http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/saturdaysabbath.htm
eomin@live.com eomin@live.com
[You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce this article, but only in its entirety, including the author's name, web site url and ministry address at the end of the article, and without any alterations. All bold print is mine.]
Over the years,
zealous Saturday Sabbatarians, especially Seventh Day Adventists (SDA), have
contacted our ministry about early Christianity and their alleged observance of
the Saturday Sabbath until it was changed by the Catholic church under
The
vast majority of Christian churches ignore the Sabbath commandment. Apparently
a law was passed by Constantine of Rome in 325 A.D., which changed the worship
day from Saturday to Sunday. His objective was to create religious peace
between pagans and Christians and to pacify church leaders who wanted to
separate themselves from the Jewish worshipers. Read Matt. 5:18
BUT THAT LAW WAS
CREATED BY MAN, NOT GOD.
As a result of
that discovery I joined the Seventh Day Adventists who recognize GOD's Sabbath.
A
second email stated:
Historical
accounts explain that to avoid persecution, some Christians began to worship on
Sunday (Sun-day the day the pagans worshipped the sun god) using as their
excuse that perhaps they could win over some of the pagans to their faith. The
official changing was accomplished much later by the Roman Papacy. Here is
a section from a Catholic catechism
"Question
Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute
festivals of precept?"
"Answer Had
she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern
religionists agree with her—she could not have substituted the observance of
Sunday, the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh
day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority."
This
article is especially dedicated to all truth-loving Saturday Sabbatarians who
want to know the facts about this issue. While the Saturday Sabbatarians
have offered no documentation for their alleged historical facts and teachings
about the Sabbath, please notice that the following quotes are all fully
documented for your close examination. You are encouraged to verify their
authenticity for yourself. Sadly, too many people are told something and just
quickly believe and spread it to others without testing it, like we are
commanded to do (1 Thess. 5:17). May this not be the case anymore for the
readers.
To
answer the SDA claim about the first several hundred years of early
Christianity, I'm forced to quote sources outside the New Testament to settle
this issue about the Saturday Sabbath observance up until
Justin
Martyr, who lived at approximately 100 to 165 AD, wrote on this issue.
He stated:
And
on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country
gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings
of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has
ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these
good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when
our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in
like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the
people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a
participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are
absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and
willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the
president, who succors the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness
or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers
sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday
is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first
day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the
world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead. For
He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day
after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His
apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to
you also for your consideration.[1]
Rev.
1:10 mentions the Lord's day, but what day of the week is it? Ignatius,
bishop of
During
the Sabbath He continued under the earth in the tomb in which Joseph of
Arimathaea had laid Him. At the dawning of the Lord's day He arose from the
dead, according to what was spoken by Himself, "As Jonah was three
days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of man also be
three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." The day of the
preparation, then, comprises the passion; the Sabbath embraces the burial; the
Lord's Day contains the resurrection.[2]
The celebration
of the Lord's Day in memory of the resurrection of Christ dates undoubtedly from the apostolic age. Nothing
short of apostolic precedent can account for the universal religious
observance in the churches of the second century. There is no dissenting voice.
This custom is confirmed by the testimonies of the earliest post-apostolic
writers, as Barnabas, Ignatius, and Justin Martyr. It is also confirmed by the
younger Pliny. The Didache calls the first day "the Lord's Day of
the Lord."[3]
Was
there an apostolic precedent for the Christians to meet on Sunday
instead of Saturday during the days of the original apostles? Doesn't the Bible
say the New Testament Christians observed the Sabbath in obedience to the
Saturday command (Lk.23:56)? Yes, but Lk. 23:56 was before Jesus'
resurrection. Also, remember Rom. 14:5,6 allows for a choice of a special
day to set apart as sacred to the Lord, unlike the Jewish Saturday Sabbath
regulation given strictly to the Jews (Ex. 31:15-17; Ezek. 20:12,13).
I
once spoke to an avid and authoritative Saturday Sabbatarian, who wrongly said
Jesus really rose on Saturday and not on Sunday as commonly taught. He also
insisted there is no Scripture to support such a view that he rose on Sunday.
Notice the following Scripture:
When
Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary
Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons (Mark 16:9).
Clearly,
then, Jesus rose on Sunday, the first day of the week. Other
Scriptures infer that Sunday was when Jesus rose from the dead because he was
three days and three nights in the tomb. If we start counting from Friday, when
he was crucified and buried, and count three days from that point we come to
Sunday. Here is proof that Jesus died and was buried on Friday, the day
before the Sabbath, known then as the day of Preparation:
It
was Preparation Day (that is, the day before the Sabbath). So as evening
approached, Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was
himself waiting for the
Because it was the
Jewish day of Preparation and since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus
there. (John 19:42)
It was Preparation
Day, and the Sabbath was about to begin. The women who had come with Jesus from
Hence,
Jesus died and was buried on the day before the Sabbath (on Friday) and rose
three days later on Sunday. So the event of the resurrection of Christ, which
is at the heart of the Christian gospel (Acts 2:31; 10:40; Rom. 10:9; 1 Cor.
15:1-4; etc.), occurred on Sunday.
What else happened
on Sunday that was noteworthy? Jesus' post-resurrection appearances to his
disciples occurred, at least in part, on Sunday:
After
the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at
the tomb. There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down
from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His
appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. The guards
were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men. The angel said
to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for
Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come
and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has
risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into
On the evening
of that first day of the week, when
the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus
came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" After he
said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when
they saw the Lord. Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has
sent me, I am sending you." And with that he breathed on them and said,
"Receive the Holy Spirit" (John 20:19-22).
Peter, however, got
up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by
themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened. Now that
same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles
from
So
Jesus appeared to the disciples on Sunday, when he resurrected. The early
Christians also met on this day:
On
the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the people and, because he intended to
leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight. (Acts 20:7)
On the first
day of every week, each one of you
should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up, so
that when I come no collections will have to be made. (1 Cor 16:2)
It
is also interesting to note that the literal Greek for Sunday in Mt.
28:1; Mk. 16:2; John 20:1; Acts 20:7and 1 Cor. 16:2 is sabbath.
So what did
Considering
that the church was struggling into existence, and that a large number of
Christians were slaves of heathen masters, we cannot expect an unbroken
regularity of worship and a universal cessation of labor on Sunday until the
civil government in the time of Constintine came to the help of the church and
legalized (and in part even enforced) the observance of the Lord's Day.[4]
Hence,
all
The
universal and uncontradicted Sunday observance in the second century can only
be explained by the fact that it had its roots in apostolic practice. Such observance is the more to be appreciated as it
had no support in civil legislation before the age of
The
fathers did not regard the Christian Sunday as a continuation of, but as a
substitute for, the Jewish Sabbath, and based not so much on the fourth
commandment, and the primitive rest of God in creation, to which the
commandment expressly refers, as upon the resurrection of Christ and the
apostolic tradition.[6]
She [the church]
regarded Sunday as a sacred day, as the Day of the Lord, as the weekly
commemoration of his resurrection and the pentecostal effusion of the
Spirit, and therefore as a day of holy joy and thanksgiving to be celebrated
even before the rising sun by prayer, praise, and communion with the risen Lord
and Saviour.[7]
May
no one be deceived any longer on this subject.
[1]
THE FIRST APOLOGY OF JUSTIN, Chap. 67, pp. 354, 355.
[2] THE EPISTLE OF
IGNATIUS TO THE TRALLIANS Chap. 9, p. 146.
[3] Philip Schaff,
History of the Christian Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1995), Vol. 2, pp. 201, 202.
[4] Ibid, p. 202.
[5] Schaff, History
of the Christian Church, Vol. 1, pp. 478, 479.
[6] Schaff, History
of the Christian Church, Vol. 2, p. 202.
[7] Ibid., p. 205.
....
This
article is especially dedicated to all truth-loving Saturday Sabbatarians who
want to know the facts about this issue. While the Saturday Sabbatarians have offered no documentation for their alleged
historical facts and teachings about the Sabbath, please notice that the
following quotes are all fully documented for your close examination. You are
encouraged to verify their authenticity for yourself. Sadly, too many people
are told something and just quickly believe and spread it to others without testing it, like we are commanded to
do (1 Thess. 5:17). May this not be the case anymore for the readers.
The So-Called Fathers
To answer
the .... claim about the first several hundred years of early Christianity, I'm
forced to quote sources outside the New Testament to settle this issue about
the Saturday Sabbath observance up until
GE:
“The Christian
is making a very serious mistake by considering their writings as the final
word or supplementary Scriptural truth”; nevertheless, “from which we can appeal
and they will provide clear evidence on this subject.” And
we must believe you? “These so-called fathers
.... contradicted other so-called fathers and even the Holy Scriptures at
times! Hence, the Christian is making a
very serious mistake by considering their writings as the final word or
supplementary Scriptural truth.” Note: “.... or supplementary .... truth”! We have taken note; thoroughly! And hope Dan Corner has also taken note ....
DC:
“Second Century Christianity
Justin
Martyr, who lived at approximately 100
to 165 AD, wrote on this issue. He stated:
And on the day called Sunday, all who live
in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of
the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits;
then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts
to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and,
as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought,
and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to
his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to
each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to
those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to
do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited
with the president, who succors the orphans and widows and those who, through
sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the
strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need.
But Sunday is the day on which we all
hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having
wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ
our Savior on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on
the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn,
which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He
taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your
consideration.[1]”
GE:
Yes, Justin Martyr. Yes, the Justin Martyr of his surviving writings.
The first dynamic-equivalent translator of the Scriptures. First Christian
evolutionist. First Christian diviner. First Christian priest of the holy mass.
First Christian politician and diplomat and first Church and State unionist.
First religious pluralist. From Justin we got our holidays; from him we got our
Sunday worship-hour. The Justin Martyr of this his surviving writing.
Who “want to know the facts
about this issue”? Beware. This is the sort of documentation for Dan Corner’s alleged “historical facts and teachings” about the Sabbath, please notice that quotes
are his for your close examination. “You are encouraged to
verify their authenticity for yourself. Sadly, too many people are told
something and just quickly believe and spread it to others without testing it....”
I verified the authenticity of the quote from Justin Martyr’s writings
for myself; that’s why I conclude as I do, and not like Dan Corner does.
DC:
Rev. 1:10
mentions the Lord's day, but
what day of the week is it? Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, lived at about 117 AD and wrote the following:
During the
Sabbath He continued under the earth in the tomb in which Joseph of Arimathaea
had laid Him. At the dawning of the
Lord's day He arose from the dead, according to what was spoken by
Himself, "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly,
so shall the Son of man also be three days and three nights in the heart of the
earth." The day of the preparation, then, comprises the passion; the
Sabbath embraces the burial; the Lord's
Day contains the resurrection.[2]”
GE:
This of course is pseudo
Ignatius; not the real Ignatius. DC
won’t tell us that, of course. The
letter to the Trallians chapter 9 contains NOTHING of this ‘quote’. It is a much later and spurious interpolation
to the already dubious letter. And then
this ‘translation’ of the interpolation or actually wholly false passage, would
leave much to be improved on, I dare say without having seen the ‘original’ of
it for myself.
Nevertheless. Let us for the sake of argument accept this quote for
saying just what it says, then WHAT DOES it say? That Sunday is the Lords
Day? Ridiculous!
I have recently composed the following study and several others in the
same vein while I for no second whatsoever had Ignatius in mind:
Extract:
“For “the first
day” is the day of the killing of the sacrifice actually numbered and named
in both the Old and the New Testaments. Lv23:15b, “Even the first day ye
shall put away leaven out of your houses.”
“The first day without leaven / the first day of de-leaven WHEN they
KILLED the passover” Mk14:12; “The Preparation of the Passover” in Jn19:14.
Day of Crucifixion Abib 14 was “the first day” “according to the Scriptures”
1Cor11:23 confirming.
Day of Crucifixion
Abib 14 was “the first day” “according to the Scriptures” JUST
LIKE the day He rose from the dead
“on”, “the Sabbath”
Mt28:1, was “the third
day according to the Scriptures” Abib 16 1Cor15:3-4 confirming.
And just so was the
day in between – ‘sabbath’ of passover Lv23:11,15 – and day of Jesus’ entombment, Abib 15, the second day of
passover “according to the Scriptures” 1Cor15:3-4 confirming.” End of
extract.
Now let us compare my study with ‘Ignatius’ .....
Ignatius: “The day of
the preparation [of the passover], then, comprises the passion;”
For “the first day” is the day of the killing of the
sacrifice actually numbered and named in both the Old and the New Testaments.
Lv23:15b, “Even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses.” “The first day without leaven / the first
day of de-leaven WHEN they KILLED the passover” Mk14:12; “The Preparation of the
Passover” Jn19:14. Day of Crucifixion Abib 14 was
“the first day”
“according to the Scriptures” 1Cor11:23 confirming.
Ignatius: “During the sabbath [of the passover] He continued under the earth in the tomb in which Joseph of Arimathaea had laid Him .... the sabbath [of the passover] embraces the burial;” It may also be understood “During the Sabbath [of the week] He continued under the earth in the tomb in which Joseph of Arimathaea had laid Him .... the sabbath [of the passover]”. So was the day in between “the passion” and “the Lord's day” – namely, ‘sabbath’ of passover Lv23:11,15 and Jn19:31 – and day of Jesus’ entombment, Abib 15, the second day of passover “according to the Scriptures”, 1Cor15:3-4 confirming.
Ignatius: “In the being light of the Lord's day He arose from the dead, according to what was
spoken by Himself, "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the
whale's belly, so shall the Son of man also be three days and three nights in
the heart of the earth." .... the Lord's
Day contains the resurrection.” Day
of Crucifixion Abib 14 was “the first day” “according to the
Scriptures” JUST LIKE the day He rose
from the dead “on”, “the Sabbath”
Mt28:1, was “the third
day according to the Scriptures” Abib 16 1Cor15:3-4 confirming.
If there’s witness
in your quoting of Ignatius here for any day of the week the Resurrection
occurred on, it is for the day after
that, of the ‘the sabbath’ which here in totality “embrace(d) the burial”
and in Jn19:31 in totality was “the day of the preparation” which
again in totality was the day after that, which in totality “comprised the passion” in Jn19:14 “The Preparation
of the Passover”.
“.... what day of the week
is it (the Lord's Day)?”? Where’s your witness for Sunday that Sunday was
the Lord’s Day? It is no less surmised
than presumed.
DC:
“The celebration of the Lord's Day in
memory of the resurrection of Christ dates undoubtedly from the apostolic age.
Nothing short of apostolic precedent can account for the universal religious
observance in the churches of the second century. There is no dissenting voice.”
GE:
DC:
“This custom is confirmed by the testimonies of the earliest post-apostolic writers, as Barnabas, Ignatius, and Justin Martyr. It is also confirmed by the younger Pliny. The Didache calls the first day "the Lord's Day of the Lord."[3]”
GE:
The Christian of good faith may just not be so gullible as you think. Some can see when fact and fiction get mixed up. Yours is a collection of popular old LIES. What is easier than to re-write them? But show them not lies but fact, let us see! Yes, you already genuinely quoted Justin Martyr; the others will be another story, I can tell you in advance, as we have already seen with reference to Ignatius. Nevertheless Justin not as much as MENTIONS the words, “the Lord’s Day”. And I am sure these words in his day were so fastened to and upon the Sabbath Day that Justin could not see fit using them in regards to Sunday.
DC:
DC:
“Doesn't the Bible say the New Testament
Christians observed the Sabbath in obedience to the Saturday command
(Lk.23:56)? Yes, but Lk. 23:56 was
before Jesus' resurrection.”
GE:
And you, DC, seem to forget Lk.
23:56 was after Jesus' crucifixion.
Senseless arguing!
DC:
“Also, remember
GE:
DC:
“.... remember
GE:
“.... the Jewish Saturday Sabbath
regulation given strictly to the Jews ....” So did the Jews ‘give the regulation’? No? But you spoke about “the Jewish
Saturday Sabbath regulation”;
yes in fact, you said, “the Jewish Saturday Sabbath regulation”. The
Bible does not contain the word “Saturday” anywhere; but the Jews know the term; so
who else than the Jews gave the regulation?
The word “Jewish” I also notice is nowhere in the Bible. So
who else than the Jews gave the regulation which you are saying was “the Jewish Saturday Sabbath regulation”? O; not
the Jews then?
“.... the Jewish Saturday Sabbath
regulation given strictly to the Jews
....” yes; another of your
halve truth full lies.
“The children of
The Sabbath Day ALTOGETHER is the LORD’S because it is ALL of HIS,
doing— of HIS, WORK as of HIS, REST.
The Sabbath is Jewish as little as it is English; nevertheless to
So rail against ‘the Jewish Sabbath’ and rail against the Promises of
mercy and goodness through Jesus Christ. Or ask after the Way that brings a man into
the Covenant of Grace, and receive answer, “I am the Way” which is Jesus
Christ Son of David the King of the Jews.
DC:
“Did Jesus Resurrect on Sunday?
I once
spoke to an avid and authoritative Saturday Sabbatarian, who wrongly said Jesus
really rose on Saturday and not on Sunday as commonly taught. He also insisted
there is no Scripture to support such a view that he rose on Sunday. Notice the
following Scripture:
When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week,
he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons
(Mark 16:9). Clearly, then, Jesus rose on Sunday, the first day of the
week.”
GE:
Clearly yes, if you corrupt the Scriptures in ‘Mark 16:9’ to say “When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week,
he appeared first to Mary Magdalene....” in stead of simply believe the real text, which exactly translates, “Risen,
Jesus early on the First Day appeared first to Mary ....”. The Verb “rose” does not exist
in Mk16:9; the only Verb is, “He appeared”. How – what like – did Jesus appear and how – in what way –
did He appear? “Risen, He appeared”. Does that say “Jesus rose early on the first day of the week”? To
say it does takes to be a liar. To say the text says He “rose early on the first day of the
week” is to make the Scriptures the liar.
DC:
“Other Scriptures infer
that Sunday was when Jesus rose from the dead because he was three days and
three nights in the tomb.”
GE:
Who says “he was three days and three nights in the
tomb.”? Not me, for one.
But how, in any case, does “Other Scriptures infer
that Sunday was when Jesus rose from the dead”? I see you don’t say ‘Other Scriptures say’, or, ‘prove’. That was wise to
do because there IS no single Scripture never mind “other
Scriptures” which infers or
implies or as much as suggests that Sunday was when Jesus rose from the dead.
DC:
“If we start counting from Friday, when he
was crucified and buried, and count three days from that point we come to
Sunday.”
GE:
Yes, if what YOU assert without ANY Scripture, were true, that “when he was crucified and buried” was the same day! But where have you read that? You didn’t read it anywhere in the Scriptures;
you made it up, then present it for Gospel truth. Go read Luke 24 before and after verse 21,
but especially verse 20 which tells you which “point” to count TO, because you should not “start counting from Friday”; you must ‘count’ back
“from” and ‘with’ Sunday because to ‘count’ “from”, means to count inclusively. But the text does not say “from”
like you do. If it did say “from” like you do it would have meant you should
“start counting from when he was buried”, which was on Friday, yes. But since the text says “since these
things that were done” —which means “after these things that were done”—, it is
obvious you should “start counting” back “from” and including Sunday. Because the Burial happened “since / after
these things that were done” it happened “Friday”; and “these things that were done”
—the Crucifixion— actually happened before Friday.
So now we can “start counting” back “from” and including Sunday ....
Sunday “this, today, is
the third day since / after these things that happened”;
Saturday is the second day “since / after these things that happened”;
Friday – and the Burial – is the first day “since / after these
things that happened”;
Thursday is _the day_ “these things happened”: “how the chief
priests and our rulers delivered Him to be condemned to death, and have
crucified Him.”
DC:
“Here is proof that Jesus died and was
buried on Friday, the day before the
Sabbath, known then as the day
of Preparation:
It was Preparation Day (that is, the day before the
Sabbath). So as evening approached, Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent
member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the
GE:
Yes! But don’t you think the
reader has the right to ask, Why has the text been changed so? Were the previous translators ignorant? Did
they not understand the Greek language?
Could they not discern the implications of the context? Why have they re-translated:
“As evening approached” NIV?
Compare
“Late that afternoon” / “When evening came” LB.
“Late noon” / “Late noon” NAB.
But in the past Mk15:42 / Mt27:57 used to be translated ....
“And now when the even was come, because it was The Preparation ....”
/ “When the even was come” KJV;
“When it was evening since it was the Preparation” / “When
evening had come”
“When evening had come since it was the day of Preparation” / “when
it was evening” RS;
“When evening had come since it was the day of Preparation” / “with
the coming of evening” ML;
“Now when evening had come because it was the Preparation Day” /
“Now when evening had come” NKJV?
“When the evening came because it was the Preparation” / “That
evening Joseph went” Phillips ....?
Why has the translation been changed so? Not because the old translations were wrong,
but because they were right! It was to
kill their truth that the lie of the newer ‘translations’ was created.
What has the truth of the older translations been? This ....
1A) HERE BEGINS the NIGHT
and the FIRST of the “three days”, “according to the Scriptures” – the
passover–Scriptures :–
wherein Jesus ENTERED IN in “the Kingdom of my Father” (Jesus’ Jonah’s
descent to hell) :–
Mk14:12/17; Mt26:17/20; Lk22:7/14; Jn13:1.
1B) HERE BEGINS the MORNING of the FIRST of the “three days”, “according
to the Scriptures” – the passover–Scriptures :–
in which Jesus was delivered and crucified :–
Mk15:1/Mt27:1/Lk23:1/Jn19:14
1C) HERE is the LATE NOON AND MID–AFTERNOON of the FIRST of
the “three days”, “according to the Scriptures” – the passover–Scriptures :–
when Jesus DIED and was
deserted by all :–
Mk15:37–41; Mk27:50–56; Lk23:44–49; Jn19:28–30
2A) HERE BEGINS the SECOND of the “three days”, “according
to the Scriptures” – the passover–Scriptures :–
the day whereon Joseph WOULD BURY the body of Jesus :–
Mk15:42/Mt27:57, Lk23:50–51, Jn19:31/38.
2B) HERE is the NIGHT of the SECOND of the “three days”, “according to
the Scriptures” – the passover–Scriptures :–
wherein Joseph begged the body,
and according to the law of the Jews – the passover’s law – undertook and prepared
to bury Jesus :–
Mk15:43–46a; Mt27:58–59; Lk23:52–53a; Jn19:31b–40
2C) HERE is the LATE NOON AND MID–AFTERNOON of the SECOND of
the “three days”, “according to the Scriptures” – the passover–Scriptures :–
when Joseph and Nicodemus laid
the body and closed the tomb; and men and women left for
home :–
Mk15:46b–47; Mk27:60–61; Lk23:53b–56a; JN19:41–42
3A) HERE BEGINS the THIRD of the “three days”, “according to
the Scriptures” – the passover–Scriptures :–
THAT JESUS WOULD RISE FROM THE DEAD ON :–
Lk23:56b
3B) HERE is the MORNING of the THIRD of the “three days”, “according
to the Scriptures” – the passover–Scriptures :–
Pilate ordered a guard “for the third day” :–
Mt27:62–66
3C) HERE is “IN the Sabbath’s Fullness MID–AFTERNOON” of the THIRD of the “three
days”, “according to the Scriptures” – the passover–Scriptures :–
First Sheaf Wave Offering Before the LORD :–
Mt28:1–4.
4A) HERE begins the day AFTER the “three days” (fourth day of
the passover season) :–
that Jesus WOULD APPEAR on :–
Mk16:1, “When the Sabbath was past ..... they BOUGHT ....”
4B) HERE is the EVENING of this day,
Jn20:1–10 Mary sees the DOORSTONE was away from the tomb (discovers tomb has been OPENED);
4C) HERE is the NIGHT of this day,
Lk24:1–10 “DEEP(EST) DARKNESS” ––– “women with their spices” and ontments go to salve the body; “they found Him NOT” (discover tomb is EMPTY);
Mk16:2–8 “very early (before) SUN’S RISING” ––– women’s return–visit to ascertain; “they fled terrified and told NO ONE”.
4D) Here is sunrise (‘Sunday’ morning),
Jn20:11f, Mk16:9 “Mary had had stood behind” .... saw the gardener (sunrise); “Risen, early (sunrise) on the First Day, Jesus first APPEARED to Mary ....”
Mt28:5–10 “The angel explained to the (other) women (Mt28:1–4) .... As they went to tell .... Jesus met them” (after sunrise).
Mt28:11–15 Guard to high priests.
DC:
“Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation and since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there. (John 19:42)
It was Preparation Day, and the Sabbath was about to
begin. The women who had come with Jesus from
GE:
You cannot just
string together cuts from the different Gospels to paint your picture of events
and time without consideration for facts with regard to every and all aspects
of the historic realities.
Here as if in
chronological order you botch up your own concoction, “Because it
was the Jewish day of Preparation”, John 19:42,
“since
the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there”, and Lk23:54, “It was Preparation Day, and the Sabbath was about to
begin”.
Each Gospel
must be taken in whole and the chronology of it determined in itself first,
before it can be placed next to another for a more complete picture, until they
are all put together to form the full picture. Clearly your jumble is inaccurate and
impossible.
John 19:42
refers to “the preparations of the Jews” that began on Fridays 3 p.m.
and lasted until sunset. John 19:42 refers to these three hours beginning; not
ending. How can I say that? Because that
was the time for the Jews’ preparations and that still is the time on Friday
afternoons for the Jews’ preparations. But of far more weight is that John
mentions that “they laid the body there”. Now Luke records that Joseph
closed the grave “mid-afternoon the Sabbath drawing near”. Then this specific time-indication is
confirmed by the fact the women – it is written – after Joseph had closed the
grave went home, and at home prepared spices and ointments and did their usual
Sabbath’s preparations BEFORE the Sabbath with sunset would have begun and they
after, would have begun to rest the Sabbath.
So it is
obvious you should have placed Luke 23:54-56a BEFORE John 19:42.
Also the
translation used of Lk23:54, “It was Preparation Day, and the Sabbath was about to
begin” is misleading. For the
Sabbath to just about begin, the sun must have been hovering over the horizon
already. Ironic is it that this is the
time of day the Friday crucifixion hoax asserts Joseph only started to act but
had to finish by having closed the door of the grave ‘before sunset’
still. No, your ‘translation’ is NO
translation. A true translation will be
a literal translation, which is, “mid-afternoon” which exactly is, 3
p.m..
Only the ending
of Friday is referred to in these two texts of Jn19:42 and Lk23:54-56. They do
not refer to the beginning of Friday the day during which Jesus had been buried. This Friday had begun in these places:
Mk15:42/Mt27:57, Jn19:31 and Lk23:50. As
above ....
DC:
“But they rested on the Sabbath in obedience to
the commandment. On the first day of the week, very early in the
morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. They
found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, they did not
find the body of the Lord Jesus. (Luke 23:54-24:3)
Hence,
Jesus died and was buried on the day before the Sabbath (on Friday) and rose
three days later on Sunday. So the event of the resurrection of Christ, which
is at the heart of the Christian gospel (Acts 2:31; 10:40; Rom. 10:9; 1 Cor.
15:1-4; etc.), occurred on Sunday.”
GE:
What absolute nonsense! Nonsense
not anything these Scriptures say, but everything Dan Corner says! Quote ANY of the Scriptures, and put it next
to DC’ assertion, and ask, is it possible, “.... hence, (that) Jesus died
and was buried on the day before the Sabbath (on Friday) and rose three days
later on Sunday”? Do it, and see, it is impossible; the truth
is, it requires a determined effort to deceive, only to attempt to conclude so.
Like right here. DC quotes “Luke 23:54-24:3”,
“It was Preparation Day, and the Sabbath
was about to begin. The women who had come with Jesus from
then alleges,
“Hence, Jesus died and was buried on the
day before the Sabbath (on Friday) and rose three days later on Sunday.”
But the zenith of his audacity is that DC unperturbed continues to yap-yap
about, “.... the resurrection of Christ, which is
at the heart of the Christian gospel”. Not the heart of the Christian gospel, the resurrection of
Christ, can deter Dan Corner
in his quest for Sundayworship by all means except the purity of the Gospel.
DC:
“What else
happened on Sunday that was noteworthy? Jesus' post-resurrection appearances to
his disciples occurred, at least in part, on Sunday:....”
GE:
See! See Dan Corner’s subtlety
and deception! “What else happened on Sunday ....”? “What else” than “Jesus'
post-resurrection appearances”? With which DC meant to state for fact, “what else”
than Jesus’ pre-appearances resurrection? As though in immediate succession “Jesus' appearances” AND resurrection, “occurred .... on Sunday”. He
shall use words fully aware of their meaning to tell the opposite of their
meaning. That is fraud.
“Jesus' post-resurrection appearances” .... that means, his appearances were after
his resurrection; not simultaneous with his resurrection or virtually
simultaneous with his resurrection. “Jesus' post-resurrection
appearances” were AFTER his
resurrection. To know HOW LONG AFTER, requires bringing into account all
factors, all aspects and all facts and implications of the WHOLE story. And the first thing noticed when that is done,
is the ample time-indications
throughout all the Gospels given for each event during the last week of Jesus’
suffering and resurrection and especially the last “according to the
Scriptures”-“three days”. And
the next thing thoroughly understood, is the harmonious interrelation between
each and every given bit of information. Therefore, it is correct to conclude “Jesus' post-resurrection appearances”, but it is incorrect and dishonest to use
the concept “post-” while attaching an immediate sense and
meaning of time to it. Therefore,
no! Jesus’ appearances were “post-resurrection appearances”, but not “post-resurrection
appearances” that “happened on Sunday”.
On the contrary, “Explained the angel to the women and told
them: In the Sabbath’s fullness in being
the very light of day before the First Day of the week mid-afternoon Sabbath’s
.... was there a great earthquake and the angel of the Lord descended from
heaven and hurled the door-stone away from the tomb and went and sat upon it
.... Don’t be afraid! I know you are looking for Jesus who was crucified
(and any human being must think should still be in his grave). He is not
here (though): for He IS RISEN AS HE SAID!”
DC:
“After the
Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary
Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. There was a violent
earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the
tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning,
and his clothes were white as snow. The guards were so afraid of him that they
shook and became like dead men. The angel said to the women, "Do not be
afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not
here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then
go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has risen from the dead and is going
ahead of you into
GE:
The differences are striking and meaningful. Whose is the true; whose is the correct;
whose is the literal translation? Your
quoted one; or mine (mine own)? Mine is
very much the same as that of all English translations before the twentieth
century. Yours is a novelty. And I dare say with confidence, yours is pure
innovation. Prove me wrong; and prove
your used ‘translation’, correct; let us see.
Prove in other words, Jesus resurrected not “In the Sabbath / On
the Sabbath”, “Sabbath’s-time”, “Sabbath’s in the full daylight”,
“before / towards the First Day of the week”, but resurrected “After the Sabbath, at dawn on the
first day of the week” .... let’s
see!
Prove in other words, other words being used in the Greek text of
Mt28:1-4; prove a strange Grammar and Syntax applied in Mt28:1-4; prove other
logical and chronological factors and implications in Mt28:1-4 than do apply;
and prove – above all – another and strange Covenant of Prophecy and Promise of
the Old Testament here in Mt 28:1-4 brought and wrought to fulfilment and
fullness and glory in Jesus Christ and through Jesus Christ and unto Jesus
Christ and God the Father “On the Sabbath”! Let us SEE!
I ask again (like I asked with regard to Mk15:42), WHY THE
CHANGES? I shall answer why, again (like
with regard to Mk15:42), For NO reason
than Sundayworship! And I now shall add, for idolatry!
Because Sunday and its worship are the bastion and pet god of
Christianity in whose defence as never in its history the Church stands ready
and quick and undivided and in full force.
DC:
“On the evening
of that first day of the week, when the disciples
were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood
among them and said, "Peace be with you!" After he said this, he
showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the
Lord. Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I
am sending you." And with that he breathed on them and said, "Receive
the Holy Spirit" (John 20:19-22).”
GE:
So this once again should prove “Jesus' resurrection
on Sunday”. What will be next?
DC:
“Peter, however, got up and ran to the
tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went
away, wondering to himself what had happened. Now that same day two of them
were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles from
GE:
Ja, this once
again should prove “Jesus' resurrection on Sunday” in fact as much as Peter’s story fits into the
textual, contextual and chronological order— which you with utter repugnance
manhandle as if it were the story of drunken men.
“Jesus
appeared .... when he resurrected” .... is your lie!
He did not appear to ANY “when he resurrected”. Not even the angel saw Him resurrect.
“So Jesus
appeared .... on Sunday, when he
resurrected” .... is your
lie! BECAUSE — as “the angel” on
Sunday morning MORE THAN FIFTEEN HOURS AFTER Jesus “On the Sabbath” had
had resurrected, “explained to the women” Mt28:5a — He now “on Sunday” morning and after the angel’s explanation, “met
them”. It must have been the women other
than Mary Magdalene because Jesus met these women AFTER He “early” “on Sunday” that morning Mk16:9 had appeared to “Mary
Magdalene first” and alone. (As
actually recorded by John in 20 from verse 11 on.) That was about sunrise when
a gardener should have started work, when Jesus had “appeared to Mary
Magdalene, first”, and AT LEAST fifteen hours AFTER He had had resurrected
“On the Sabbath Day” before.
So, “So Jesus
appeared to the disciples on Sunday, when he resurrected”, is the full fledged, double lie of one Dan
Corner.
DC:
“The early
Christians also met on this day:
On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the people and, because he intended to leave
the next day, kept on talking until midnight. (Acts 20:7)”
GE:
AND AGAIN you should know as well as I do saying “On the first day of the week we
came together” is lying –
again lying for the worship of Sunday’s sake; to legitimize it; to find SOME
Scriptural basis for this idolatrous practice of heathendom in Christianity. Idolatry that blots out conscience.
Because, if one says, “On the first day of the week we came together”, one uses a finite, Indicative Verb, and makes of the existing Participle, a Predicate in the same
process causing the Participle to loose
its adverbial as well as adjectival force, the essential traits of a Greek
Participle which NEVER is a formal VERB!
Because, also, you should know as well as I do if one says “On the first day of the week we
came together”, one uses a
finite, Indicative, Verb, and as if possible makes of the existing time-relative Perfect Participle, a Present
or Imperfect Predicate, in the same
process causing the Perfect Participle to loose
its dual Perfect Past act and Perfect ongoing resultant meaning, the essential
traits of a Greek Perfect Participle
which NEVER is a FINITE, non-time-relative
VERB!
DC:
“On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum
of money in keeping with his income, saving it up, so that when I come no
collections will have to be made. (1 Cor 16:2)”
GE:
And that should
clinch it for Dan Corner “The early Christians met on this day: On the first day of the week”. So
meeting on the First Day of the week was all for money. No, don’t object; if
you can argue as you do, so by the same rules can I. Excuse me!
DC:
“It is also
interesting to note that the literal Greek for Sunday in Mt. 28:1; Mk. 16:2; John 20:1; Acts 20:7and 1 Cor. 16:2
is sabbath.
So what did
GE:
I thought you should have asked what it would mean to promote your own doctrine that “The early Christians met on this .... the first day of the week” the fact “that the literal Greek for Sunday in Mt. 28:1; Mk. 16:2; John 20:1; Acts 20:7 and 1 Cor. 16:2 is sabbath.” In any case, again, you dump not only irrelevant but faulty and false ‘information’ on us – to what improvement to your “own doctrine” only you will know. (What does anyone care about the “the SDA people”?) Because “the literal Greek for Sunday in Mt. 28:1; Mk. 16:2; John 20:1; Acts 20:7 and 1 Cor. 16:2” IS NOT “sabbath”; it is “the first (day) of the week” – ‘mian (hehmeran) sabbatohn’. You, Dan Corner, with desultory deductions and conclusions “fallaciously distort” facts and implications “to promote” YOUR “own doctrine”, “The early Christians” because “Jesus on Sunday resurrected”, “met on the first day of the week”.
DC:
“Considering
that the church was struggling into existence, and that a large number of
Christians were slaves of heathen masters, we cannot expect an unbroken
regularity of worship and a universal cessation of labor on Sunday until the
civil government in the time of Constintine came to the help of the church and
legalized (and in part even enforced) the observance of the Lord's Day.[4]
GE:
See again, the fraud of Dan Corner!
No! it’s not me splitting hairs; it is Dan Corner utilising
misinformation to its utmost worst. “Constintine (sic) came to
the help of the church and legalized (and in part even enforced) the observance
of the Lord's Day”?! To the help of the “church”? He came to the help of pagan die-hard
customs! And did he do it by having “legalized (and in part even enforced) the observance of the
Lord's Day”?! “The Lord's Day”?!
You want to tell us, Dan Corner, you didn’t know or you didn’t realise
what you’re saying? You knew, and you
chose to say “the observance of the
Lord's Day”! Unhesitatingly
and deliberately have you written, “the observance of the
Lord's Day” as were it the
Christian observance of the Lord’s Day and not the heathen divining of the Day
of the Lord Sun, “Sunday”, which
DC:
“Hence, all Constantine did in 321 was legalize Sunday for worship and a
time of rest for all people, even though Sunday had already been set apart for centuries from the time of the
original apostles.”
GE:
Rubbish.
All Constantine did in
321 was legalize Sunday for
worship and a time of rest for all except farmers, because it was the
superstition concerning Sunday observance for centuries from the time of the original sun-worshippers that
Sunday was the best of days for agriculture.
DC:
“The universal and uncontradicted Sunday observance in the second century
can only be explained by the fact that it had its roots in apostolic practice.”
GE:
Rubbish. Maybe Sunday observance was
universal and un-contradicted in the second century that can only be explained
by the fact that it had its roots in Sun- and Emperor-worship. Yes; and that it
incontrovertibly influenced Christian worship.
That is obvious from the fact Christianity began to compromise with
heathendom for survival, first and foremost by having accepted Sunday-worship
in the place of Sabbaths’ observance. So
they distanced themselves from the Jews and Judaism, and closed ranks with
their pagan neighbours and Caesars. Justin’s letter to the emperor illustrates
it perfectly. In order to fool the
simple Christians into subjection, Justin ‘interpreted’ the Gospel narrative
about the Resurrection for them so that it may seem they actually celebrated
the Day of Jesus’ resurrection while observing the Lord Sun’s Day of
Worship.
DC:
“Such observance is the
more to be appreciated as it had no support in civil legislation before the age
of
GE:
Isn’t it strange therefore that the only
first century document more or less reflecting the “social
condition of the majority of Christians and their dependence upon their heathen
masters and employers” is that of Justin Martyr we are familiar
with? Which “considering” their “inconveniences” and “lowly social condition” really shows Sunday-observance was to the
Christian’s benefit, and not at all to their temporary or social
disadvantage.
But observed Christians the Sabbath Day it the more is appreciated they
would receive no nor expect any support in civil legislation in any age of secular
rule and power. It shows Justin Martyr in writing to the emperor did not try to
represent these Sabbath-keeping Christians, or thought to be of help to them,
or that he liked them at all. It rather shows his disregard for Sabbath-keeping
Christians and that he acted towards them as did they not exist. Sabbath observance for Christians connected
with many inconveniences, considering the lowly social condition of virtually
all Christians and their heathen masters and employers’ dislike of anything
looking Jewish like the Sabbath outwardly does.
So Justin played the arch anti-Jew and Jewish, even to the detriment of
his fellow Sabbath-keeping Christian brethren and utter contempt for the
Sabbath as such. Just like it is to this day....
DC:
“The fathers did not
regard the Christian Sunday as a continuation of, but as a substitute for, the
Jewish Sabbath, and based not so much on the fourth commandment, and the
primitive rest of God in creation, to which the commandment expressly refers,
as upon the resurrection of Christ and
the apostolic tradition.[6]”
GE:
Say that and say ‘the Christian Sabbath Day’ in stead of “the Christian Sunday” and say the truth. Yes, Justin Martyr’s at least was “the Christian Sunday”, and the Jews’ at least was “the Jewish Sabbath”— even of some and perhaps many
Christians. But neither was the Sabbath or
Lord’s Day of the New Covenant which was based not so much on the fourth
commandment, and the primitive rest of God in creation, to which the
commandment expressly refers, as upon the resurrection of Christ and the
apostolic tradition. Which is obvious from the New Testament
Scriptures with not so much as one exception against it.
DC:
“She [the
church] regarded Sunday as a sacred day, as the Day of the Lord, as the weekly commemoration of his
resurrection and the pentecostal effusion of the Spirit, and therefore
as a day of holy joy and thanksgiving to be celebrated even before the rising
sun by prayer, praise, and communion with the risen Lord and Saviour.[7]
May no one
be deceived any longer on this subject.”
GE:
The apostate
church regarded Sunday as a sacred day. The apostate church stole from the
Sabbath its name as the Day of the Lord and offered it to the sun-god as the
weekly commemoration of his resurrection. The apostate church adorned Easter
with pentecostal effusion of the spirit, and as a day of holy joy and
thanksgiving celebrated its day even before the rising sun by prayer, praise,
and communion with the risen lord sun and saviour. May no one be deceived any longer on this
subject.
Dan Corner:
[1] THE
FIRST APOLOGY OF JUSTIN, Chap. 67, pp. 354, 355.
[2] THE EPISTLE OF IGNATIUS TO THE TRALLIANS Chap. 9,
p. 146.
[3] Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995), Vol. 2, pp. 201, 202.
[4] Ibid, p. 202.
[5] Schaff, History
of the Christian Church, Vol. 1, pp. 478, 479.
[6] Schaff, History
of the Christian Church, Vol. 2, p. 202.
[7] Ibid., p. 205.
Gerhard
Ebersöhn
Private Bag X43
Sunninghill
2157