Gerhard Ebersöhn







Save the Sabbath!



(First delivery)









Save your life to save the Sabbath, and you shall lose both; lose

your life to save the Sabbath, and you if God will, might save the








The Seventh Day Adventist Church in order to save the Sabbath,

should sever all ties with its past, and unconditionally and totally

reject and renounce not the person of Mrs E.G. White, but the

doctrine and dogma as well as attitude and approach it, has

adopted and based and erected on ‘Inspiration’ and

‘the Testimonies’.
























































Gerhard Ebersöhn

Suite 324

Private Bag 43

Sunninghill 2157

Save the Sabbath!


[ A word before.

I would not know if this is the last time; it may be yet another new beginning. In Thee I trust!  It today is Thursday, 3rd of April, 2008. I have begun a few days ago with this task, very, reluctantly. But as I got going, I saw more and more its opportunities for enjoyment.


Many and much of the things I have written through many years, I have many times, changed; but not beyond recognition – as far as I am aware of. I only tried to say things better and clearer as also my own insights improved, I hope. I do not pretend to have said things the best way every last time. I still am convinced, my standpoints cannot be confused for anything they are not.   Looking back over forty years of writing, the greater outline of my beliefs and principles is bold and firm, and one of the principles enclosed, was change, change which I shall always believe has been in the right direction, towards a clearer, more correct, and TRUER knowledge and understanding of the Mystery of Godliness, the One and Only Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Free Grace of our loving Father. So help me God! 


Read this booklet in view of same things, said differently in many other places. ]















I dedicate this booklet to my school-time only and best of my life friend, Carolus Reinecke, yea, in fact the whole book, ‘The Lord’s Day in the Covenant of Grace’, which was written from start to finish (Immer nicht Schluss!) with an event of my youth always in the back of my mind looming. Will he recall, when I stayed opposite his home in the high street of Potgietersrus in the wonderful old Transvaal, how a pugnacious Seventh Day Adventist adult, picked a theological squabble with an innocent and tender young lad of fourteen ... an incident at my house?

A Reconsideration, or a Comparison of,

or a Contradiction, or a Controversy between,

the faith I, as a child held for truth, and the Truth that as a grownup, kept me, In The Faith –

which same Faith was, and is, and ever,

I pray the Lord, will be, the Faith of Jesus Christ!



Quotations taken from The Desire of Ages’, or, ‘The Passion of Love’, by EG White, Remnant Publications, Inc. Coldwater, MI, 2004. All rights reserved, ISBN 1-883012-18-X.


My objective is to show by contrast, what I believe the Scriptures in truth teach for Truth regarding the crucifixion, burial and resurrection of our Lord Jesus – but, regrettably, also in contrast to show the falsities of the author, her authoring, and her Church.


The reader of the book I shall discuss, is invited by the publishers, “Are you searching for the truth? Do you need reliable answers to urgent questions?”, like this one, “Is the development of character important?”— on the third page after one has opened the book! I despite will go ahead with using and quoting from the above book, without written consent. And if ‘they’ want to prosecute

(–it’s my conceitedness of course that they might–), well, so be it! It has become time for the truth to be told, and legal matters won’t deter me!


Just to make sure the reader won’t miss which are the words of Mrs E.G. White, and which mine, I have italicised her words, and put them in “quotation marks”. Where I use her words out of their original context, I shall indicate them with ‘single quotation marks’, Each remark of hers I might choose to respond to, shall be quoted as it stands in the ‘edition’ above indicated.


Emphasis by underlining and / or bold print, are mine.   



Christ’s Divinity


Chapter 1, ‘Gethsemane’, This chapter is based on Matthew 26:36-56; Mark 14:32-50; Luke 22:39-53; John 18:1-12.


(p 12) “. . . As man He must suffer the consequences of man’s sin. As man He must endure the wrath of God against transgression. Page 70 §2, “God veiled the human agony of His Son” as could not God undergo agony. Nevertheless, in the very same lines

E.G. White speaks of Jesus’ “face, reveal(ing) ... the image of God”. When it is “innocence, serenity, benevolence revealed”, God is able Subject; when it is agony and suffering, Man – the ‘human’, ‘as man’ – is subject. Was Christ two persons? Or was Jesus’ ‘humanity’, a unique, and therefore, a divine, humanity? God, veiled, and, revealed, Himself through Jesus’ divine agony and suffering!


Reference: “Zechariah 13:7”:  “. . . the Man that is My Fellow, saith the LORD of hosts. Like Christ was the Fellow of man, so was He the Fellow of Yahweh. He was of the nature of man and of God in Himself, indistinguishable and inseparable, one, “the Mystery of Godliness”, indeed. Christ’s sufferings were His; not of a part of Him merely. As suffered the Son of Man, so suffered the Son of God. ‘As man’, so, ‘as God’ – No! As The Man, so, as GOD!

As man” as though not also ‘as God’, is a falsity: “As man He must suffer the consequences of man’s sin. As man He must endure the wrath of God against transgression”. 


Yet another falsity is, such a claim “is based on Matthew 26:36-56; Mark 14:32-50; Luke 22:39-53; John 18:1-12.


‘It is written’, not, “as a man”; it is written, “Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things?”— the whole, the only, the one, “the Christ”. We cannot dissect Him as were He an object of our curiosity. “Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; … this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ.” Paul never spoke of Jesus Christ ‘as man’. In fact, said he, “We no longer know Christ after the flesh”. ‘As man’ would mean we knew Christ ‘after the flesh’.


The New Testament does not mention that Jesus took on ‘nature’ or different ‘natures’. Jesus’ ‘nature’ was Jesus’ love for His Father and for His Own; “For He took on, verily the seed, of Abraham”,

Hb2:16— ‘in the flesh’!  Now we know Him as Lord and God even in His suffering of dying and death in ‘the flesh’ of his Humanity, which, like His ‘nature’, was no ordinary, but was, Divinity – Divinity Himself. Not just ‘divine’ to describe something other than Deity Himself. We know Him as Lord and God exactly in His suffering of dying and death or we do not know Him. For in His suffering of dying and death, both Jesus and God are glorified— not as different Gods, but as Father and Son, unto Whom praise, not ‘as Man’, but as God one in ‘nature’, belong!

The Christ of God in his suffering, is Jesus the Son of Man in his resurrection, “Christ, the same, yesterday, today and tomorrow.” Paul preached not a Christ ‘as man’; He preached Jesus, as Christ, as Christ who “must needs have suffered”. Always, while ‘in the flesh’, Jesus had been Man fully; always, while ‘in the flesh’, Jesus had been God fully. As through resurrection from the dead Jesus was God and Man fully, so through entering into and going through death, was He Man, and, God, fully.  I have Power to lay down of Myself, my Life; I have Power to take up of Myself, my Life.” Jn10:18. Jesus was Man, and, God, fully.  Do not say, ‘both, Man, and, God’!


Mrs White maintained that Christ not ‘as God’ suffered and died the death which is sin’s reward. She teaches a strange gospel. But then again, contradicting herself, she expresses the most sublime of Truth, “God ... sacrificed Himself, in Christ, for man’s redemption. “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself.” 2 Cor. 5:19.” p 77 §2.  Is that, ‘Inspiration’? No! It is just a fallible human being; and it is cruelty to call it or her, ‘Inspiration’! The Seventh Day Adventist Church is a heartless opportunist-assembly of men.





As the trial drew to a close, Judas could endure the torture of his guilty conscience no longer. Suddenly a hoarse voice rang through the hall, sending a thrill of terror to all hearts: He is innocent; spare Him, O Caiaphas!


The tall form of Judas was now seen pressing through the startled throng. His face was pale and haggard, and great drops of sweat stood on his forehead. Rushing to the throne of judgment, he threw down before the high priest the pieces of silver that had been the price of his Lord’s betrayal. Eagerly grasping the robe of Caiaphas, he implored him to release Jesus, declaring that He had done nothing worthy of death. Caiaphas angrily shook him off, but was confused, and knew not what to say. The perfidy of the priests was revealed. It was evident that they had bribed the disciple to betray his Master.


“I have sinned,” again cried Judas, “in that I have betrayed the innocent blood.” But the high priest, regaining his self-possession, answered with scorn, “What is that to us? See thou to that.” Matt. 27:4. The priests had been willing to make Judas their tool; but they despised his baseness. When he turned to them with confession, they spurned him.

Judas now casts himself at the feet of Jesus, acknowledging Him to be the Son of God, and entreating Him to deliver Himself. The Saviour did not reproach His betrayer. He knew that Judas did not repent; his confession was forced from his guilty soul by an awful sense of condemnation and a looking for of judgment, but he felt no deep, heartbreaking grief that he had betrayed the spotless Son of God, and denied the Holy One of Israel. Yet Jesus spoke no word of condemnation. He looked pityingly upon Judas, and said, For this hour came I into the world.


A murmur of surprise ran through the assembly. With amazement they beheld the forbearance of Christ toward His betrayer. Again there swept over them the conviction that this man was more than mortal. But if He was the Son of God, they questioned, why did He not free Himself from His bonds and triumph over His accusers?

Judas saw that his entreaties were in vain, and he rushed from the hall exclaiming, It is too late! It is too late! He felt that he could not live to see Jesus crucified, and in despair went out and hanged himself.


Later that same day, on the road from Pilate’s hall to Calvary, there came an interruption to the shouts and jeers of the wicked throng who were leading Jesus to the place of crucifixion. As they passed a retired spot, they saw at the foot of a lifeless tree, the body of Judas. It was a most revolting sight. His weight had broken the cord by which he had hanged himself to the tree. In falling, his body had been horribly mangled, and dogs were now devouring it. His remains were immediately buried out of sight; but there was less mockery among the throng, and many a pale face revealed the thoughts within. Retribution seemed already visiting those who were guilty of the blood of Jesus.” p 40-41.


Judas, embarrassed by his ‘Master’ being taken “like a thief with swords and staves”, did not with the mob go to the house of Caiaphas. After he betrayed Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane, Judas, too afraid to stay, and too ashamed of himself to look anyone in the eye, like “all the disciples, forsook Him, and fled. But Mrs White draws another picture. She has Judas in the house of the high priest Caiaphas, in “the hall” where “the throne of judgment” was, with Caiaphas sitting upon it.  But actually “the hall” with its “throne of judgment” was in the palace of Pilate, see Jn19:9. “They led Jesus, from Caiaphas, unto the hall of judgment.” Jn18:28. Caiaphas would not even enter Pilate’s palace, “lest he should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.

Judas, was nowhere near.

(Jesus) looked pityingly upon Judas (‘his betrayer’) and said, For this hour came I into the world.   But Jesus never mentioned ‘this hour’, to Judas. It is unfounded Jesus spoke to Judas in the house of Caiaphas at all.  The only references to the ‘hour’, are Jesus speaking to Andrew and Philip, “For this cause, came I unto this hour”, Jn12:27; in Gethsemane to the priests, elders and chiefs, “This is your hour and the power of darkness”, Lk23:53; and Mt26:55, “to the multitudes”.


It is unfounded Judas in the house of Caiaphas, while during the ‘trial’, “threw down before the high priest the pieces of silver that had been the price of his Lord’s betrayal”.  No Judas-‘scene played off in ‘the hall’ of Caiaphas’ home. Matthew records, “All the chief priests and elders of the people took council against Jesus”, in the ‘palace’ of Caiaphas, 26:57-75, “to put Him to death”. 27:1. “And when they had bound Him”, after His ‘trial’ there, “they led Him away, and delivered Him to Pontius Pilate the governor

(27:2). All of them!  The whole caboodle after the ‘trial’ in the house of Caiaphas, set off for Pilate’s place, with nobody having stayed behind. “The chief priests and elders” were the chief accusers, so they had to go there as well. Judas could not have argued with them still back at the house of Caiaphas. 


Then Judas  brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders”, verse 3— clearly a parenthesis that tells of an event of another time, in the temple— verse 5!  No indication of when Judas did this, is given.  The priests much later, where and when they could have argued, “It is not lawful for to put in the treasury”, must have “(taken) the silver pieces” back. Judas therefore never came near inside the house of Caiaphas or, “the throne of judgment” assumed inside it, or even outside the house!  Neither entered Judas the house of Pilate!  But all this was done, that the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook Him, and fled.” Mt26:56.  


Judas in the absence of the ‘throng’ “brought again the thirty pieces to the chief priests and elders”. He was received coldly by the priests, What have you come here for, “again”?  Again”— that means, where, they first closed connivance, Mk14:10-11, Mt26:14!(*) What is it you want, ‘this time’? O, you (in the

meantime) repented your betrayal of innocent blood? “What is that to us? See thou to that!” turned they the back on Judas.


After the priests at first refused the money, Judas “cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and hanged himself.” Verse 5. Yet again, the Gospels give no indication of Mrs White’s, that “Later that same day, on the road from Pilate’s hall to Calvary (before the Crucifixion) ... they saw ... the body of Judas.” p 41 §4. It is sheer conjecture. There’s nothing of Mrs White’s melodrama around the ‘throne of judgment’ or ‘at Jesus’ feet’, Judas pleading for Jesus’ sake.  Where the Father did not leave, but comforted the Son, there Mrs White has the Father absent; where the people left Jesus, she has them at his side, pleading for his sake.  


After all, it was not Judas’ wish, but God’s determinate will, that decided all the disciples should forsake Him. So they forsook Him – everyone of them. White’s Judas-story is gruesome hypochondria. The passion of the plagiarist is blinding, for, somewhere, White had

to have got her nonsense from – from anywhere, but from the Gospels; from anywhere, but from ‘Inspiration’!   It is such utter disrespect from ‘the pen of Inspiration’ for fact, truth, ‘detail’, that Seventh Day Adventists refuse to open their eyes to – or rather, which they will protect and defend at the price of their own souls. 


((*)  Do not confuse the occasion, place or time of Mk14:10-11/Mt26:14 for the occasion, place and time in Mk14:1/Mt26:3, in “the palace of the high priest”! They were different and separate, yet of the same day, cf.  Lk22:2/4.  Mk14:1 and Mt26:3 played off in the house of Caiaphas, but Judas was not present; in Mk14:10-11, Mt26:14, he was; but it is not told where the meeting took place.  Judas “two days before Passover (Feast Day Nisan 15)”, which is Nisan 13, consulted with the priests and scribes. “Then came / followed the Day-of-Unleaven-when-must-be-killed-the-passover”, Nisan 14, Lk22:7.)





Both the men who were crucified with Jesus had at first railed upon Him, and one under his suffering only became more desperate and defiant. But not so with his companion. This man was not a hardened criminal; he had been led astray by evil associations, but he was less guilty than many of those who stood beside the cross reviling the Saviour. He had seen and heard Jesus, and had been

convicted by his teaching, but he had been turned away from Him by the priests and rulers.” P 65, third paragraph.

The imaginations of E.G. White! This man was not too sinful; he was not himself to blame totally for his sin or sinfulness; Jesus was only fair to him. But truth was, this man, “desperate and defiant”, was a hardened criminal, and of evil associations. He was guilty no less than any of those who stood beside the cross reviling the Saviour, and wicked not behind the other criminal crucified with him. He may have seen and heard Jesus before, which would have made of him a sinner for the worse. Against all human expectation this incurable murderer was convicted, not by preaching from Jesus, but by the shear power of the Spirit of His Grace.


Again the melodramatic speculating – trademark of the writing of E.G. White – is superfluous and simply untrue.


A Saving Guilt


Among the passers-by he (the penitent thief) hears many defending Jesus.” P 65/66.  Never before was there such a general knowledge of Jesus as when He hung upon the cross. Into the hearts of many who beheld the crucifixion scene, and who heard Christ’s words, the light of truth was shining.” p 65 §2.


Not all and everybody were totally wicked so as to crucify the Lamb of God. There were still the good ones who should not be counted with the rest, and who, were they in control, would not have crucified Jesus. Would John have crucified Christ? Would Mary the mother of Jesus? Would Joseph of Arimathea, or Nicodemus? So subtle is the suggestion, would one dare to say, Yes, they or any one, would, he must feel like blaspheming and himself a hypocrite. Not only are these few people by White’s speculations exempted from having shared in the crime; “many who beheld” as well, are excused from the crime of having been accomplices in the killing of the Son of God. But truth is, that whomsoever Jesus died for, He for their killing of Him, died for. This the ‘penitent thief’ realised; and was saved; for him “the light of truth was shining”. But he who does not acknowledge his own the very sin and guilt of the crucifier of Christ, does not know Christ neither does Christ know him.


The Gospels tell us ‘as when He hung upon the cross’ of no penitent but this only one; they tell us ‘as when He hung upon the cross’ of only the unbelievers or the sharers in the ultimate sin of killing the Son of God. Among the passers-by like among the bystanders,

there was not one not ‘wagging the head’, physically or in the secret of the heart. There was no one that believed; no, not one! Again, it must be said, “All his disciples forsook Him and fled!


Why hast Thou forsaken Me?” the Son could ask the Father, but not men?  Therefore what false detraction, “Never before was there such a general knowledge of Jesus as when He hung upon the cross. Into the hearts of many who beheld the crucifixion scene, and who heard Christ’s words, the light of truth was shining”!  What flatulent flattering of human depravity!


Never before was there such darkness regarding the knowledge of the Christ of God as when He hung upon the cross. In the heart of each who beheld and still beholds the crucifixion, the sin of vindictive disappointment, of avenging disillusionment and implacable despair, takes over total control. Each human being crucified, and crucifies, the Son of God, for to each, He was and is an offence, accusation and judgment; the tormentor of the

conscience. To each to whom Christ Jesus has become or will become Saviour, He first blocks the way – He first becomes the Stone of Stumbling; the Stone struck by Moses and by every man that came into the world.  Like to the impenitent criminal, so to Mary and John and Joseph, was and will Jesus be the Object of and Sufferer under their transgression, the Victim of every man’s selfishness! Christ by all had been denied; or by none would have been accepted after.


Calling Jesus a liar


I say unto thee today, Thou shalt be with Me in Paradise. Christ did not promise that the thief should be with Him in Paradise that day. He Himself did not go that day to Paradise. He slept in the tomb, and on the morning of the resurrection He said, “I am not yet ascended to My Father.” John 20:17 But on the day of the crucifixion, the day of apparent defeat and darkness, the promise was given, “Today” while dying upon the cross as a malefactor, Christ assures the poor sinner, Thou shalt be with Me in Paradise.” p 67 §3.


The Seventh Day Adventists talk of Jesus, ‘sleeping in the tomb’; even of ‘resting’ in the tomb! But the death of Jesus was His suffering the wages of sin— our sin! The grave’s is no mere ‘sleep’, what, a ‘rest’!  Jn11:11, Jesus saying of Lazarus, “Our friend Lazarus sleeps” in Christ, is one thing; Jesus having died ‘the second death’ for Lazarus, is another!  How, we just aren’t able to understand, but Jesus, while in the grave yet, experienced “the pains of death” still, for The Scriptures in so many words declare these “pains of death” were ended only when God had raised Him up again, Acts 2:24. Compare Jonah 2:6, “Yet hast thou brought

up my life from corruption.” The “corruption” – death and “the pains of death” in the case of Jesus – ended when only and in that only, “Thou hast brought up my life”. “He who has the Son, has life; he who does not have the Son, does not have life!  Christ not before He had risen, sealed his triumphant “goings in” and “goings out” (Ez43) through glorious suffering, glorious pains, glorious dying and glorious death (through the “glory” of indeed the Law, 2Cor3:6-11, “that killeth”). Only in exaltation of resurrection from the dead, perfected Christ his glorious suffering. Then because of that, Jesus spoke the truth in every respect when He declared to the thief on the cross that that very day, in it and upon it the day of Jesus’ speaking, he with Him would enter into, and with Him, would be, in paradise. Jesus’ word to the criminal was His guarantee and oath to him, that he – like everyone saved through Christ – “shall never see death”.


Death is the point of no return to an irreversible and eternal redemption to the saved. The thief the day he died, died in Christ, his “life with Christ hidden in God”; immortality had been awarded him. Christ had paid the wages, had presented the prize for his sins. The sinner forgiven in life, shall never see death in death – death that in Christ for him, had been the wages for his sin in Christ. The thief would never see death, but would continue in life forever. Christ most assuredly did promise the thief that he would ‘with Him be in Paradise that day’ and not a second later. He who has Christ, his soul has immortality; he who does not have Christ, his soul has not immortality – he has mortality. “Thou shalt surely die” ... versus ... “he shall never die”. God speaks both words; and He speaks them both through Jesus Christ. “For / as judgment have I come into the world.


But this – ‘the mortality of the soul’ – is major Seventh Day Adventist denominational doctrine and dogma (one of the ‘pillars’ of their faith), so that the question must remain unanswerable whether it is the Seventh Day Adventist Church that became the prisoner of Mrs White, or Mrs White who became the prisoner of Seventh Day Adventism, its doctrine and its hierarchy. Adventists do not realise they contradict their own doctrine of ‘the immortality of the soul’ with their dogma of ‘the soul-sleep’ in death or the grave. But what can we do?  ‘No bridge is there one could build between faith and unbelief, but one’s confession.’ (Karl Barth) 


For me, immortality of the soul in Jesus Christ, is major doctrine, the cry of my soul, the hope of my faith, the joy of my salvation.

John and Mary


At the foot of the cross stood His mother, supported by the disciple John. She could not endure to remain away from her Son; and John, knowing that the end was near, had brought her again to the cross.” p 68 §2.


This is another of Mrs White’s old wives’ tales. Nothing of it ‘is written’ and everything of it therefore, is false. False, because unmistakably another of the oft repeated good talking of hers of just about every sinner who was involved in the last suffering of Christ.  No, not John or Mary was too good and holy not to take the blame for Jesus’ crucifixion and death. Like I or you, or anyone else, John and Mary were the murderers of the Son of God. Now tell that to a Roman Catholic, and get anatomised and cursed for antichrist; but tell it to a Seventh Day Adventist, and receive the mark of the beast on hand and forehead as well.


So far I could not see the slightest difference of essence or in principle between the Seventh Day Adventist and Roman Catholic views of Christ’s suffering, dying and death. For both, the Gospel stops here; both regard Jesus’ physical as virtually his only suffering, and his death as his only merit. Neither knows what it was “I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord … out of the belly of hell.” Neither, is truly a ‘Resurrection-Faith’! Both are ‘blood-and-death’-religions proper.


When the Seventh Day Adventist refer to Jesus’ resurrection, it will be as an accidental stepping stone to the ‘Investigative Judgment’. When the Roman Catholic may refer to Jesus’ resurrection, it will be in desperate attempt to rescue Sunday-sacredness.


Denying Jesus’ Faith


The nearer to the resurrection, the worse the theology and the more daring the imaginations of our drama-queen Mrs White ...


Pretends she, ““Today” while dying upon the cross as a malefactor, Christ assures the poor sinner, Thou shalt be with Me in Paradise.” She nevertheless asserts, “The Saviour could not see through the portals of the tomb. Hope did not present to Him His coming forth from the grave a conqueror, or tell Him of the Father’s acceptance of the sacrifice.” p 69 §2.


Only two pages further on, Mrs White would say, “In those dreadful hours He had relied upon the evidence of His Father’s acceptance heretofore given Him.” p 71 §5. “In that dreadful hour Christ was

not to be comforted with the Father’s presence. He trod the wine press alone, and of the people there was none with Him.” p 69/70.  It is clear she was confused, and didn’t know herself what she believed. ‘Inspiration’? No!   Besides the above being an oft repeated contradiction, what more flagrant negation can be found of Christ’s declaration, “It is finished”— just before He died?  


Ten pages on, p 79, last two sentences, Mrs White writes, “Christ Himself fully comprehended the results of the sacrifice made upon Calvary. To all these He looked forward when upon the cross He cried out, “It is finished.” It is the direct negation of her own statement, “The Saviour could not see through the portals of the tomb. Hope did not present to Him His coming forth from the grave a conqueror, or tell Him of the Father’s acceptance of the sacrifice”!


What about Jesus’ confidence the evening before, when He, already “knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, that He was from God and that He went to God, (rose) from the table”?   Now I tell you before it come, that when it come to pass, ye may believe that I Am He!  Verily, verily, I say unto you, that ye shall weep and lament, while the world shall rejoice. And ye shall be sorrowful but your sorrow shall be turned into joy!” “The hour is come, glorify thy Son that thy Son also may glorify Thee. Thou hast given Him all power.”  “I have glorified Thee on earth: I have finished the work Thou hast given Me to do. And now O, Father, glorify Thou Me with Thine Own Self— with the Glory which I had before with Thee before the world was.” — A few statements from only one Gospel, but “The Saviour could not see through the portals of the tomb. Hope did not present to Him His coming forth from the grave a conqueror, or tell Him of the Father’s acceptance of the sacrifice”? – To think this with Seventh Day Adventists has become one of Mrs White’s most popular ‘testimonies’!


The darkness


Vivid lightnings occasionally flashed forth from the cloud, and revealed the cross and the crucified Redeemer.” p 70 §3  There is nothing of in the Gospels; it is Mrs White’s fancy.   After a while ... some attempted to grope their way back to the city, beating their reasts and wailing in fear.” §4 “And all the people that came

together to that sight, beholding the things which were done, smote their breasts and returned”, Lk23:48, all together and directly after the midday darkness!  It is unbelievable Mrs White’s irresponsible dealings with – or ignorance of – the simplest of information. The darkness not partiallyat the ninth hour lifted”, but “Now / suddenly from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto (suddenly / at once) the ninth hour” it ended totally. Mt27:45.   Another untrue speculation for which no Scriptural evidence exists, “At the ninth hour the darkness lifted from the people, but still enveloped the Saviour.” p 70 §4. “The sun shone forth; but the cross was still enveloped in darkness. ... The fierce lightnings of God’s wrath were directed against the fated city.” p 71 §3.  On p 72, §2, she for the third time makes the same unfounded assumption, “Again darkness settled upon the earth, and a hoarse rumbling, like heavy thunder, was heard. There was a violent earthquake.”   When the darkness had stopped just when the only earthquake occurred, it stopped at once, completely and finally. Jesus had overcome.


The Last Temptation


The last opportunity to relieve His sufferings they (the priests) refused.” p 70/71. Christ, refused the potion; no priests prevented the soldier who “offered (the vinegar) to Jesus”.


The resurrected dead


Sepulchres were broken open, and the dead were cast out of their tombs.” p 72 §2.  Another false impression of White’s!  The earth did quake, and the rocks rent; and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept, arose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.” Mt27:52-53.


The Last Passover Sacrifice


The priest is about to slay the victim; but the knife drops from his nerveless hand, and the lamb escapes.” p 72 §4.


An unfounded assumption. Later that evening the Jews were going to eat their Passover Meal – a meal of the sacrifice from the afternoon and day before, because after their meal, they refrained not to enter into the palace of Pilate as they the very morning still refused to do. (Jn18:28, 19:31.)



It was because the Law was changeless, because men could be saved only through obedience to its precepts, that Jesus was lifted up on the cross.” p 78 §1.


This in itself must be interpreted as an obvious contradiction and total rejection of the Gospel. Mrs White makes it look as if men by their obedience to the precepts shall be saved. Of course she would have denied it, as Seventh Day Adventists vehemently in fact do. But she makes no effort to let one understand it is because the Law is changeless that all men must be and are damned. It is because the Law is changeless that few shall be and are saved— because through the obedience of One are any saved.  For obedience on man’s behalf and in his stead, was it that Jesus was lifted up on the cross.


I answer some of Seventh Day Adventist doctrinal error and heresy in Books 6/1 and 6/2 mainly; only incidentally here and where impossible to avoid.   In my present undertaking I shall try to keep to matters of actual facts, in view of what the Gospels say against what Mrs White says.


























In Joseph’s Tomb


The Grave the Sabbath-Rest of Jesus


At last Jesus was at rest. The long day of shame and torture was ended. As the last rays of the setting sun ushered in the Sabbath, the Son of God lay in quietude in Joseph’s tomb. His work completed, His hands were folded in peace, He rested through the sacred hours of the Sabbath day.” p 80 §1.


At last Jesus was at rest


‘Rest’ for God, is not lying still, dead still, doing nothing. His ‘rest’ for God and for his Christ, is Work, the Act – the Divine Willing and ‘Energising’ – the Divine Feat— of,


(1)the Exceeding greatness of his Power which He Worked”; which He worked, in “Finishing / Completing” – in “Perfecting” – “all the works of God”, Hb4:5;


2) in “Finishing / Completing” – in “Perfecting” – “all the works (of God) which He had made / availed” – i.e., the Feat or Glory of His “accomplishment” which He had ‘done’ / ‘wrought’, Gn2:2;


(3) also in “Finishing / Completing” – in “Perfecting” – “all His works which God created, and made” – i.e., the created universe, Gn2:3,


Finished”, is how God in Christ, ‘rested’. In Genesis 2:2-3 these words are not used pleonastically. ‘Work’ and ‘Rest’ for God, are not synonyms; for God, His ‘Rest’, is the Superlative of His ‘Works’.   The ‘rest’ of God of and on the Seventh Day, for God was The Finishing of His Finishing of “all the Works of God”— not to lie “in quietude in Joseph’s tomb” all the works of God undone!  Dark grave was Jesus’ ‘rest’, not yet; bright day, Christ’s Sabbath’s Rest “from the dead!


The grave, sin’s wages’ purse and safe —extraordinarily in the case of Jesus who “bare our sins”— is symbol of ‘finished’ in the sense of kaput, nihil, the point of no return, void and emptiness! Domain of the dead, the tomb is token and seal on death’s “corruption”. The hyacinth does not grow in graves; the grave

hosts no gods or goddesses be she Serenity. The grave is no place of quietude, but the hall of haunting and feasting devils. Worshippers of satan frequent graves, because the grave has swallowed up life. Bones of the dead bestrew the vulture’s table! The grave with fear drives out rest for sooth —  were it not our Lord Jesus Christ through resurrection triumphed over death, and triumphed over grave. The grave with flames of hate drives out love, for sooth — were it not our Lord Jesus Christ is the Risen from the grave as He is the Risen from hell ... were it not Christ conquered, not only in, the grave, but from, the grave— through Love, “For God so loved the world”, glory alleluia!


Therefore Christ ‘rested’ “when God” rested “when He raised Christ from the dead”. God rested, and, Christ the Saviour, then, rested. “For He that is entered into His Rest, as God He indeed from His Own works ceased.” Hb4:10. The Son as the Father rested when “Suddenly there was a great earthquake, and the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came, and rolled away the stone from the door.” Now, “sing the song of Moses and of the Lamb!” For “Then shall be brought to pass that is written: Death is swallowed up in Victory.” “And I saw a Lamb stood on mount Zion, and with Him, hundred and forty four thousand!O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where, thy, victory”, now?

Thanks to God who gave us Victory through our Lord Jesus

Christ.” His “labour (was) not in vain!   He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied!” Is53:11.


At last, Jesus was at rest”. No! God never ‘is at rest’. We cannot capture the deeds of God serabrally. In “the exceeding greatness of His Power … energised”, therein, is God’s ‘rest’, “worked!     Jesus Christ in “resurrection from the dead” and from, the grave, rested, ‘at last’, and ultimately, ‘rested’! “The last enemy … destroyed, is death”.  Death’s destruction was God’s rest through Jesus Christ. Not sin, sinner, the wages of sin, or grave, could destroy the Christ of God – “Persuaded that they should destroy Him”, “the LORD bringeth the counsel of the heathen to nought. He maketh the devices of the people of none effect.



The last rays of the setting sun


There is nothing wrong with this, “As the last rays of the setting sun ushered in the Sabbath, the Son of God lay ... in Joseph’s tomb

 (“in quietude” omitted).  But there is something strikingly obvious before this, missing!  Few (if any) Seventh Day Adventists have noticed; but there are no modern translators or reviewers of the old translations of the Bible who did not see it. So they changed it in the new translations so that everybody for ever after should gloss over what is here missing.  I shall now bring forward that other deception of satan, that the death of Christ abrogated the Father’s law of creation, that the sun should rule days. (Cf. p 77 §6.) 

Even if it take you hours, or days, or weeks or months or years, dear reader, understand what I have here said, or you won’t be able to understand the devil’s deception and the passion of his deception, which was so strong that he not only deceived the

Seventh Day Adventists, but all Christianity.


Now what is missing in Mrs Whites’ statement, “At last Jesus was at rest. The long day of shame and torture was ended. As the last rays of the setting sun ushered in the Sabbath, the Son of God lay in quietude in Joseph’s tomb. His work completed, His hands were folded in peace, He rested through the sacred hours of the Sabbath day?


We have seen her say, “Christ did not yield up His life till He had accomplished the work which He came to do, and with His parting breath He exclaimed, “It is finished.” John 19:30”, p 73 §1. From

here on, between John 19:30 and Luke 23:53-56 inferred in her here quoted statement from page 80, §1, Mrs White wrote seven pages of inspiringly sound doctrine (which we not now of course intended to repeat).  In this section Mrs White quoted from the Gospels, “Matt. 26:39”, p 74 §5, and “Luke 23:34”, p 75 §2. Every of her quotes from the Bible (these two included), in these seven pages was chosen for its ‘theological’ content. She makes no direct or indirect reference to or from any Scripture that might have bearing on or that might have implications for, chronology. It is only John 19:30 and Luke 23:53-56 that in these pages have implications of time that help tell us when the events recorded in these pages occurred.   Reading these seven pages with only these two texts for information on the time and day and date of Jesus’ crucifixion and interment, unequivocally creates the impression all said therein, happened on the same day! Reading, “At last Jesus was at rest. The long day of shame and torture was ended. As the last rays of the setting sun ushered in the Sabbath, the Son of God lay in quietude in Joseph’s tomb. His work completed, His hands were folded in peace, He rested through the sacred hours of the

Sabbath day”, leaves no doubt Jesus suffered and died the very day He was laid to rest, Friday. ReadingThe long day of shame and torture was ended ... in Joseph’s tomb”, can mean but one thing, Jesus was crucified and died earlier on Friday, “in the end of” which, “the last rays of the setting sun ushered in the Sabbath”.  Well, what is wrong with that? probably everyone will reply, Seventh Day Adventist and non-Seventh Day Adventist alike.


It’s not so much that Mrs White places “the last rays of the setting sun (that) ushered in the Sabbath”, too early – before the women had their preparations done. No, what is ‘missing’; what is truly awry?   What is missing are several – in fact, many – Scripture-references and -inferences to time, date and day in the context of the chronology of events, not mentioned, not looked at, and consequently not taken into consideration by Mrs White. Only thus

in these seven pages of Mrs White’s, could she have upheld, yea, vindicated, the impression Jesus was crucified and buried, both, the same day, Friday, before Friday ended and the weekly Sabbath began.   


This is what I call hermeneutics by ‘methodology’ (I learned the word from Seventh Day Adventists) – in which ‘methodology’ creates its own meaning, and meaning of the text is retracted into and covered within method. Or call it tactics, for sinister motive. But it not nearly belongs to Seventh Day Adventists exclusively!


The most important Scriptural reference to time, date and day of such tactics not mentioned, not looked at, and consequently not considered in the context of the chronology of the events, is Mark 15:42 / Matthew 27:57 – texts like Luke 23:48 and John 19:14

and 31, confirming.  What does the omission of the ‘time-texts’, mean? It means, the left-out texts incorporated into reckoning and evaluating chronology of events,


(1) Jesus was crucified and died – as recorded – 3 o’clock in the afternoon, and that thereafter the same day, everybody – “all the people that came together to that sight” – “deserted Him” and the scene of the crucifixion, and “returned”, each to his own place of abode during that Passover Season.


(2) It means, 6 o’clock with sunset, the long day of shame and torture, ended, and the next day upon which Jesus’ body was to be laid in the tomb, begun! – In fact, it means, “the long day of shame and torture”, ‘was the day’, before Pilate “granted Joseph” the body “to bury”; ‘was the day’, before Joseph “took down the

body” from the cross, and “away”; ‘was the day’, before, Joseph “prepared the body” for burial “according to the custom of the Jews”.


(3) It means, after the Son of God had been crucified and died – after his work of that long day of shame and torture had ended, He, the following day, 3 o’clock “mid-afternoon”, before the last rays of the setting sun ushered in the sacred hours of the Sabbath Day, “was laid” in Joseph’s tomb.


(4) It means the Son of Man, “mid-afternoon” (3 o’clock?), rose from the dead, death and the grave “First Sheaf Wave Offering Before the LORD”, “In Sabbath’s time fully, after noon, before the First Day of the week”, “the third day according to the Scriptures!


The greater context


Respect for detail equals respect for God’s Word; neglect of detail equals disrespect for God’s Word. One needs no knowledge of the Greek to see the detail – to see enough of it to the better understanding of and proper respect for, God’s Word.   What after respect for detail is of first importance for a right knowledge of the

Word and Will of God, is simply ‘good sense’ (as Luther said), which one should never let go of with regard to the least of detail, and especially not, with regard to the larger and comprehensive concept one may be employed with. Mrs White totally fails in both. Read the following, keeping in mind she talks of “In Joseph’s Tomb” – chapter and section devoted to when “At last Jesus was at rest”. 


Now Jesus rested from the work of redemption; and though there was grief among those who loved Him upon earth, yet there was joy in heaven. Glorious to the eyes of heavenly beings was the promise of the future. A restored creation, a redeemed race that, having conquered sin could never fail— this, the result to flow from Jesus’ completed work, God and angels saw. With the scene the day upon which Jesus rested is forever linked. “For His work is perfect;” and “whatsoever God doeth, it shall be forever.” Deut.

32:4; Eccl. 3:14. When there shall be a “restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began” (Acts 3:21), the creation Sabbath, the day on which Jesus lay at rest in Joseph’s tomb, will still be a day of rest and rejoicing. Heaven and earth will unite in praise, as “from one

Sabbath to another” (Isa. 66:23) the nations of the saved shall bow in joyful worship to God and the Lamb.” p 80, §2.  


Keep in mind three things:  (1) Mrs White supposed the whole period of the Sabbath Day.  (2) She intended the full hours of the Sabbath that “Jesus was at rest”, “in the tomb”.  (3) Mrs White

links’ these two aspects in order to validate the Sabbath as Day of Christian Worship-Rest. :— “Now Jesus rested from the work of

redemption; ... — this, the result to flow from Jesus’ completed work, God and angels, saw. With the scene, the day upon which Jesus rested, is forever linked. ... the creation Sabbath, the day on which Jesus lay at rest in Joseph’s tomb, will still be a day of rest and rejoicing. .... When there shall be a “restitution of all things .. “from one Sabbath to another” the nations of the saved shall bow in joyful worship to God and the Lamb.” (I had to insert a comma or two for emphasis.)


This” – Jesus’ “rest in the tomb”, according to Mrs White – is of such virtue and consequence that, without it, “redemption” could not have been; in fact, according to her, Jesus’ ‘rest in the

tombcompletes (or completed) ‘redemption’ and ‘restoration’. Jesus’ ‘rest in the tomb’ meant much more than a doing of nothing. Jesus’ ‘rest in the tombin itself, was of such tremendous value and power even angels would see and adore it.  The scene” had such “result” that “flowed” from it, “the day upon which Jesus rested”, i.e., “the day on which Jesus lay at rest in Joseph’s tomb” – the Sabbath Day –, “is forever linked”, with, “the creation Sabbath” and “the restitution of all things”.


What does Mrs White herself, do here? The same passage, emphasized from yet another angle – from the perspective of ‘finished / completed / perfected’ — “Now Jesus rested from the work of redemption; and though there was grief among those who loved Him upon earth, yet there was joy in heaven. Glorious to the eyes of heavenly beings was the promise of the future. A

restored creation, a redeemed race that, having conquered sin could never fail— this, the result to flow from Jesus’ completed work, God and angels saw. With the scene (of such ‘completed work’), the day upon which Jesus rested, is forever linked. “For His work is perfect;” ... the creation Sabbath, the day on which Jesus lay at rest in Joseph’s tomb, will still be a day of rest and rejoicing.  She allows herself the principle of association; of connection and relationship. A valid and applicable and indeed an

absolutely relevant and necessary principle! Mrs White without questioning –‘a priori’– decides on the principle of cause and effect; she brings into effect the principle of merit and ‘result. And she does so with respect to Jesus’ ‘rest in the tomb’, for, the

sanctity and validity of the Sabbath Day for Christian Worship.


Is it not precisely the principle from which the Church departed when it based its argument for the validity of the Christian Day of Worship-Rest on the resurrection of Jesus Christ? Why may the

Church not have argued, ‘The result to flow’ from Jesus’ ‘completed work’ in resurrection, God and angels saw? Why not, ‘The day upon

which’ Jesus ‘conquered’ through resurrection, ‘is forever linked’, ‘with the scene’, of his ‘rest’, by feat of resurrection from the dead? Why not, could the Church have reckoned, “For his work is perfect” ... ‘the day on which’ Jesus went out of Joseph’s tomb, ‘will for ever be’ for the Church of Christ The Day of Rest and Rejoicing? – Why not? Why indeed, because what is it ‘to rest in the tomb’ against to ‘Rest’ in Victory of Resurrection and Completion of all the Works of God?  Why not, if the Seventh Day Adventists may as above think of Jesus’ ‘rest in the tomb’, may the Church not think the same of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead?  Why may the Church not with regard to the Resurrection, do just that which Mrs White and the Seventh Day Adventists with regard to their supposed ‘rest in the tomb’ of Jesus do, namely, to “link together” or associate it as motive, reason, and basis, with the Christian Day of Worship-Rest? 


Karl Barth, when he weighed the authority by which the Church  changed the Christian Day of Worship-Rest from the Sabbath to the First Day of the week, asked, “Was it not innovation when the primitive Church (so) decided?” He of course reckoned, No, it was no innovation, because the Church changed its Sabbath Day from the Sabbath to the First Day of the week on her conviction of the worthiness and merit of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead --- ‘on that day’ the First Day of the week (meaning Sunday! “What is it that gives this day its special meaning?” asked Barth.) There was – the Church might have thought –, ‘the result from Jesus’ completed workthrough resurrection from the grave; There was – the Church might have thought –, ‘the scene of the day’, which ‘forever would be linked with’ when ‘Jesus at last restedin resurrection from the dead!For His work is perfected” – the Church might have thought –,  ... the Redemption-Sabbath, the Day on which Jesus broke the bonds of Joseph’s grave. The Church might have thought “It is the Day the Lord has made”, ‘day of rest and rejoicing’.  And that’s why Barth did not think it ‘innovation’.  So the Church must have reasoned (but— mistakenly, concerning Sunday).  


While Seventh Day Adventists have always held the idea (or principle), the event makes the day, not the day the event, for authoritarian audacity, they have nevertheless taken opportunistic

advantage of it — only for far less worthy and glorious a reason, having instead of His resurrection preferred Jesus’ humiliated state in death and grave for that ‘work of redemption’ and ‘restitution of all things’ – for ‘Jesus’ completed work’ – for in fact, his rest. They have taken Jesus’ ‘rest in the tomb’, for their sanctification and remembrance of the Christian Day of Worship. They shall deny it, for as sure you live. But here, is, the evidence, that they do!


So we find fault to the left as well as to the right. To the left the Seventh Day Adventists have opted for Jesus’ ‘rest in the tomb’ –  the wrong, invalid, event of ‘rest’ – a non-event, ‘in fact’ for the ‘principle of association’ to finding and defining the Christian Day of Worship-Rest.  To the right, the Christian Church General has opted for Jesus’ resurrection from, the tomb – the correct, in fact, no non-event, but the most valid and energetic event of act of God for basis and content of the Christian Day of Worship-Rest!  But, unfortunately, the Church opportunistically and irregularly has hit upon the wrong, most invalid and least Scriptural day of Sunday for, and to, this end.


The General Church at least does not disregard and ignore the Resurrection – God’s ultimate Work of Rest in the Completion of all His Works –, where the Seventh Day Adventists deliberately gloss over and ignore it, as were the Resurrection “a bare fact of no importance for the day upon which it happened(A most commonly used phrase! I also have in my possession a personal letter from the “Voice of Prophecy” School, for proof.), staring themselves blind against and favouring a ‘rest in the tomb’, which was not God’s Completing Act, or, the Working of his Rest, but a ‘rest’ of their imagination, for them, of determinative importance for the day upon which, according to them, it, Jesus’ ‘rest’ happened in that it happened “in the grave! (This page, 80, chapter 7, paragraph 2).  


That is Seventh Day Adventism; that, is Mrs E.G. White. But not totally yet!  Because for Seventh Day Adventists, “Without the resurrection, the atoning work Christ for us today is performing in

heaven, would not be possible.” (‘Quoted’ from hundreds, nay, thousands, of times in their literature and preaching.) 


I wanted to deal with actual facts of events and circumstances, and not with doctrine, I think I said. But this showed how wrong ‘actual facts’, lead to wrong doctrine. So our effort to deal with just ‘actual facts’, served a good purpose: ‘Actual facts’, expose doctrinal error!  Let us go on with it, and stick to it.



As evening drew on


As evening drew on, an unearthly stillness hung over Calvary. The crowed dispersed, and many returned to Jerusalem …. When (the fearful gloom) was lifted, they made their way to their homes in solemn silence.” p 81 §3.  


Naturally on the day of Jesus’ crucifixion, after that He had died and the midday darkness had ended, ‘evening’ would have ‘drawn on’. But it is not written –in no Gospel– that ‘evening drew on’. Read Mk15:34 to 41; Mt27:50 to 56; Lk23:45b to 49; Jh19:28 to 30, where and when in every Gospel, day with ‘afternoon’— purely supposed— was ending. We are talking of the day of Crucifixion.


But mentioned is it in fact of the day of Crucifixion that, after Jesus had died and the midday darkness had ended, “the crowed dispersed”. It is written “all the people that came together to see that sight, returned home”— but not, “as evening drew onoras the last rays of the setting sun ushered in the Sabbath”, but, immediately, as soon as it became “the ninth hour” (3 pm.). Nor casually and gradually, here ‘many’, there a few others through the remaining three hours of the day. But at once and as one, everybody frightened by the, one, earthquake with all their might— with “beating of breast”, “returned (and / or fled) when suddenly’ and for once only, the ‘complete darkness’ (p 69 §3) made way before the light of mid-afternoon again. In pandemonium, and in no “solemn silence”, have “they made their way to their homes”. (p 81 §3)   It is, written in the Gospels. Read Mk15:34 to 41, and, Mt27:50 to 56, and, Lk23:45b to 49, and, Jh19:28 to 30 again, and see, how and when, it exactly the same in all the Gospels happened, not less than three hours before sunset. That was the day of Crucifixion!


Now of the day Jesus was buried on, it is in fact written, that after Joseph had closed the door of the grave, “It was (Friday) mid-afternoon-tending towards the Sabbath”. Luke 23 verse 54. This now was the day of Burial!  Naturally this day also started, and one should expect the fact written down. Well, so it is, “When evening had come, it now being already Preparation Day, which is the Fore-Sabbath” (Friday)! Read Mk15:42; Mt27:57; Lk23:49; Jh19:31/38, where and when in every Gospel, the day of Burial with “evening” was beginning and in fact had begun, “already”. We are talking about the day of Burial that ended after Joseph had


closed the door of the grave and “It was (Friday) mid-afternoon-tending towards the Sabbath”, Lk23:54b.


Lastly, with the very same word it was written of the day of Jesus’ interment, “It was (Friday) mid-afternoon-tending towards the Sabbath” (after which the women went to prepare), is it written also of the day of Jesus’ resurrection, “It was Sabbath mid-afternoon-tending towards the First Day of the week when suddenly there was a great earthquake”.


So we are confronted with several and huge discrepancies throughout Mrs White’s relating of events of Jesus’ suffering, death and burial— discrepancies and irreconcilabilities due to and caused by flat suppression of certain marked texts.


We shall not pay attention to doctrinal issues, but shall try to concentrate on factual things, like time, place and persons, and “events attending His resurrection” (p 82 §3), burial and resurrection, because I want to keep this pamphlet as short as possible. It is going to be difficult, seeing actual facts and sound doctrine are so interrelated.




For the bodies to hang upon the cross


Still speaking of the day of Crucifixion, Mrs White writes,


They (the priests and rulers) feared the results of that day’s work.

Not on any account would they have had His body remain during the Sabbath. The Sabbath was now drawing on, and it would be a violation of its sanctity for the bodies to hang upon the cross. So, using this as pretext, the leading Jews requested Pilate that the death of the victims might be hastened, and their bodies be removed before the setting of the sun.  p 82 §3b.


The problem with Mrs White’s statement again is inobservant neglect of the texts pertaining the end of Crucifixion-day, Mark 15:34 to 41 / Mt27:50 to 56, Lk23:45b to 49, Jh19:28 to 30;  and flat suppression of specific marked texts pertaining the beginning of Interment-day, Mark 15:42 to 47 / Matthew 27:57 to 61, Luke 23:50 to 56 and Jn19:31 /38 to 42 — in between of which two

days, sunset must be presupposed and must be recognised for it being mentioned, “Evening had begun”.   To ignore a Scripture is

to abuse that Scripture. (Like a child – one’s responsibility – ignored is a child – one’s responsibility – abused.)  Mrs White obviously means the weekly Sabbath “was now drawing on”, referring to the events of the current day, Friday. We again encounter her mistaken idea, that the burial, also occurred on the day of crucifixion, and before the sun had set on it. We see the same thought, “The Sabbath was now drawing on”, which we have seen earlier, “As the last rays of the setting sun ushered in the Sabbath”, p 80 §1. We see this, Mrs White not taking cognisance at all, of the texts that started the day of Burial in the Gospels, that began, the Passover-sabbath.   And we repeat, there are no such words or idea to be found near ‘the crucifixion scene’ in any Gospel as, “The Sabbath was now drawing on”, or “As the last rays of the setting sun ushered in the Sabbath”, ending the day of Crucifixion!  It is, a lie!  Instead, we have indeed read so much, read in so many words, read concerning both the Passover-sabbath and the weekly Sabbath, read, that they, the days of Burial and Resurrection, “when-with-(the sun’s)-light-tending, towards the Sabbath”, Lk23:54b,  when-with-(the sun’s)-light-tending, towards the First Day of the week”, Mt28:1a, respectively, began ending! Not the ‘Inspiration’ of the Seventh Day Adventists or, their 164 years of embarrassment, could make them open their eyes or change their view!


The scene and the day of Crucifixion ended with the mention of (1) the time, 3 pm., with the mention of (2) the people who saw the crucifixion, and with the mention or implication of (3) their departure from ‘the crucifixion scene’ immediately and

concurrently with the earthquake just after the unnatural darkness, three hours before sunset, just after Jesus had died.


The Scriptures, Mk15:42, Mt28:57, Lk23:50 and Jn19:31/38, apply to the started, starting and prospective day of Friday, and in themselves give no retrospective account of what had happened on the previous, crucifixion-day, Nisan 14 before “the evening had come”, but they show what would happen on the started and starting day.  Because from and with Mk15:42, Mt28:57, Lk23:50 and Jn19:31/38 on, it’s Nisan 15, Burial-day, Friday – second ‘first’ day of Passover Season, called a ‘sabbath’, in Lv23:11b, and ‘great / high day’ in Jn19:31 –– the first of the seven ‘Days of Unleavened Bread Feast (Eat)’. It would be no violation of its sanctity for this ‘sabbath’ that was now drawing on if on it, its purpose would be fulfilled, that ‘what remains’ of the Lamb of God – his body – must be laid in the tomb. Cf. Ex12:10b.



Mrs White has no Scripture for claiming, “their bodies be removed before the setting of the sun.” Neither does the world. I challenge the world and all authority to bring me its authority for this idea! It is not in the Gospels said; and it is not implied. Facts contradict it. Facts are that Jesus’ body was removed after sunset during night, before sunrise. It was not left “all night”, Dt23:31. Joseph removed the body of Jesus before sunrise!  So on that same Preparation-Friday, before the Sabbath now drawing onbefore, as the last rays of the setting sun ushered in the Sabbath – Joseph and Nicodemus had laid Jesus’ body in the tomb and had closed it. These were the events of the second day of the ‘three days’, “according to the Scriptures”.





Pilate was as unwilling as they for the body of Jesus to remain upon the cross. ... Thus in the offering of the Lamb of God was fulfilled the law of the Passover, “They shall leave none of it unto the morning, nor break any bone of it ….” Num. 9:12  


Mrs White supposes the Jews got restless just before sunset of Crucifixion-day, and so do most people. (But what stupidity to come to one’s senses when the opportunity has passed— like I can catch a cricket ball or thought I could?)  But no, actually their discomposure set in soon after sunset of Crucifixion-day, when Friday, the day of Burial, had already begun.  The shocking fact the ‘great sabbath’ had already arrived, tells why as well as how the Jews became unsettled, and “unwilling for the body of Jesus to remain upon the cross”.


From where their sudden “unwilling(ness) for the body of Jesus to remain upon the cross”, now?  Everyone the morning still –

according to universal view a bare six hours before – wished only one thing, to have Jesus unjustly punished according to Roman law and crucified! (And, not knowing, unjustly punished in fulfilment of

the law of the Passover’.)  Nobody ever wanted Jesus released from his sentence or removed from his cross then! Not until now, now that the ‘great-day-sabbath’ of the Passover had begun, do they begin to realise the implications of their acts for themselves! Nobody except God, and Joseph (at first), wanted Jesus removed from his cross. Jesus said it was God who would not allow Him to see corruption in death – where else? Those who had a say among men, wanted Him to stay crucified until decayed / ‘corrupted’. They wanted it satan’s way! No one co-operated with God or shared His will— except the man He predestined to differ with all the rest,

Joseph of Arimathea. So not only was God’s prophetic will exactly executed in every step of the way on this Passover, but also his Written “law of the Passover” – and according to that Law, the “remains” of the passover lamb had to be burned the day after it had been slaughtered on; on the day it had been eaten; not before it (— how nonsensical to think)! They shall leave none of it unto the morning …” but also, “and that which remaineth of it until the morning, ye shall burn with fire”, i.e., ye shall return the ‘remains’ to dust, to earth— ye shall inter it --- on the same day --- after sunrise --- before sunset. What could be clearer? And, those who obeyed not this Law, were removed from the assembly of Israel and were killed!


From where then this ‘unwillingness’, “The Jews that the bodies should not remain upon the cross …”? There was no unwillingness with any for the body of Jesus to remain upon the cross before!  

John’s words reveal the Jews’ unexpected concern; the day, surprised them!The Jews therefore —because it had become Preparation  (of the weekly Sabbath), “already” (according to Mk15:42), “and so that, the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day  for / because, that, sabbath, was high day (of the Passover)—  asked Pilate that their legs be broken and they be taken away.”  Absolutely clearly and unmistakably the cause for and of the Jews’ concern is given, is beforehand, and obviously, is the day specific— the day of Burial beginning.  Do not search for other motives or reasons far. It is near; it is in the text and in the context of the text.   It would be most embarrassing to the Jews, remained the crosses standing and ‘THE KING OF THE JEWS’ exposed to shame on Passover-sabbath – greatest day to their national pride and religious zeal. They never thought of that, when they wanted Him crucified the previous and by now, past, day! But God ... God put in Joseph’s heart the “courage” to go and “beg” Pilate for Jesus’ body to be buried, otherwise no one at any stage would have worried about Him in his humiliation, and He with the criminals, would have putrefied in gehenna / sheol. So now Jesus had received proper burial, “according to the custom of Jews”. But the ‘priests and rulers’, they, knew nothing, and they, had no say! How insulting! Who, does Joseph think, is he!





With a spear pierced His side


The priests and rulers were amazed to find that Christ was dead. Death by cross was a lingering process; it is difficult to determine when life had ceased. It is an unheard-of thing for one to die within six hours of crucifixion. The priests wished to make sure of the death of Jesus, and at their suggestion a soldier thrust a spear into the Saviour’s side ... this was noticed by all the beholders, and John states the occurrence very definitely. He says, “One of the soldiers with a spear pierced His side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. And he that saw it, bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe. For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled. ... To satisfy the priests, they (the soldiers) pierced His side.” p 82/83-§1-2.


He knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.” So please take not offence if I show you quite a few inaccuracies; inaccuracies and therefore not truths; and because not truths, nothing ‘that ye might believe’.


The priests and rulers were amazed to find that Christ was dead.

You will read in vain for this; it’s not there. The priests and rulers, on the contrary, thought Jesus still lived; that’s why they wanted the legs of every of the crucified be broken, not so much to quickly die but so as to be taken away to ‘hell’ where they may have died after much longer than they would, had they been left on the crosses.   So the priests and rulers, ‘found’, nothing. It was “after these things” – after the Jews’ request in Pilate’s palace to have the crucified taken down; after the “evening” was spent, and Joseph had “(gone in and beseeched Pilate” to have Jesus’ body for burial. He then must have gone to Golgotha, (just in time) to see how a soldier pierced Jesus’ side. So not even the soldiers were sure Jesus was already dead; how could “The priests and rulers (be) amazed to find that Christ was dead” even before they went in to Pilate, and without, before or after, having seen? If they knew Jesus was dead, they would not have asked for the bones of the crucified to be broken!


The priests wished to make sure of the death of Jesus, and at their suggestion a soldier thrust a spear into the Saviour’s side.

The priests cared not. They wished Jesus’ legs broken and He – alive still – “be taken away” to the refuge dump (“ ... a burial

ground especially provided for such criminals.”, p 83 §5 ) to die there – as long as He was removed from sight because of the

pending –already begun– ‘great day’ (vis a vis the Roman dragonnade— the description is not used in the Old Testament).   The priests’ also suggested nothing to any soldier. Nowhere is it written priests were at the scene of the crosses after “everybody (had) returned”. On the contrary, it is clearly written in such a way as were present besides the soldiers, the solitary witness of the piercing. “He that saw”, was one; it means, nobody else was there, or knew. It could only be Joseph who asked for Jesus’ body, to bury it according to the custom of the Jews – for which task he only, obtained permission, for which task he only was capable and equipped, and he only, was predestinated!


With the death of Christ the hopes of His disciples perished. They looked upon His closed eyelids and drooping head ... They saw only the cross and its bleeding Victim. ... Even in death, Christ’s body was very precious to His disciples. They longed to give Him an honored burial ... ” (p 83-§4, 5) ...


Simply untrue as well as quite unreal! Circumstances around the ‘scene’ of Jesus’ dying until much later after Joseph had gone in to Pilate “after this” (the Jews’ request) and “evening had already come”, and asked for the body, and it was granted him – far into night of the day Joseph would still bury Jesus on – are not the

circumstances or time one would expect any except the guard near

the crosses. One must not forget the fact, too, everybody had left the scene of the crosses afternoon before sunset on the day before, and also, that nobody is said afterwards returned! Nobody stayed behind. Nobody again appeared on the scene of the Crucifixion at any time, but Joseph, who, for the first time, “Now, evening already had come” (… and “After these things …” of the Jew’s request), “came”, and “boldly”, but “secretely”, “came and went and asked”.













John with the women had remained at the cross


Says Mrs White – above quoted, “John states the occurrence of the piercing of Jesus’ side) very definitely.” She implied there what she here affirms, p 83 last lines, “The disciple John with the women from Galilee had remained at the cross. They could not leave the body of their Lord to be handled by the unfeeling soldiers and buried in a dishonored grave.


On p 68 in the first half of §2, Mrs White has said,   At the foot of the cross stood His mother, supported by the disciple John. She could not endure to remain away from her Son; and John, knowing that the end was near, had brought her again to the cross.

She continues in the second half of the same paragraph, “Christ ... said to her, “Woman, behold thy son!” Then to John, “Behold thy

mother!” John understood Christ’s words, and accepted the trust. John at once took Mary to his home, and from that hour, cared for her tenderly.   This  scene occurs before the darkness, just after “the soldiers had crucified Jesus”, Jn19:23a. It is not said John

returned! John did not, ‘remain at the cross’! It is not true, John “brought her (Mary) again to the cross”!  Mrs White obfuscates the most simple facts.  Why? Because she has read other people’s views, not the Gospels; and used the other people’s views for her own, ‘words of inspiration’ – double treachery!  



Who buried Jesus, and where?


In this emergency (of the disciples’ lack of “authority”, “influence” and “favour” to get Jesus ‘honorably’ buried) Joseph of Arimathaea and Nicodemus came to the help of the disciples.” p 84 §1-2. “While John was troubled about the burial of his Master, Joseph returned with Pilate’s order for the body of Christ; and Nicodemus came bringing a costly mixture of myrrh and aloes. ... The disciples were astonished to see these wealthy rulers as much interested as they themselves in the burial of their Lord.” “The help of these rich and honoured men was greatly needed at this time.” p 84 §5.


It would appear the personae, the disciples, and specifically John, were present at, were involved in, and were “as much interested in the burial of their Lord”, as were the two “wealthy rulers” – from Joseph’s initiatives, ‘until the very end’ (as J.C. Ryle would have said). Mrs White in fact refers to John as helping with the interment of the body, “... the Redeemer was borne to the tomb. There the three disciples …” p 85 §1.  Well, the presence of any of ‘the twelve’ disciples at any stage of ‘the scene’ of the burial, is untraceable in the Gospels, most noteworthy, that of John, since it

is expressly stated he before the midday darkness, took Mary to his home— and is never mentioned as having returned to the cross. That’s ‘a bare fact’ for you now! Sentimental untruths, the lot! All betray but one source, tradition, not the Scriptures; not ‘Inspiration’!


Another gloss is obviated: The locality of activities. Mrs White’s portrayal pictures the disciples and the two ‘rulers’ as being occupied with the burial, right under the cross, at its foot, on the roughness of the ‘land’! The stand of the cross was practically adjacent to the garden in which the tomb was, “It was near Calvary, and (Joseph) now prepared it for Jesus”, p 85 §1. But the Gospels say Joseph “took the body away” – from the cross that is – for him to prepare it for burial (which was part of burial “according to the custom of the Jews”.  


And, what is more, Mrs White undoubtedly supposed the circumstance, as amidst the tumult, under which Joseph there and then after Jesus had died – with the crowd and ‘priests and rulers’ pressing upon him – prepared the body. According to her, “the disciples feared to show themselves openly as His followers”. p 84 §5. She supposes the crowd’s presence while the body was being removed for burial. Which would have meant Joseph had to leave the body just there while he had gone to buy the linen – which everything he had done so far, shows he would not do. It would have destroyed his whole endeaver as well as wholly his original plan. Therefore Joseph acted unobtrusively, “in secret for fear of the Jews”, because they would not have it that Jesus received proper burial. What might the crowd have done with the body while Joseph went to buy the linen? what would the priests and rulers? the soldiers?!  While it is written, “Not a bone of Him shall be broken”?  


It also would have meant the Jews knew, that Joseph buried Jesus – which they, conspicuously did not, as every given in the story of the Gospels will indicate.










Gently and reverently they (–‘the poor disciples’ with the help of the ‘two rich and honoured men’, Joseph and Nicodemus–) removed with their own hands the body of Jesus from the cross.” p 84 §6.  An oversight? Just a few lines up, Mrs White wrote, “the disciples feared to show themselves openly ...”.   But John (19:38c), says, Joseph, “boldly” Mk15:43b, nevertheless wisely, and “secretly, for fear of the Jews”, Lk23:50a, asked for the body; then, “came therefore and took (down) the body of Jesus (and) away.  And Luke says, “This man (Joseph), he, took it down.” And Matthew says, “When the evening had come there came ... Joseph ... He went to Pilate, and he, begged the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the body be delivered (to him). And when (this man) Joseph had taken the body (down and away) he, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth. (It was only at this point in time and progress that, according to John, Nicodemus appeared on the scene.)  And Mark says, “And now when it had become evening because the Preparation has started ... Joseph of Arimathea ... went in boldly unto Pilate, and he, begged to have the body of Jesus. ... And he gave the body to Joseph. Then he (Joseph) bought fine linen, and he, took the body down, and he, wrapped Him in the linen, and he, laid Him in a sepulchre.


What Nicodemus did, was only contributory. Of the disciples, no Gospel mentions anything as far as the whole process of the burial was concerned. Nicodemus also came long after Joseph

had the body taken down, away, and handled in preparation for burial. Joseph therefore, ‘single-handedly’, but, it must be understood, with the help of the guard / soldiers, removed the body from the cross— obviously as Pilate must have commanded them via the centurion: “Pilate marvelled / wondered / doubted if (Jesus) had been dead already: So he called the centurion, and asked him, if and how long Jesus had been dead. When Pilate knew (it) of the centurion that Jesus had been dead already, he gave / handed over / allowed / commanded the body, to Joseph. That was, “After Pilate had known the centurion in the matter and he confirmed that Jesus had been dead already”, or, “After Pilate had consulted the centurion and learned from him that Jesus had been dead already”.  

Gospel-facts cannot be reconciled with the idea many others other than Joseph were involved with the preparation for burial of Jesus’ body. It is not possible. These two men only, are specifically, mentioned. John never features! The Scriptures told us, he took Mary home; he did not return— it’s not written! Even ‘small stuff’ like the Singular Verbs, won’t allow more than one person involved with the interment— at least for most of its night-time. But for ‘inspiration’, even the impossible is possible. Is that really what Seventh Day Adventists mean when they speak of, ‘The pen of inspiration ...’? Because ‘testimonies’ like this, must mean Mrs White overrules the plainly stated facts in the Gospels.


Mrs White is correct; or she is wrong.  Everything proves she is wrong, and that the Seventh Day Adventist Church has done worse than she, for having enforced her writings upon its followers for ‘inspired’ and in agreement with Scripture. Seventh Day Adventists have had more than a century and a half (1844 to 2008 = 164 years) to notice these discrepancies and glaringly obvious contradictions between her writings and the Bible; they have not noticed; because they dared not study or criticise; they have paid no attention, and have done nothing about it. No, they have hardened their attitude and narrowed their outlook. They have condoned and accepted myriads of fanciful grotesqueness, and not only have enlarged, embellished and polished it as a club of rule for themselves, but also for a rod to judge others. And I have barely scratched the surface.



‘The Galilean women


The Galilean women came to see that all had been done that could be done for the lifeless form of their beloved Teacher. Then they saw the heavy stone rolled against the entrance of the tomb, and the Saviour was left at rest. The women were last at the cross, and last at the tomb of Christ. While the evening shades were gathering, Mary Magdalene and the other Marys lingered about the resting place of their Lord, shedding tears of sorrow over the fate of Him whom they loved. “And they returned, … and rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment.” Luke 23:56. p 85 §1


I wonder how many mistakes of actual fact a Seventh Day Adventist would be able to notice in this statement. This it will look like, after the Seventh Day Adventist has reviewed the passage for mistakes and discrepancies:  The Galilean women came to see that all had been done that could be done for the lifeless form of their beloved Teacher. Then they saw the heavy stone rolled against the entrance of the tomb, and the Saviour was left at rest. The women were last

at the cross, and last at the tomb of Christ. While the evening shades were gathering, Mary Magdalene and the other Marys lingered about the resting place of their Lord, shedding tears of sorrow over the fate of Him whom they loved. “And they returned, … and rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment.” Luke 23:56. --- With nothing changed!   So, to help them, I’ll indicate where they must look for those lurking mistakes; because in there are mistakes – several, literal, factual, mistakes!


The Galilean women came to see that all had been done that could be done for the lifeless form of their beloved Teacher. Then they saw the heavy stone rolled against the entrance of the tomb, and the Saviour was left at rest. The women were last at the cross, and last at the tomb of Christ. While the evening shades were gathering, Mary Magdalene and the other Marys, lingered about the resting place of their Lord, shedding tears of sorrow over the fate of Him whom they loved. “And they returned, … and rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment.” Luke 23:56.


Twelve or thirteen mistakes? These may in more than one way and of different kinds. There are the ‘interpretative’ and ‘literal’; there are the ‘added’ and ‘mentioned’; there are the ‘emphatic’ and ‘incidental’. How do people read the Scriptures!?


(1) “The Galilean women came ...  The women “came”, “with Him, from Galilee”; they ‘came’ not to the funeral. (2) The women did not ‘come’; they “followed behind / after / in procession”.

It is a blatant lie “The Galilean women came to see that all had been done that could be done”.  There were several women at the crucifixion. Then on Friday as the two men lead the procession, there were but two, who “followed after”! Luke 23:55, “And the women who came with Him from Galilee, also followed after (Joseph and Nicodemus), and saw (inside) the sepulchre, how his body was laid down (by the two men).” The women partook in no preparations of the body whatsoever. They ‘came’ not, “to see that all had been done that could be done for the lifeless form of their beloved Teacher.” The women could have had no idea of what Joseph the evening before had undertaken until he – it seems – called them to come join in the procession. All that could be done, had been done by Joseph and Nicodemus. We have only the facts on which to build our conclusions. We cannot hover or sear on ‘inspirations’.



Then they saw the heavy stone rolled ...”.  This is not too serious an imprecision. The women nevertheless, it is written, “saw the sepulchre, and how his body was laid down.” The implication is, the women “saw” Joseph rolling the stone into the opening. They before that, were able to watch “how his body was laid down”, which implies, they could see inside the tomb. Matthew actually informs us, “There was Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary, sitting, over against the sepulchre”, obviously looking inside the tomb and seeing “how his body was laid down”. Mt27:61.



The women were last


The women were last at the cross, and last at the tomb of Christ.  Untrue!  After ‘the cross’: “There were also women (there)”, Mk15:40; which implies, there were men, mainly. Now read Luke’s account: “All the people (all men and women together) who came to that sight (of the Crucifixion, mark well!) seeing the things happening … turned around and went back – also all his acquaintance (men and women) who were present, even the women (who) stood far away, seeing these things, (returned).” All as they came, saw, and returned – no one stayed behind, man or woman.  That “everybody returned”, is the main idea. Their ‘seeing’, only explains why, when, and how everybody, “returned”— at once and together. ‘While seeing / Because they have seen / After having seen’— it’s all the same. Fact remains, there were no ‘last’; “everybody”, ‘dispersed’. This now what we are speaking of, happened on Crucifixion-day!



Mary Magdalene and the other Marys


Mary Magdalene and the other Marys lingered about the resting place ... Mrs White supposes three women, Mary Magdalene, ‘the other Mary’, and, “Mary the mother of James and Joses” – Mk15:40, Mt27:56.


Now read what occurred after these verses. Matthew records the breaking of the next day, with, “When evening had come”. It’s the umpteenth time Mrs White in her ‘passion’, overlooked this text!  Taking into account just one single, actual, fact Matthew supplies us with, it’s impossible Mrs White glossed over!  It is impossible to imagine how she glossed over so grossly as nearby, exactly, clearly, and unambiguously, Matthew named the three woman in verse 56, and named, not three, but two women, in verse 61! This is no error of the manuscripts; there is nothing wrong with the Greek text. There are no variants that have the third woman mentioned in verse 61 or have her left out in verse 56; there’s no hint of whatever kind, in the context, that the third woman must be supposed in verse 61 or omitted in 56. Learned men (like John Wenham) have ad nauseam given explanations for the ‘glaring contradiction’, and most others foolishly have never noticed. But to heed facts – factual facts – in this instance is rebellious treason and artifice! It beforehand for the Seventh Day Adventists and the Church at large, is profanity to just look in the direction of the verses in between verses 56 and 61, specifically, verse 57, and use, common sense!  ‘Use a better Translation!’ is all they could answer.


I beg you, dear reader, r-e-a-d, these verses; r-e-a-d them open eyed and open minded; read them honestly. And after that, be courageous! Because intelligent and learned as well as clever and shrewd men have come that far, but, after, have lacked the courage to keep their honesty up and their eyes opened, and lacked the will to keep their minds straight. Out of the window for them with the virtues of closet-Christianity, the prince of which is honesty! ‘Into all the world’ for them with the vices of bureau-Christianity, the prince of which is affectation! White washed graves! The best of English the best to get the furthest from ordinary correct truth, from the uncomfortable, from the correcting meaning of the most simple and least imposing language of the Text. Matthew 27 verse 57 and source, Mark 15:42, mean what they say, and say what they mean. No higher or lower authority or greater or ‘lesser light’, can or may guard or open their ‘true meaning’. They say the Crucifixion and the Burial with its preparations, fell on two separate days. And the factual fact of that, explains all ‘differences’ – which are no differences, but are unmistaken, unmistakeable factual facts of actual facts of the two days, each day’s truths, its own, in its own right, and within its own hours. ‘Good sense’, says Luther. Common sense will do, and will do better than too much of genius. I simply say this, Don’t you – whoever – dare change the Text!










Mrs White errs. There were not, three women “about the resting place”.  They were not the women  among others” at the crucifixion— Mt27:56!   Mrs White – like almost everybody else – is totally blind for verse 27 and the differentMarys!


A.  At the Crucifixion

There were / present”, “came together”, “stood”—  Mk15:40a, Mt27:55a, Lk23:48a, 49c,

Mary Magdalene and the other Marys”— Mk15:40c, Mt27:56b,

among”— Mk15:40b, Mt27:56a,

many (other) women also”— Mt27:55a, Mk15:41b,

afar off”— Mk15:40a, Mt27:55a, Lk23:49d,

(but the mother of Jesus, “standing by”— Jn19:26)

looking / beholding”— Mk15:40b, Mt27:55b, Lk23:48b,  and

returned, breast beating”— Lk23:48c.


B. At the Tomb

There was sitting over against the sepulchre”— Mt27:61a, c,

Mary Magdalene and (the other) Mary”— Mk15:47a, Mt27:61b,

who “followed after” (Joseph and Nicodemus)— Lk23:55b,

and beheld”— Mk15:47b, Lk23:55c

the sepulchre and how his body was laid”— Lk23:55d 

and they returned and prepared spices”— Lk23:56a-b. 


C. ‘A’ occurred beforeevening had come”— Mt27:57, Mk15:42; 

‘B’ occurred after “evening had come”— Mt27:57, Mk15:42,

but only later, was finished, before,

afternoon tending towards the approaching Sabbath”— Lk23:54.

























































Gerhard Ebersöhn

Suite 324

Private Bag 43

Sunninghill 2157