according acc. to Lk24:1-10). At THIS visit recorded in Mark, was it that the women “fled from the tomb for they trembled and were amazed neither told they anything to anyone”…. “BUT” — according to John 20:11 — “Mary Magdalene had had stayed behind….”!

The same INITIAL ‘trip’ or visit at the tomb by Mary Magdalene on ‘Sunday morning’ MENTIONED in Mark 16:2-8, is PRESUPPOSED in John 20:11-17. And this “had had stood after”-visit at the tomb on ‘Sunday morning’ of Mary’s in John 20:11-17, again is PRESUPPOSED in Mark 16:9.

Mark 16:9 presupposes John 20:11-17 with regard to Jesus’ appearance to Mary. Where John gives no time indication (than the suggestion of a gardener for whom Mary supposed Jesus and who would start working sunrise “twelve hours in a (working) day” sunrise to sunset), Mark 16:9 states that it was “early on the First Day”. Now this “early”- ‘proh-i’ must of course have been later than when Jesus (in 16:2) “VERY early sunrise”- ‘lian prohi anateilantos’, had not yet appeared to anyone.

Mk16:2 was “VERY early sunrise” and Mk16:9 was just “early”— like John’s gardener’s day that began ‘sunrise’.

There are many other differentiating time and circumstance factors I shall not now pay attention to. These for any reasonable person should be sufficient to show the various visits at the various times of night and morning at the tomb but also away from the tomb. See many discourses and studies, besides books 1/1, 1/2, 2— ‘Passover to Crucifixion’, ‘Burial’, ‘Resurrection’.

This therefore should show the MANY misconceptions, Dr Walter, in your above statements, so that I am sure it will not be necessary to go into finer detail. A positive statement simply of the real thing should give the desired insight, as I have tried to make with my explanation of Mary’s more than one or two visits at the tomb during the Saturday night and Sunday morning before sunrise, and after.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Better read my other post because it won't sound to "perfect" for you then! John is clarifying that the Roman Sunday is EQUAL to the first day of the week in regard to the resurrection and counting SUNDAY as the first day in his eight day count which ends up on the next SUNDAY.

GE:
This sounds too complicated for a simple man like me. It's a pitty.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

"having been the First Day of the week" - Gerhard

This is an impossible translation for John 20:19. You cannot make the two perfect participles modify the day. The perfect participles may refer to actions that began prior to the stated day but they cannot be used to modify the stated day.

Luke may be referring to Roman time instead of Jewish time. However, if he is, then he is emphasizing that the Roman day Sunday is to be understood as equal to the Jewish first day of the week in regard to the Christian Sabbath. Therefore, here is a transition from Jewish to Roman in counting the Christian Sabbath to be the Roman day Sunday. Hence, by Roman counting if you begin with Sunday as equal to the jewish first day of the week and start counting the Roman Sunday as the first of eight days it brings you to the next Sunday.

This was a worship service conducted by Christ on this first Christian Sabbath ("protos tou sabbatou" - Mk. 16:9).

GE:
Dear Dr Walter, it was you saying, not me!
Here's my statement having quoted YOU:
<And again, it must be pointed out, John does NOT speak of it ‘having been the First Day of the week’ in verse 19 as the point in time departed from, but of it “having been EVENING ON_THAT DAY_ relative to the First Day of the week”— so, from the point of departure of the second day of the week....>

It was that statement where I made the mistake I soon afterwards corrected .... <.... In this sense and sentence therefore, the use of ‘meth’ hehmeras ….’ has simply NO ‘idiomatic’ force but is intended purely ‘literal’. >

 

[Dr. Walter]

GE:
Dear Dr Walter, it was you saying, not me!
Here's my statement having quoted YOU:
<And again, it must be pointed out, John does NOT speak of it ‘having been the First Day of the week’ in verse 19 as the point in time departed from, but of it “having been EVENING ON_THAT DAY_ relative to the First Day of the week”— so, from the point of departure of the second day of the week....>

It was that statement where I made the mistake I soon afterwards corrected .... <.... In this sense and sentence therefore, the use of ‘meth’ hehmeras ….’ has simply NO ‘idiomatic’ force but is intended purely ‘literal’. >

"evening" is not modified by the perfect tense participles. It is not "having been evening" but rather "BEING evening the same day, the first day of the week having been...."

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Self-correction:
Please note that Mary made no 'trip to the tomb', after sunrise .....

........ A positive statement simply of the real thing should give the desired insight, as I have tried to make with my explanation of Mary’s more than one or two visits at the tomb during the Saturday night and Sunday morning before sunrise, and after.

Thanks.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

"evening" is not modified by the perfect tense participles. It is not "having been evening" but rather "BEING evening the same day, the first day of the week having been...."

GE:
John 20:19, 'Ousehs oun opsias' --- 'ousehs' Participle Feminine Singular, "being", 'ruling', 'opsias' Subject-Noun Feminine Singular, "evening".

I translated the Present 'Tense' 'ousehs' q.d. 'Past Present', 'Tense', for its historic, narrating function or force in Jn20:19, just like one might translate the Present 'Tense' 'erchetai'- "Mary cometh" in 20:1, with a Past Tense in English. We (I) did refer to this 'Aspect' of the Greek 'Present', which is a common thing in most languages.

Then again, I could not find I once used the Past (Tense) meaning of 'ousehs' elsewhere in this discussion.
Here are my references:
as John says “THEN (‘OUN’) having been (‘ousehs’) on _THAT_ ‘EKEINEHI miai (hehmerai)” --- which RELATIVE PRONOUN REFERS TO: _THAT_ PAST, and “First Day of the week” (Sunday). It does not say ‘BEING on the First Day’; it says “being EVENING” REFERRING TO: “the EVENING” RELATIVE to “THAT day” whichever day of the week.

John reads:
“ousehs oun opsias” - “then being evening”;
“on THAT DAY” - ‘tehi hehmerai EKEINEHI’;
“WITH REFERENCE TO the First Day of the week” - ‘tehi miai sabbatohn’: Dative of Reference. In other words, the NORMAL Dative!

In John it is written ”It being evening on THAT DAY”- ‘ousehs opsias hehmerai ekeinehi’ Jn20:19. The disciples were thus “found” Lk24:33.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

"

having been the First Day of the week" …………Luke may be referring to Roman time instead of Jewish time. However, if he is, then he is emphasizing that the Roman day Sunday is to be understood as equal to the Jewish first day of the week in regard to the Christian Sabbath. Therefore, here is a transition from Jewish to Roman in counting the Christian Sabbath to be the Roman day Sunday. Hence, by Roman counting if you begin with Sunday as equal to the jewish first day of the week and start counting the Roman Sunday as the first of eight days it brings you to the next Sunday.

This was a worship service conducted by Christ on this first Christian Sabbath ("protos tou sabbatou" - Mk. 16:9).

GE:
Luke does not ‘refer to Roman time instead of Jewish time’. Luke consistently used ‘Jewish time’ in both his Gospel and Acts.

Now Dr Walter supposes, “……IF he (Luke) is (refer(ring) to Roman time instead of Jewish time), then he is emphasizing that the Roman day Sunday is to be understood as equal to the Jewish first day of the week in regard to the Christian Sabbath.”

What firm basis is such a supposition for Luke to ‘EMPHASIZE’, “that the Roman day Sunday is to be understood”, “HENCE”-FORTH, “as equal to the Jewish first day of the week in regard to the Christian Sabbath”! (Emphasis GE)

It is this very same summary, absolute, PREMISE, upon which Dr Walter, “HENCE”-forth (from Luke), also pens his own dogmatic stake, declaring, “This was a worship service conducted by Christ on this first Christian Sabbath” and sommer at the same time, spans its perimeters with stolen ropes "protos tou sabbatou", from Mark, “- Mk. 16:9” …. INCREDIBLE! “Therefore, here is a transition from Jewish to Roman in counting the Christian Sabbath to be the Roman day Sunday.” (Just a repetition.) “Hence, by Roman counting if you begin with Sunday as equal to the jewish first day of the week and start counting the Roman Sunday as the first of eight days it brings you to the next Sunday.” (And another repetition with an extra of superior arithmetic skills we have seen before of Dr Walter.)

Now folks, we all meet next Sunday for a blessed Sabbath! See ya there! Then sought they for Jesus, and spake among themselves, as they stood in the church, What think ye, that He will come to the Feast? Ye know He never saw this day or knew by Roman counting if you begin with Sunday as equal to the Jewish first day of the week and start counting the Roman Sunday as the first of eight days it brings you to the next Sunday in counting the Christian Sabbath to be the Roman day Sunday….

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

It is very very clear from the Scriptures that John 20:1; Mt. 28:1; Mark 16:1-2 and Luke 24:1 all occurred on the very same day - the first day of the week and in the morning not the evening of that day.

It is also very very clear that Mark 16:9 occurred on that very same day in the morning and not the evening between 3am-6am

Mary Magdalene came with the rest of the women in Mat. 28:1; Lk. 24:1 and Mk. 16:1-2.

John 20:1 also occurred on the same day - the first day of the week where Mary is singled out by John because John is not going to talk about the rest of the women at all even though he is going to talk about what happened on the same day as in Mt. 28:1; Lk. 24:1 and Mk 16:1-2 in connection with going and telling the disciples as in Mt. 28:7-9; Lk. 24:9-10; Mk. 16:7-8 in which ALL THE WOMEN were involved.

John 20:1 simply traces Mary Magdalene without denying that the other women were also with her in John 20:1-2 as John 20:1-2 is parallel with Mt. 28:7-9; Luke. 24:9-10 and Mark 16:7-8.

Jesus arose from the grave BEFORE the women got to the grave and he arose between 3am to 6am Sunday morning.

The term “proii” describes the EXACT SAME PERIOD of time - 3am to 6am on Sunday Morning for the resurrection of Christ (Mk. 16:9) as well as the time the women began their journey to the grave (John 20:1) and the time they arrived before sunrise.

Mary Magdalene’s second trip (Jn. 2:3-11) on the very same day occurred after her initial trip with the other women (Jn. 20:1).

Mark 16:9 makes it clear that Jesus rose from the grave on the first day of the week during “proii” during the very same period “proii” that the women came to grave “proii” on the very same day - Period - end of story.

GE:
Before I reply to this post, I think we must first return to Dr Walter’s post,

………Mt 28:1 ¶

In the end of [Gr. opse - after] the sabbath, as it began to dawn [Gr. epiphosko - get brighter] toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

…………
1. Every text above gives the day they came - the first day of the week
…………
Mt 28:1 ¶ In the end of [Gr. opse - “after”] the sabbath, as it began to dawn [epiphosko - to get brighter] toward (eis - into) the first day of the week,

2. Every text above gives the time they came to the tomb was at sunrise
a. “sunrise” (not sunset)
b. “morning” (not evening)
c. “early” proii - 3am to 6pm or 4th watch
d. “dawn” - epiphosko - to get brighter (not darker)
3. They started while it was yet “dark” between 3 a.m to 6am
4. They arrived at sunrise not sunset
5. The rest of the women went back but Mary stayed.
6. Jesus rose between 3 am. to 6 a.m and then appeared to Mary.

Thus the clear chronological order is as follows:
1. Began their journey while it was yet dark between 3 am to 6pm Sunday Morning.
2. They came “early” on the first day of the week
3. They arrived at the selphchre at SUNRISE Sunday morning.
4. They got their at Sunrise while it was twilight, saw it was empty and all the women but Mary Magnalene ran back to tell the apostles.
5. Jesus appeared to Mary - Mk 16:9.

It is just that simple and that clear.

There was a “watch” at the tomb (Mt. 28:11)and the precise watch is designated by the repeated Greek term “proii” or the fourth watch between 3am to 6am.
………

…. In order to first have a look at our last Text, Matthew 28:1 as promised, I think, before we could go on. Therefore ….

“Mt 28:1 … In the end of [Gr. opse - after] the sabbath, as it began to dawn [Gr. epiphosko - get brighter] toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. ………
Mt 28:1 … In the end of [Gr. opse - “after”] the sabbath, as it began to dawn [epiphosko - to get brighter] toward (eis - into) the first day of the week,”

GE:
First, let us see the KJV only,
“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.”

Now according to THIS, Dr Walter avers,
“1. Every text above gives the day they came - the first day of the week”
“2. Every text above gives the time they came to the tomb was at sunrise
a. “sunrise” (not sunset)
b. “morning” (not evening)
c. “early” proii - 3am to 6pm or 4th watch
d. “dawn” - epiphosko - to get brighter (not darker)
3. They started while it was yet “dark” between 3 a.m to 6am
4. They arrived at sunrise not sunset
5. The rest of the women went back but Mary stayed.
6. Jesus rose between 3 am. to 6 a.m and then appeared to Mary.

Thus the clear chronological order is as follows:
1. Began their journey while it was yet dark between 3 am to 6pm Sunday Morning.
2. They came “early” on the first day of the week
3. They arrived at the selphchre at SUNRISE Sunday morning.
4. They got their at Sunrise while it was twilight, saw it was empty and all the women but Mary Magnalene ran back to tell the apostles.
5. Jesus appeared to Mary - Mk 16:9.
………
There was a “watch” at the tomb (Mt. 28:11)and the precise watch is designated by the repeated Greek term “proii” or the fourth watch between 3am to 6am.”

The determining concepts are,
First of course, WHO act in Mt28:1, “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary” only, or, “they” and “the rest of the women” therefore “all the women”?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

post deleted because duplicated

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Well, if we should go according to the words Matthew used, only “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary” were the actresses during this episode of the Gospel Story. But obviously Dr Walter thinks different, and reckons “they”, “the rest of the women” and therefore “all the women”, were involved, from start to finish, because he says, ““1. Every text above gives the day they came - the first day of the week”
“2. Every text above gives the time they came to the tomb was at sunrise
a. “sunrise” (not sunset)
b. “morning” (not evening)
c. “early” proii - 3am to 6pm or 4th watch
d. “dawn” - epiphosko - to get brighter (not darker)
3. They started while it was yet “dark” between 3 a.m to 6am
4. They arrived at sunrise not sunset
5. The rest of the women went back but Mary stayed.
6. Jesus rose between 3 am. to 6 a.m and then appeared to Mary.

Thus the clear chronological order is as follows:
1. Began their journey while it was yet dark between 3 am to 6pm Sunday Morning.
2. They came “early” on the first day of the week
3. They arrived at the selphchre at SUNRISE Sunday morning.
4. They got their at Sunrise while it was twilight, saw it was empty and all the women but Mary Magnalene ran back to tell the apostles.
5. Jesus appeared to Mary - Mk 16:9.
………
There was a “watch” at the tomb (Mt. 28:11)and the precise watch is designated by the repeated Greek term “proii” or the fourth watch between 3am to 6am.”

So who is right, Matthew or Dr Walter?

See, that Dr Walter only in the last position --- last in chronological position --- places “5. Jesus appeared to Mary - Mk 16:9”. He places Jesus’ first appearance AFTER everything in Matthew. Except Dr Walter’s postscript about the guard, of course …. as a parenthesis, one might say.

Matthew does not do that though; Matthew mentions the Marys and the guards present and involved in the period of time which he had in mind, never mind now what period of time that was. That is what we must find out; we cannot at this stage of our investigation make assumptions and claim what period of time it was. I do not want to argue ‘in a circle’ which I have before shown, is the method used by Dr Walter.

We conclude therefore that Dr Walter takes Mary Magdalene right through all the events in company with all the other women …. Even right through Matthew 28 from verse 1 of the chapter until …. where shall we say? …. until all the disciple men and women were found together in Jerusalem somewhere where and when all the women Mary Magdalene included, told all the disciples men and women together that the Lord actually “met them”, and that they “held Him at his feet” and that He actually spoke to them all and told them all to go to ‘the twelve’ (eleven by then) and tell them that He had raised from the dead. THEN after it all, comes Dr Walter’s point number “5. Jesus appeared to Mary - Mk 16:9”.

So did Jesus appear to Mary alone AFTER He had had appeared to her and the other women together, again? What shall we believe, that Jesus appeared to Mary alone AFTER He had had appeared to her and the other women together, AGAIN, and not “first” and because “first”, all by herself, “first”— “Mk 16:9”?

Shall we believe Dr Walter, and not Mark— “Mk 16:9”?

So, WHO, act in Mt28:1, “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary” only, or, “they” and “the rest of the women” therefore “all the women”? And the answer is inevitable: “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary” only— as Matthew wrote it, “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary”.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Now,
WHAT did “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary” actually DO, according to Matthew 28:1? (Wait with asking or answering ‘when?’ now. That question will soon enough have answered itself.) WHAT did “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary” actually DO, according to Matthew 28:1?
KJV, “came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.”

Dr Walter:
At first says:
“the day”….
“1. they came -”,
“2. they came to the tomb”;
“3. They started”;
“4. They arrived”;
“5. The rest of the women went back but Mary stayed”;
“6. Jesus rose then appeared to Mary”.

Then says:
“the chronological order is”….
“1. Began their journey”;
“2. They came”, “They arrived”
“3. saw it was empty”;
“4. “They got there”; “all the women but Mary Magdalene ran back to tell”
“5. Jesus appeared to Mary - Mk 16:9.”

In all fairness to see what was in Dr Walter’s mind –– is to understand that “The rest of the women went back but Mary stayed”; “all the women but Mary Magdalene ran back to tell”— BUT, that “Jesus rose” BEFORE— and, “then appeared to Mary”, points “6.” and “5.”. But that is about all he deserves credit for, because every other statement Dr Walter makes, is erroneous. Why? Because Dr Walter just will not admit separate visits at the tomb that night and morning were the order of the day literally! These errors are so obvious they hit the eye.

And they are all, also due to Dr Walter’s refusal to admit Mary undertook
1)at least once to go to the tomb on her own and see the stone was removed from the opening, and run back to tell it Jn20:1;
2)at least once to on her own stay behind at the tomb and Jesus then appeared to her Jn20:11-17.

And they are all, also due to Dr Walter’s refusal to admit Mary and other women were at the tomb together more than once when they
3)first “arrived with sweet spices ready and prepared” Lk24:1, “and remembered… and returned… and told all”;
4)and AGAIN “arrived… and said… and looked… and entering… saw… and FLED… and told no one anything” Mk16:2-5;

And they are all, also due to Dr Walter’s refusal to admit the other women without the company of Mary Magdalene at the very last had to have been at the tomb
5)“when EXPLAINED the angel to the women”, Mt28:5, “Fear not ye…. BECAUSE, He is not here, BECAUSE He is risen…. And they going…. Jesus suddenly met them”.

So that it may be understood how “In the end of the Sabbath, being-mid-daylight-inclining as it towards the First Day of the week began to dawn”, “Sabbath’s”— BEFORE— Mt28:1-4, “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary set out to go have a look at the grave WHEN SUDDENLY there was a great earthquake and the angel of the Lord descending from heaven approached and hurled away from the tomb the doorstone and sat on it.”

I’ll repeat it in bold for it is everything, everything is about:

“The angel answered and explaining, said to the women…”, so that it may be understood how
“In the end of the Sabbath being-mid-daylight-inclining Sabbath’s— as it Sabbath’s— towards the First Day of the week began to dawn, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary Sabbath’s— set out to go have a look at the grave WHEN Sabbath’s— there suddenly was a great earthquake and the angel of the Lord Sabbath’s— descending from heaven approached, and Sabbath’s— hurled away from the tomb the doorstone and, Sabbath’s— sat on it.” “Sabbath’s” everything! NONE OF ‘SUNDAY’ anything! Because “it is written”: ‘opse de SABBATOHN tehi epiphohskousehi eis mian sabbatohn…. apokritheis de ho anggelos eipen tais gynaiksin….’.

 

[BobRyan]

Instead of introducing yourself and saying, "Dr. Walter, I am in agreement with your position even with Mark 16:9 in regard to the day and time of the resurrection but I take exception for your use of Mark 16:9 in the case of Mary as the same time with all the other women that same Sunday morning" you just started in with an attack without any clarification joining with the Seventh Day Adventists who were already engaged and denying that Mark 16:9 had anything to do with Sunday morning resurrection.

If all you wanted to do was discuss the chronological order of events on Sunday morning then you should have started another thread for that purpose or informed me that was your purpose instead of just joining in with the SDA in their attack of a Sunday morning resurrection use of Mark 16:9.

If you notice the thread subject this is about the fourth commandment and its application in regard to Saturday or Sunday.

One more not-so-subtle correction if you please.

Seventh-day Adventists teach that Christ was crucified on Friday evening and was raised on Sunday Morning - week-day-one.

Not sure how you missed that.

GE (who claims on another thread that his former local SDA congregation is to be condemned for not disfellowshipping him) appears to claim a Sabbath resurrection --

Past history on this board will clearly show that the only person that GE would gladly debate on this topic - more than you -- is me.

in Christ,

Bob