Appeared at no Visit


Mark 16:1


Page seven of study, ‘Gospels’ witnesses’ (December 31, 2008),

In Matthew 28, the angel’s second and later ‘appearance’ in time, was when he “explained / answered to the women” what in verses 1 to 4 had happened— the Resurrection! This – verse 5a – was the first and only time “the angel told the women” these specific Resurrection-particulars found in verses 1 to 4 that had not been recorded anywhere else in the Gospels – particulars the angel could not have told the women before because they were not prepared for it before.

The contextual and syntactical relation between Mt28:1-4 –Resurrection–, and 5-8 –(second) Appearance– is

1) sequential. The Resurrection historically had to have occurred before the angel’s ‘explanation’ of or ‘witness’ about it to the women. But it is also

2) rhetorical— as follows,

The Gospel writer placed his statement, “The angel answered / explained to the women, and said ....”, both as concluding and introductory remark, in between, the angel’s ‘witness’ of and about the Resurrection contained in 1-4, and the angel’s direct “speech” to the women at the empty tomb in 5-8.

There is no equivalent of 1-4 in another ‘witness’ of the angel or for that matter in another Gospel. The fact of the incidence of verses 1-4 in the angel’s witness ‘in Matthew’, proves the course of events that developed up to the unique opportunity that presented itself ‘in Matthew’ in the form of the event (in its own right) of the women’s final visit at the tomb when the angel related his ‘witness’ to them as not once before.

Before Jesus appeared to the women other than Mary on Sunday morning, Mt28:5-10, the angel first “explained to / answered the women” about the Resurrection, in verses 1-4. Only then, “Said he to them, fear not .....” etc. See how the differences prove agreement, that the ‘one visit principle’, cannot.
In verses 1-4, ‘Matthew’s’ angel, ‘relates’ to the women his message, “explaining” / “answering, he told them” his “witness testimony”—

1) about “the whole resurrection incident” — as the Resurrection actually had happened on the day— before;
In verses 5-7, ‘Matthew’s’ angel,

2) actually “tells the women” his “witness testimony”; and

3) actually “tells the women” to go tell the disciples what he had told them of and about the Resurrection.

Neither the angel’s reference to or mentioning of the Resurrection, nor his answer or explanation or speaking to the women, is the incidence of the event as such of Jesus’ Resurrection, or, is the incidence of the events as such of the women’s visits. It is the, big mistake that these things all, and together, are made, and are identified with, and so are confused for, the Resurrection per se.


A_C, while we discuss the chronology of the Great Passover Events we might just as well share it with the others?

I have had a quick glance across your sketch, and the first thing I looked for, I have found, as expected, because everybody got accustomed to overlooking the interval in the course of events that is identified in Mk15:42, Mt27:57, Lk23:(49)50, and Jn19:31/38.

Even before this, you used for your caption, “Three days and three nights in the heart of the earth— Jesus’ burial”. It is not so Jesus had been buried for this, period. The time Jesus suffered death —into, and in, death—, constituted the three days and three nights ‘in the heart of the earth’. See other studies on this subject. 

As far then as concerns the day upon which Jesus was buried, he was not buried on the same day that he was crucified and died!

The evening”, that is, the night after sunset, had begun with “it being the Fore-Sabbath” and its ‘opsias’-‘early night-part’ – it being the Sixth day beginning, before Joseph even had asked for the body. See several studies on the subject.

The body was still hanging on the cross when Joseph started his undertaking to obtain and bury the body of Jesus, and he eventually took it down any time of night later on, before he (and Nicodemus still later on) prepared it for burial “according to the custom of the Jews”. Joseph closed the grave after the completion of these ceremonies, literally, “daylight-being-mid-after-noon-tending-towards the Sabbath” [epefohsken sabbaton, Acc. or Nom.] That was exactly 3 p.m. Nisan 15 and the very time of day the Gospels declare that Christ had died on the day before, ‘Thursday’ the Fifth Day of the week and Nisan 14.

How could Joseph had finished to bury Jesus at the exact time He had died?

After Joseph had closed the grave, the two Marys— who “saw where they laid his body”, went home and prepared spices before sunset and the Sabbath Day (Saturday) would start with its evening- first part (‘Friday’ evening). Luke 23:54-56.



“Pilate ordered that it be given to him. 27:59 Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, 27:60 and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut in the rock. Then he rolled a great stone across the entrance of the tomb and went away. 27:61 (Now Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were sitting there, opposite the tomb.)

The Guard at the Tomb
27:62 The next day (which is after the day of preparation) the chief priests and the Pharisees assembled before Pilate 27:63 and said, “Sir, we remember that while that deceiver was still alive he said, ‘After three days I will rise again.’ 27:64 So give orders to secure the tomb until the third day. (Matt. 27:59 - 64) NET

Strong's Concordance - ' even ' opsios adj AV - even 8, evening 4, in the evening 1, eventide 1 at even 1; 15
1) late
2) evening
2a) either from three to six o'clock p.m.
2b) from six o'clock p.m. to the beginning of night” End quoting.

I still believe my Chart is accurate and your calculations are not.

Matt. 27:59 - 60 (above) shows us that Christ was buried on the late evening 'of the day of preparation' as my Chart shows (approx. 5:00 PM) and Strong's Concordance argues that the period 3 - 6 PM is regarded as the 'even or evening' (i.e. the evening of the same day that Christ was Crucified)

The next Day (Matt. 27:62 shown above) i.e. (which is after the day of preparation) the priests and Pharisees asked the Tomb be sealed so the body could not be stolen / taken away (thereby trying to prevent any chance of the prophecy of Christ's resurrection being fulfilled by the bodies disappearance)


A_C wrote, “I have never claimed any women 'witnessed' the Resurrection.  The resurrection took place within the sealed tomb as far as I can determine.  As my Chart shows, The resurrection took place approx. 5 AM on the 1st Day of the Week (Our Sunday early morning) as I said 'within the sealed tomb'.

The 'witness-issue’, is quite relevant, as you can see, to our present discussing of the crucifixion and resurrection chronology.

You said, “The resurrection took place within the sealed tomb as far as I can determine. A very wise remark, but not quite observant enough, because as far as any human can determine – which is by way of deduction and correlation only – the Resurrection took place “within the twinkling of an eye” simultaneous with the angel of the Lord’s having opened the tomb by having rolled the stone away from it --- As I pointed out in my ‘witness-study’, the angel did not observe what in actuality was taking place in the innermost being of God Himself, right inside that very tomb-chamber!

But now unfortunately you said you do not believe Christ is God --- about which situation I am totally unable to do a thing but to confess Jesus Christ is God and Lord the only Potentate, who alone has power to both lay down his life and to take up his life Himself. Sorry I cannot do any better but believe with my heart and confess with my heart. I cannot say one word more or better to you than I could to a Jew or Muslim or infidel.


If one apply the method the Bible and the Jews use, that any part of a period represents the whole of it, then you actually keep Jesus buried, four days and not only three days and three nights - even if one hour only he were buried on Thursday afternoon as you claim he was.
Thursday 1 day / 1 hour = one night and one day --- part represents whole of one night and day day, day one;
Friday 2 days / 25 hours = two nights and two days --- whole represents whole of one night and day day, day two;
Saturday “the third day”. According to you another 24 hours and another night as well as day --- whole represents whole of one night and day day, day three.

But then you say He rose on Sunday morning --- part represents whole of a fourth day!


Saturdaythe third day”— Here you should have placed the Resurrection, and should have made it part represents whole of “three days and three nights”.  

See my study, Resurrection not on fourth day,


Your style of explanation must show the glaring fallacy shown in your sketch, A_C, to quote, “.... 5a.m. prior 2 Mary's visit to anoint his Body (Mark 16:1)”

According to Mk16:1, it was, “after the Sabbath (just) had passed” – just after sunset; NOT, “5a.m.”!



16:1 When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought aromatic spices so that they might go and anoint him. 16:2 And very early on the first day of the week, at sunrise, they went to the tomb. 16:3 They had been asking each other, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?” 16:4 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled back. 16:5 Then as they went into the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed. 16:6 But he said to them, “Do not be alarmed. You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has been raised! He is not here. (Mark 16:1 - 6) NET

So we discover that by the time the Women reached the Tomb early on the First Day of the Week (Our Sunday early morning) The Lord had already resurrected and left the Tomb. (Mark 16: 6) NET

GE, you wrote: “Just read, and just say, what the text says; not what you, want the text to say for you!
Be you the servant of God's Word; and do not you make God's Word, your servant!”

You have complained to me that others insult you (which I never have nor intentionally ever would) and here you are doing to me precisely what you complain and allege others were doing to you. That is hypocrisy. Please stop it and concentrate on presenting your argument in a civil manner. I understand perfectly you have put a lot of work into your claims, but so far you have presented them poorly especially by sending your alleged carefully researched notes you then admit were ' full of errors ' that needed your last minute edits and rushed corrections and frankly I see no legitimate evidence from you even now that you are correct, or that my Chart contains any errors?

I stand by my assertion that the Resurrection took place within the sealed tomb.


There is no evidence any Women (or any mortal) witnessed the Lord's Resurrection and we know this because of the fact that the angel had to inform the women that Jesus was not to be found in the Tomb.



The fact that Jesus is not God is actually another topic however for now -  Jesus didn't have the innate ability to do anything, including raising himself from the dead.  Any abilities or powers Jesus had were derived, not innate and the Bible proves this easily –

Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, (John 5:19) KJV

I can of mine own self do nothing: . . . . (John 5:30) KJV

But God raised him from the dead: (Acts 13:30) KJV

I would even go as far as state that God gave the angels at the Tomb the honour of raising the Lord from the dead and rewarding him with immortality. Other angels have also acted with the full authority of God (e.g. Ex. 23:21) KJV

NB: The Lord Jesus Christ was ' rewarded ' with immortality but God needs no rewards for everything is already His. (Col. 1:16) KJV

Proving yet again Jesus is not literally God.


First, “GE, you wrote: “Just read, and just say, what the text says; not what you, want the text to say for you!
Be you the servant of God's Word; and do not you make God's Word, your servant!”
“ --- Apologies if I occasioned reason for offence being taken! It is just my own 'slogan' I apply to myself before anyone else. But beware unless it does apply to you in this conversation.

Next, Re: your quote from NET.

Yes, it seems quite confusing is the best I can say of it. To me it not in the least enlightens.

But the trouble does not only lie in the translation; it also lies in the text-division, that started chapter sixteen with verse one, which without a doubt belongs with the last verse of chapter 15.

Now there are BIG corruptions in NET. I gave a literal version of the Greek - having used Marshall's to NA.

The rest of verse 2 as well, differs significantly with NET. The impression NET creates – deliberately and premeditatedly created – that the women started out just after having had bought spices and as they were going to the tomb wondered how they would roll the stone away because they were thinking how great its size was as if they had not already known the tomb was open, word for word is a fake translation which is not only clear and incontrovertible from the text itself, but also from the simple fact Mary had told the disciples and the other women already, even before anybody else would have attempted to go and see it, that the stone was rolled away from the tomb -- Jn20:1-10. Yes, indeed, the women generally did not even know that Jesus was buried! How could they have known, seeing they all have left the scene of the cross after Jesus had died, and went home, having expected him to stay for any unknown period on the cross? There were no women near the ceremony of the burial or its preparations, except the two Marys : and that, only after the men – Joseph and Nicodemus – had finished the preparations for laying down the body in the tomb. The Gospels expressly state that the women – only the two Marys – followed after in the procession to the tomb. They were nowhere during the night while Joseph and Nicodemus prepared the body.


To me that Jesus is God, is a priori, axiomatic, non negotiable; I will not participate in a discussion that questions this saving Truth; I shall only participate in a thread that will sing the glory of this Truth, the Truth that Jesus was able to save me because He is God. I will not say another word on this 'topic' -- Christ is not 'discussed' --- under no 'topic' or on no 'thread', as if a piece of created stuff. No further word fro me.

Ask me how I understand these texts from John by faith, in faith, according to faith, and I shall gladly try. But never as an abstract, distanced, 'objective' self-wise god in my own estimation. Never!



The fact remains that the women went to anoint the body. That means they not only didn't know the Lord was risen, but they never believed nor expected that he ever would.


Indeed! “The fact remains that the women went to anoint the body.” But that fact, is not found anywhere in Mark! That fact that just is not in there in the text in Mark, is what makes dishonest 'translators' make of, “That when they would go, they might anoint the body”, “They went, and anointed the body” or as near as possible to it for them.

The fact that the women went to anoint the body (but eventually never did), you find only, in Luke 24.



You have been shown to be in error on both counts so far.

The fact that you are not willing to discuss your claims further but expect others to engage in discussion with you about Topics you want to discuss whilst dismissing those they wish to also displays hypocrisy.

I have easily refuted your Resurrection claims and also easily proved Jesus certainly isn't literally God.

Unlike you, I am most happy to discuss my teachings openly and have them scrutinised.

As my PM to you suggested, perhaps you would like to try your Satan beliefs out and see how you go there?

IF you wish to start a Thread about your alleged Satan, please start it and advise me of the Link?


I watch your victories unperturbed. Enjoy your celebrations!



The only celebration I have is that once again my teachings have prevailed over the false teachings of others.

Any time you have the alleged courage of your convictions and want to try to support your other claims (e.g. your Satan beliefs, whatever else I haven't already covered) God willing I shall be here to examine them and respond?



The different accounts were like witnesses at the scene of any accident or occurrence. They write according to their account of what transpired. They may not always appear to agree 100% with each other however when the evidence is placed altogether they invariably agree as to what occurred.

I see no reason or justification for you to claim the various accounts were corrupt or corrupted?

The Women never anointed the body of the Lord Jesus Christ because it was a silly thing they went to do and only shows how little they understood of Christ's teachings and the fact that he would be resurrected which they frankly never understood nor believed.


I don’t “claim the various accounts were corrupt or corrupted?” That’s you talking; not me. I maintain the ‘translations’ of ‘the various accounts’ are corrupt, and that they corrupt “the various accounts” of the Gospel writers.


Frankly I find this style of explanation unclear. Can you put in simple terms what you are alleging and why?


Just what I have said friend, every word to its simplest literal meaning, just what I have said.
1) 'The witness' of the Resurrection, _is_, _ not_, the Resurrection;
2) 'The witness' of the Resurrection, is not the Resurrection, but is _of_ and _about_, the Resurrection;
3) 'The witness' of the Resurrection, is _not_, _at_, the Resurrection;
4) 'The _witness_' of the Resurrection, is _at_, a _visit_, of the women, _at_ the tomb;
5) The _Resurrection_, was _at_, _NO_ event of a visit of the women at the tomb;
6) The Resurrection was _not_, on Sunday morning any time of night or day.

Let him who has eyes to read, read!

In fact: Jesus not once, _appeared_, at _any_ visit of the women at the tomb; He appeared,
1) “to Mary first”, from opposite and --- _away from_, the tomb;
2) to the other women, after they had left the tomb, and while they were on their way to, the city, _away from_ the tomb.
3) NOT, as were he rising and appearing _from_ the tomb!

Jesus, did NOT rise from the dead on Sunday morning any time of day of night!

Let him who has eyes to read, read! and ears to hear, hear!

This my style of explanation MUST show the fallacy shown in your sketch, A_C, to quote, “Resurrection (Matt.:1-2) approx. 5a.m.... prior 2 Mary's visit to anoint his Body (Mark 16:1)”.  According to Mk16:1, it was, “after the Sabbath (just) has passed” - just after sunset; NOT, “5a.m”!



GE, I've been following this discussion and I have a question for you. Are you of the belief that your “services” conducted on Saturday are more acceptable to the Lord than others who conduct their “services” on “The Lord's Day”? Do you also believe this is the bottom line of God's love for us that He will only accept our “services” on a Saturday? I would have a hard time believing in that kind of a God. I believe we must keep one day for the Lord to follow the Sabbath Law, but I don't agree it has to be Saturday. Early Christian churches choose Sunday to be this day. I think there is more to The Way than just keeping the Sabbath. If you just make this one issue your focus of following Jesus, I think you've missed the boat.



Gerhard Ebersöhn wrote:GE: “I am totally unable to do a thing but to confess Jesus Christ is God an Lord the only Potentate, who alone has power to both lay down his life and to take up his life Himself.”

Who raised Jesus from the dead?

The Bible is very clear on this subject. The Father raised Jesus from the dead. This is made clear by many verses:

Galatians 1:1; Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead);

1 Thessalonians 1:10; And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

Ephesians 1:20; Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places.

Romans 10:9; … and shall believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Romans 6:4; …that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Romans 8:11; But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

Acts 2:24; whom God hath raised up, verse 32; This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we are all witnesses.

It was the Father who raised Jesus from the dead. Oh, and he didn't do it on the first day of the week at the fifth hour.



I am afraid Gerhard is astray from the Bible on virtually everything including his Tomb claims and Jesus is God claims (I have already refuted) and his Satan claims he won't even discuss, and now this latest Sabbath Keeping (especially Saturday only).

The Bible is quite clear that no specific day needs to be kept at all because we should carry God in our hearts every day and no particular day (or any day in particular at all) needs to be set aside. Proof: -

Therefore do not let anyone judge you with respect to food or drink, or in the matter of a feast, new moon, or Sabbath days (Col. 2:16) NET

Gerhard's teachings (& those like them) are easily proven false.


You haven't said a thing; nor 'proven' a thing. Your words are vanity, each of them.

Now I believe in the power of confession (1Tim6:13-17); and let me reaffirm – if you don't want to hear, just skip the part to your own loss:

I believe in God, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit because I am saved by grace because of Jesus' Victory on my part unto eternal life through His resurrection from the dead by the power He had of Himself; You cannot all together do a thing against the truth of it; I owe you nothing: NOTHING, understand?

What I say about the Scriptures, I say in faith on the above sure foundation; and therefore it is my earnest; not to impress man or his wisdom and knowledge and power.

Therefore, let me state a few facts, to counter the nonsense you have uttered:

The Sabbath is the Lord's Day; not Sunday; And I do not partake in Sunday idolatry and call it love-service to Jesus; to do so after having rejected better knowledge about it is blasphemy.

For this reason I shall use Colossians 2:12-19 like few other texts to defend my case of believing the Sabbath, which you, Goatboy have abused not knowing the first or last thing you have made with it. It's a shame!

But I know it's in vain if I told you go read my book on Colossians 2:12-19 - but it is for a witness against you that I do make mention of it.

It is a tragedy the Sabbath has fallen into the hands of heretics like the Seventh Day Adventists and the unitarians - mostly called by that blasphemous name, 'Church of God'. It breaks my heart; God is my witness.

“The Lord's Day”, is the Lord Jesus' Day - his Lordly Day of Victory through resurrection from the dead whereby He obtained and perfected, and claimed and sealed LORDSHIP and ownership of Title, on strength of victorious resurrection from the dead:- “In the fullness of the Sabbath, midst of daylight tending towards the First Day of the week.....”

All Mohammatans and Unitarians and infidels: Be silent and hear!



Can anyone other than God tell the Holy Spirit what to do?  I've read the posts and someone please enumerate the contradictions that are claimed to exist. I myself haven't found any but am willing to consider the examples posters believe are evidence of an inaccurate history of Jesus.


Jesus had absolutely NO powers of himself - Let us compare Gerhard's words with the Bible - Gerhard: “ . . . . by the power he had of Himself . . . .  Note also Gerhard's textual manipulation of inserting a Capital H, to try to imply or give false weight that his argument has some credibility, when it does not.

The Bible: “ I can of mine own self do nothing: . . . . “ (John 5:30) KJV

The Bible: “ I can do nothing on my own initiative. . . . . “55 (John 5:30) NET

55tn Grk “nothing from myself.”

I'll go with the Bible thanks.

Gerhard Ebersöhn wrote: “What I say about the Scriptures, I say in faith on the above sure foundation; and therefore it is my earnest; not to impress man or his wisdom and knowledge and power.”

Your foundation is built on sand. It is not a sure foundation. John 5:30 for starters has already proved against you.

Gerhard Ebersöhn wrote: “Therefore, let me state a few facts, to counter the nonsense you have uttered:”

You have already been proven in error yet you insult others when you are proven guilty yourself.

Gerhard Ebersöhn wrote: “The Sabbath is the Lord's Day; not Sunday and I do not partake in Sunday idolatry and call it love-service to Jesus; to do so after having rejected better knowledge about it is blasphemy.”

I am glad you quoted Colossians, for it only speaks against Christians keeping the Sabbath. – “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]: (Col. 2:16) KJV

Gerhard Ebersöhn wrote: “For this reason I shall use Colossians 2:12-19 like few other texts to defend my case of believing the Sabbath, which you, Goatboy have abused not knowing the first or last thing you have made with it. It's a shame!  But I know it's in vain if I told you go read my book on Colossians 2:12-19 - but it is for a witness against you that I do make mention of it.”

I am not Goatboy but I would recommend to Goat boy and every one else, to be wary of anything else you write, because it is obviously based upon a flawed ideology as you have proven so far (even in this Post alone) by your various false and Biblically unsupported claims.




I don't know who your statement is aimed at, but I pointed out several scriptures that clearly state that Jesus was raised from the dead by the power of the Father. Also, that the Lord's day has nothing to do with a particular day of the week, but with his return. That's the truth of it.


I do not deny the Father raised the Son from the dead; in fact, my whole 'theology' hinges on the Truth of the fact of it. I have written against the Seventh Day Adventists who deny this Truth of Truth; even three books, 6/1, 6/2, 6/3. I view their denial of the Truth God the Father raised Jesus God the Son the SDA's most blasphemous heresy.

God the Father raised God the Son; God the Holy Spirit raised God the Son; and God the Son by the power in Himself and of Himself and at his own command, “took up (his) Life again” --- by the omnipotent co-existing and “Full Fellowship” of God the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. God does everything He does in full co-operation and fellowship within Himself.

Like the Son does nothing but He does it at and to the Father's will, the Father does nothing but at and to the Son's will; like both do at and to the will of the Holy Spirit, and He, at and to theirs. Because the Unity of God the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit is perfect.

God is not the sum-total of human logic; in fact, human logic necessarily must be the idol of his own imagination. That's why Allah is not God, and no unitarian not-god can be the God who revealed and still reveals Himself through Jesus Christ in salvation. There cannot be difference between Allah and the unitarian not-god; because neither can save. Only God can forgive sins and save the lost.

It's easy enough to compile a list of texts of any fancied nonsense and untruth. It demands no knowledge of the Bible, even less understanding of it. Any infidel can use a concordance for his own agenda. It is derogatory provocation to expect a believing Christian to respond to such inferior show of learning.

“The Truth” of “The Lord's Day”, is The Lord --- the Lord, OF THAT DAY.  Jesus BECAME, “Lord”, by having earned Title of 'Lord' --- even by having WON, Lordship. He was called 'Lord' before his death or resurrection; but He was called 'Lord' after his resurrection on quite another basis --- like not before, “wrought”/”obtained”, on the basis of his Triumph. Jesus' title of Lord, and his Lordship, derive from his Lordly Victory in resurrection from the dead.

From exactly the same principles the Day of Jesus' Victory by Resurrection from the dead, derives its distinguishing title of The Lord's Day. BECAUSE Jesus “On the Sabbath”, rose from the dead, the Sabbath received title of “The Lord's Day”. Thus, by the resurrection from the dead of Jesus Christ, “the Sabbath was made” --- “was made” by feat of Jesus Christ of having vanquished death through resurrection --- “was made: even for man” and for the salvation of man.

By no other means does man receive benefit from the Sabbath than by the resurrection from the dead of Christ on it. Jesus' resurrection is the New Testament Law upon which the Sabbath Commandment of God Almighty rests --- squarely and solidly; no square inch allowing space for another foundation than Christ's Triumph in Victory of Resurrection from the dead.

This had been everything the Old Testament promised “With regard to the Seventh Day God thus concerning did speak: And God [in and through Jesus Christ in and through resurrection from the dead] from all his WORKS the Seventh Day, RESTED.” Hb4:4-5.

Note that for the Lord's Day the Greek has the Adjectival, 'Lordly Day' - 'kyriakeh hehmera'. Compare “The Lord's Supper”- 'kyriakon deipnon'. It is not the 'LORD's Day' in the sense of the Possessive, 'hehmera kyriou' which is used for the last day.