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
Sabbath.
The
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
Private
Bag 43
Sunninghill
2157
http://www.biblestudents.co.za
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, ‘
(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
Judas
“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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
partially “at 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.)
Works-righteousness
“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
“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!
Sabbath day”, leaves no doubt Jesus suffered and died the very day He was laid to
rest, Friday.
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
tomb’ completes (or completed) ‘redemption’ and ‘restoration’. Jesus’ ‘rest in
the tomb’ meant much more than a
doing of nothing. Jesus’ ‘rest in the
tomb’ in 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 work’ through 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 rested’ in 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
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 on” or “as 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 on – before,
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”.
“Unwilling”
“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
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
“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
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
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
‘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
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
“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 different ‘Marys’!
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 before “evening 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
Private
Bag 43
Sunninghill
2157