Christ Resurrected On Saturday Morning

[promethius]

NO, you are terribly mistaken. My position is NOT from EGW. It only proves you don’t know what you are talking about. Your dragging of EGW on the issue is totally uncalled for since I NEVER mentioned her in my OP.

Erm… EGW didn’t originate the SDA organization? She DIDN’T espouse that the Catholic church moved worship to Sunday (specifically in the time of Constantine)?

It’s entirely germain, because the question is whether I should trust Ellen Gould White, a failed “prophet” from the USofA, who split off from a failed sect when their apocalypse prophecies failed to come true, or trust someone like, say, Justin Martyr, Ignatius of Antioch, etc… you know, the people whom the apostles HANDED THE CHURCH TO DIRECTLY, who state, unequivocally, that worship occured on Sunday.

Or whether I should trust the Bible, since St Paul repeatedly tells Christians to gather after sundown on the sabbath… aka… SUNDAY.

So it’s germain to bring up the fact that your argument stems from a false prophet, because we HAVE to realize that your terrible exegisis is based on this fact.

Did you notice that Vine also allows translating protos into ‘CHIEF’? Did you likewise take note that “day” is supplied and “after” is inside parenthesis?

‘proi prote sabbatou’

From Strong’s data:

From BGM Morphology & Ginrich Greek NT Lexicon

You can see that based on the above, ‘proi prote sabbatou’ may be correctly translated into “early morning of the chief sabbath” without violating any rule of the Greek grammar.

Blah blah blah. This is improper exegesis. You don’t translate phrases ONE WORD AT A TIME, but rather in context of idioms and collective meaning. The phrase proi prote sabbatou means, together in terms of an expression, the first day after the sabbath.

Taking valid, professional translations of one word at a time, I can see how you have been deceived into believing that your version is a proper translation… but it’s not. It’s amateur work that would get you failed out of any undergraduate greek program. The sole consolation is that someone else has probably led you to believe that this translation is correct, so at least you’re blameless in trying to pull the wool over peoples’ eyes.

 

[pablope]

Hi, pablope;

Do you have anything on ‘prote sabbatou’? Sorry, but your last two posts are simply not worth my time anymore. Really sorry, brother. The questions you asked in those last posts were already addressed in my previous posts. Unless, you didn’t realize it.

In Christ Our Risen Lord,
Samie

Yes…and which you have not answered…that Mark 16v9 is not part of the original manuscript…a well known historical fact verified by scholars.

And you have dodged so far.

And that there is other testimony outside the Bible that verifies the resurrection on Sunday…and thus verifies the Bible account.

And this goes to the main point of your contention in Mark…which you have so far refused to answer…and I will modify my question:

First…how do you know Mark actually wrote the Gospel of Mark? Why don’t you provide the chapter and verse where Mark claims authorship…and when you provide this chapter and verse…why do you now believe Mark wrote the Gospel? And it is not anybody named Mark? Why do you believe it is Scripture?

 

[Samie]

Samie,
Please explain to me how Mark 16 vs 1 is contrary to what I said? I said the women went to the tomb after the sabbath. Again, how is this contrary to Mark 16 vs. 1? I just do not understand your assertion?

Let us read the verse again:

RSV Mark 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him.

Did the verse say they went to the tomb, or **bought spices **after the sabbath?

 

[Samie]

Interesting how you leave out the point I was making.

Yes, Truth is interesting.

Having said that, maybe you don’t realize how many Bible scholars speak Greek, including my priest (who IS a Bible scholar and owns a Greek bible and can read it) and don’t come to the same conclusion you did.

Since when did you realize the majority is not always right?

Also interesting that the early Church would have some ulterior motive to change the Sabbath to Sunday. So many, many difficult teachings they could try to change instead, but no, they change the date of worship.

I remembered coming across (was that an article?) something like a bishop acknowledging the Church somehow changed the sanctity of sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. But that would be off-topic in this thread.

 

[TOME]

Samie,

What is the relationship of verse 1 of Mark 16 and the verse you are using from the same chapter of Mark?

 

[Samie]

I don’t know Greek but as far as I can tell the expression prote sabbatou in the New Testament seems to be unique to Mark 16:9 so its intended meaning will probably never be known for certain. A seemingly related expression using the word deuteroprotos instead of protos apparently appears in some inferior manuscripts in Luke 6:1 and is usually translated there as second-first Sabbath, referring perhaps to the second Sabbath following the first Sabbath after the Passover. Since the usual expression in Scripture for the first day of the week in Mark and elsewhere seems to be something like mia twn sabbatwn, without looking to any non-Biblical sources for clarification, the expression in question, prote sabbatou, might indeed, as you suggest, be translated *first *or Chief Sabbath (following Passover) rather than the first day of the week.

However, there are non-Biblical sources that we can look to for clarification, such Justin Martyr, who converted to Christianity about A.D. 125 (about 20 years after the death of the apostle John) and later (about A.D. 155) wrote, as previous posters have briefly mentioned:
But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration. (Justin Martyr, First Apology, chap. 67)

Also, it is my understanding that Mark 16:9 can be translated two different ways depending on whether the word early applies to rising or to appearing and may not, as you assume, refer to the actual time of Christ’s resurrection but to the time of his appearing to Mary Magdalene: “he rising (i.e., having risen), appeared early morning the first day of the week first to Mary Magdalene…”, instead of “he, rising early morning the first day of the week, appeared first to Mary Magdalene…”

Other considerations concerning Mark 16:9:
Since Mark 16:9 is not found in many important ancient Bible manuscripts, how certain are you that it can be trusted?
The expression Chief Sabbath that you propose seems rather technical Jewish-speak. Would Mark’s principal audience of Gentile Christians really know what he was talking about?

Thank you, Todd. Yes you are right on ‘mia twn sabbatwn’ which is actually ‘one of the sabbaths’, since there were at least two sabbaths which occurred in that Paschal week.

I’d try cyberspace for The First Apology in its native tongue. I am interested as to what was used in the language it was written regarding ‘Sunday’, a word coined much, much later.

As to whether the Gentile Christians would understand Mark on the ‘chief Sabbath’, I would say Yes. Because of the Jewish Christians, they could not miss the fact that there always follows a ceremonial sabbath on the morrow of Passover regardless of what weekday it occurs. And since the weekly sabbath is regularly occurring, compared with the annual sabbath after Passover, when the two comes in Passover week the chief or more prominent sabbath would be the weekly sabbath, the 7th day of the week, now called Saturday.

 

[Samie]

Erm… EGW didn’t originate the SDA organization? She DIDN’T espouse that the Catholic church moved worship to Sunday (specifically in the time of Constantine)?

It’s entirely germain, because the question is whether I should trust Ellen Gould White, a failed “prophet” from the USofA, who split off from a failed sect when their apocalypse prophecies failed to come true, or trust someone like, say, Justin Martyr, Ignatius of Antioch, etc… you know, the people whom the apostles HANDED THE CHURCH TO DIRECTLY, who state, unequivocally, that worship occured on Sunday.

Or whether I should trust the Bible, since St Paul repeatedly tells Christians to gather after sundown on the sabbath… aka… SUNDAY

So it’s germain to bring up the fact that your argument stems from a false prophet, because we HAVE to realize that your terrible exegisis is based on this fact…

Did you know EGW and the SDA Church believe in a Sunday resurrection? Now you know. So please be ethical once more and don’t drag her and the SDA Church in this issue.

Blah blah blah. This is improper exegesis. You don’t translate phrases ONE WORD AT A TIME, but rather in context of idioms and collective meaning. The phrase proi prote sabbatou means, together in terms of an expression, the first day after the sabbath.

Taking valid, professional translations of one word at a time, I can see how you have been deceived into believing that your version is a proper translation… but it’s not. It’s amateur work that would get you failed out of any undergraduate greek program. The sole consolation is that someone else has probably led you to believe that this translation is correct, so at least you’re blameless in trying to pull the wool over peoples’ eyes.

Had I translated ‘proi prote sabbatou’ the way you misunderstood me as having done it " ONE WORD AT A TIME" as you said, then I would have come up with only 3 words.

As to your ‘first day after the sabbath’ for ‘prote sabbatou’, can you please cite a verse where the genitive ‘sabbatou’ received the same treatment you gave it? If none, then why condemn others in a way as if you were born with koine Greek in your tongue?

And I am not a copycat. I would be very grateful if you can show me anybody else who brought up this issue on ‘prote sabbatou’ before.

 

[Samie]

Yes…and which you have not answered…that Mark 16v9 is not part of the original manuscript…a well known historical fact verified by scholars.

And you have dodged so far.

You don’t hear of any scholar who don’t agree with your scholars? So why is that verse in your Catholic Bible? Had you torn that verse off?

And that there is other testimony outside the Bible that verifies the resurrection on Sunday…and thus verifies the Bible account.

Yes, tons of them. That’s why I rely on the Bible.

And this goes to the main point of your contention in Mark…which you have so far refused to answer…and I will modify my question:

First…how do you know Mark actually wrote the Gospel of Mark? Why don’t you provide the chapter and verse where Mark claims authorship…and when you provide this chapter and verse…why do you now believe Mark wrote the Gospel? And it is not anybody named Mark? Why do you believe it is Scripture?

Because of faith, brother, faith, which you perhaps also have.

If you are complaining of why there is v9 in Mark 16, I’m not. If you believe it was another Mark who authored the gospel book, I don’t care.

Why are you so bent on delving into other issues when ‘proi prote sabbatou’ is the issue, plain and simple? You said you have something on it, but it appears, you don’t have any. What you have instead is the long-ago-staled-issue of v9 ff are not in the original. Who cares? You? I don’t. I believe Mark 16:9ff are all supposed to be there. Now if you want to engage in a debate of whether v9 should be there or not open a thread and I will follow you there. Please don’t clutter my thread.

 

[Incomplete]

Yes, Truth is interesting.

This is nothing but a comment that means nothing. My point was that you threw in a sentence that didn’t address what I was asking. You didn’t prove a thing here. Just trying to stir things up, I guess, huh?

Since when did you realize the majority is not always right?

Again, you fail to see the point. Read what I said; I was speaking of people with knowledge, not about majority. I am speaking about people who know Greek well, who have thoroughly studied the Bible, and who I have reason to trust. I have no reason to trust you over the centuries of brilliant Christians, including my priest, and including people like Pope Benedict.

This was my challenge to you to prove you know more than them. That line you gave was not proof. It just showed (once again) that you fail to see my point. If you can’t understand my question, how can I trust you understand Bible translation?

I remembered coming across (was that an article?) something like a bishop acknowledging the Church somehow changed the sanctity of sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. But that would be off-topic in this thread.

Or maybe you’re remembering wrongly. Without evidence, it’s hard to refute OR to agree with him. We have no idea what he based his words on, if he was Catholic, or if, indeed, he even exists.

You can take the time to throw that out there, then use the words, “off topic”, but can’t even provide one link? Just trying to stir things up, I guess.

I googled the phrase “proi prote sabbatou” and found you all over the internet. There are people with very, very good reasoning against this. You refuse to consider their thoughts, and you make the same arguments over and over and over again. Often you copy and paste.

You think you can come to multiple websites, give us no idea why we should trust your word, and expect us to believe you? And expect us to leave the fullness of truth for something you can’t back up? If you really think it is important to our salvation to trust your word over all the other experts out there, including the first Christians (who would know, one would think) then you need to do a lot better than the kind of responses you have give me and others.

Obviously it’s pointless to talk to you. I see that on other threads, too. Even if a person thought you had a point, and wanted to learn more, you give them nothing to go on. You give us no reason to trust you, and no refutation of the excellent points others make.

 

[Samie]

Samie,

What is the relationship of verse 1 of Mark 16 and the verse you are using from the same chapter of Mark?

They are different sabbaths. The ‘sabbath’ in v1 is not the same day as the ‘sabbath’ of v9. That of v1 is ceremonial sabbath that then fell on Thursday; that in v9 is the weekly sabbath, Saturday. Please see my opening post.

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

I followed the link. Here’s the info, uploaded May 16, 2003, in the link:

Sorry, but it’s a farce; a waste of time. Since when can a solar eclipse occur on a full moon?

Think the article misquoted because it was a lunar eclipse, not solar. Every other source states a lunar eclipse, also stated lunar in that video series I posted on part 6, the previous clip of the clip I posted. Might want to read this paper (not a mere article), asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1985/JASA3-85Humphreys.html

 

[Samie]

This is nothing but a comment that means nothing. My point was that you threw in a sentence that didn’t address what I was asking. You didn’t prove a thing here. Just trying to stir things up, I guess, huh?

Hmmm…

Again, you fail to see the point. Read what I said; I was speaking of people with knowledge, not about majority. I am speaking about people who know Greek well, who have thoroughly studied the Bible, and who I have reason to trust. I have no reason to trust you over the centuries of brilliant Christians, including my priest, and including people like Pope Benedict.

The same thing was said about the fishermen disciples of the Lord.

This was my challenge to you to prove you know more than them. That line you gave was not proof. It just showed (once again) that you fail to see my point. If you can’t understand my question, how can I trust you understand Bible translation?

A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still, so the adage goes. Your will is that I’m a know-nothing, right? So why do I have to prove anything to you?

Or maybe you’re remembering wrongly. Without evidence, it’s hard to refute OR to agree with him. We have no idea what he based his words on, if he was Catholic, or if, indeed, he even exists.

You can take the time to throw that out there, then use the words, “off topic”, but can’t even provide one link? Just trying to stir things up, I guess.

Since you are that insistent, how about this:

“Is not every Christian obliged to sanctify Sunday and to abstain on that day from unnecessary servile work? Is not the observance of this law among the most prominent of our sacred duties? But you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.” James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of Our Fathers (1917 edition), p. 72-73 (16th Edition, p 111; 88th Edition, p. 89).

Maybe there’s a library in the corner. Or better still, the Library of Congress. Check out and tell me if it or he does not exist.

I googled the phrase “proi prote sabbatou” and found you all over the internet. There are people with very, very good reasoning against this. You refuse to consider their thoughts, and you make the same arguments over and over and over again. Often you copy and paste.

You think you can come to multiple websites, give us no idea why we should trust your word, and expect us to believe you? And expect us to leave the fullness of truth for something you can’t back up? If you really think it is important to our salvation to trust your word over all the other experts out there, including the first Christians (who would know, one would think) then you need to do a lot better than the kind of responses you have give me and others.

Obviously it’s pointless to talk to you. I see that on other threads, too. Even if a person thought you had a point, and wanted to learn more, you give them nothing to go on. You give us no reason to trust you, and no refutation of the excellent points others make.

I just feel this is present truth that needed to be known by many. I think I would be accountable to the Lord if I kept my silence. I believe I need to let others know and the best way to propagate this would be via the cyberspace. This is personal conviction, brother. I don’t get paid for doing this. I spend precious time which could had been spent on something pecuniary to feed my family.

But if you believe that I had been ignoring DIRECTLY related issues others would like me to address, I think you are wrong. I ignore unrelated issues. They waste precious time. Now show me from any site you said you had googled anybody who had given me a sound, bible-based refutation of what I understand about ‘proi prote sabbatou’ but whom I just ignored. Even one. Gerhard Ebersoehn? Which of his related posts did I ignore. I can’t recall any. But if you have one, then tell me. I would be very grateful, brother.

 

[TOME]

Samie,

Just to keep things clear, my disagreement with you in this post is whether or not the Resurrection took place on a Saturday. I am saying it could not. AS I said earlier, I don’t know Greek (Konine) so I will have to rely on primarily asking questions.

Saturday is a sabbath day, is it not? [You probably already know where my thinking is leading to; please feel free to comment about sabbath restrictions.]

 

[pablope]

You don’t hear of any scholar who don’t agree with your scholars? So why is that verse in your Catholic Bible? Had you torn that verse off?

No…that is why my question to you…why do you now accept it as part of your Bible?

And why are you using it to argue against the sunday resurrection?

Yes, tons of them. That’s why I rely on the Bible.

 

[SwissGuard25]

Hi, puzzleannie;

For sure, you alone know the tenor of your post. But this much I can say: Copernicus got excommunicated when presenting evidence against the age-long-held belief in the geocentricity of our solar system. The Savior was awarded with Crucifixion when He went against the belief of the times.

Thank you, annie.

In Christ Our Risen Savior,
Samie

He never went against the beliefs of his times he just came to fulfill them. He didn’t come to destroy them. And if he did come to destroy them then he would of change the Sabbath. So wait to ruin your whole tree.

Alright so me and you both know that Ellen G. White separated from the Church in 1863. For two main reasons.

1. The Sabbath.
   St. Paul says many times that the Sabbath is to be celebrated on the 8 day. Due to the Jewish calender there is eight days in a week and 28 hours in a day. The eight day is Sunday.
   for more info:
   catholic.com/tracts/sabbath-or-sunday
2. This reason is hilariously ironic she said that the pope’s title Vicarius Filii Dei (Vicar of the Son of God) ads up to 666 in Latin. The Popes title is Vicarius Christi (Vicar of Christ) which does not add up to 666 in Latin.
   IRONICALLY THOUGH
   Ellen G. White’s OWN NAME adds up to 666 in Latin.

 

[Incomplete]

Hmmm…

That’s helpful.

The same thing was said about the fishermen disciples of the Lord.

I don’t understand why you refuse to give us a reason to believe you if it so important for you to convince us. Now you equate yourself to one of the twelve, but still won’t answer my question.

A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still, so the adage goes. Your will is that I’m a know-nothing, right? So why do I have to prove anything to you?

This is very clearly an effort to not answer once again.

You don’t have to prove a thing, but it was you who came here to prove something.

Since you are that insistent, how about this:
Maybe there’s a library in the corner. Or better still, the Library of Congress. Check out and tell me if it or he does not exist.

You are the one who claims he exists. If he doesn’t, I’ll just be wasting hours and hours…kind of like I’m doing here, apparently. You made a statement, I asked for proof, and all you can say is I am being “that insistent.” Once again, avoiding the answer.

I just feel this is present truth that needed to be known by many. I think I would be accountable to the Lord if I kept my silence. I believe I need to let others know and the best way to propagate this would be via the cyberspace. This is personal conviction, brother. I don’t get paid for doing this. I spend precious time which could had been spent on something pecuniary to feed my family.

But if you believe that I had been ignoring DIRECTLY related issues others would like me to address, I think you are wrong. I ignore unrelated issues. They waste precious time. Now show me from any site you said you had googled anybody who had given me a sound, bible-based refutation of what I understand about ‘proi prote sabbatou’ but whom I just ignored. Even one. Gerhard Ebersoehn? Which of his related posts did I ignore. I can’t recall any. But if you have one, then tell me. I would be very grateful, brother.

If it is so important, give people something to go on other than what you believe those words to mean. Tell us why we should trust you, some random person on the internet. I don’t know Gerhard Ebersoehn, by the way. Though I have to add, I didn’t really look at the names of other posters.

What I said was that even if a person thinks you have a good point and would like to learn more, you give them nothing to go on…kind of like the way you’ve been answering my questions. That, and when people make good points, you don’t see them…in other words, you don’t take them in at all. You pose yourself as some kind of expert with inside information from God, but don’t give us reason to believe you, contrary to all the other evidence. Yet you expect us to believe you.

You misunderstand what I say over and over again, so why should I believe you can translate the Bible?

Do you think people who don’t agree with you lose their salvation?

 

[Samie]

Samie,

Just to keep things clear, my disagreement with you in this post is whether or not the Resurrection took place on a Saturday. I am saying it could not. AS I said earlier, I don’t know Greek (Konine) so I will have to rely on primarily asking questions.

Saturday is a sabbath day, is it not? [You probably already know where my thinking is leading to; please feel free to comment about sabbath restrictions.]

**Luke 6:9-10 **

9 Then said Jesus unto them, I will ask you one thing; Is it lawful on the sabbath days to do good, or to do evil? to save life, or to destroy it? 10 And looking round about upon them all, he said unto the man, Stretch forth thy hand. And he did so: and his hand was restored whole as the other.

Christ our Savior healed diseases on Sabbath to save life. Why would it be against His will if God the Father resurrected Him on that day? No, it is not against the will of Christ to be resurrected on Saturday.

 

[TOME]

Samie,

I thought you might use Luke the way you did. However, if you read Acts, and if you read all four gospels don’t they show that the followers of Christ did not come to the full realization that they were something beyond Judaism, especially at the time of Christ’s death and resurrection. The Twelve (minus Judas, of course) and Christ followers were still acting according to the Law which brings me to my earlier point. The activities of the women at the tomb, Peter and the “Other Disciple”, the men walking on the road to Emmaus, the women’s anticipation or hope of finding someone strong enough to remove the stone blocking the enterence to the tomb are all activities that were prohibited on a sabbath.

 

[Samie]

No…that is why my question to you…why do you now accept it as part of your Bible?

Because I believe it is part of it.

And why are you using it to argue against the sunday resurrection?

Because, of all resurrection verses, it is the only verse that explicitly says when Christ resurrected; and it says Christ resurrected on ‘proi prote sabbatou’ which is ‘early morning of the chief sabbath’.

And where does the Bible say it is the pillar and ground of Truth? Where does the Bible state it is the only source or rule of Faith?

The Bible is a collection of books, not of one single writer. You are asking for something available only when a book is written by one person. The absence of what you want to find therein does not in anyway diminish that the Bible is the sole authority in matters of spiritual life.

Seems you are dodging again…where did I say what you are saying above?

I was asking how do you know Mark actually wrote the gospel of Mark?

Did you not understand my answer? I believe Mark wrote it. Faith. Do you know what the bible definition of faith is. Seems not because you keep on repeating the same boring question over and over and over again.

So if you do not care who wrote it…so why are you citing it? Why do you even use the name Mark? Why do you even believe it is Scripture? Why even have scripture is authorship is not important? Why was it even included in the Bible is the author was not important?

This only shows you really don’t understand what I was posting. Or, you simply refuse to? What I DON’T CARE about is how you appraise the book of Mark, not the book itself. Understood, brother?

It has to do with the issue of authority…it has been continuously thought for centuries…by the Church when the resurrection occurred…so who would you believe…your own authority or the Church?

Neither. I believe in the authority of God as portrayed in the Bible.

 

[promethius]

Did you know EGW and the SDA Church believe in a Sunday resurrection? Now you know. So please be ethical once more and don’t drag her and the SDA Church in this issue.

I know plenty about what Ellen Gould White espoused. A former girlfriend’s mother was SDA so I read the works of Ellen Gould White. It is quite nutty stuff.

Had I translated ‘proi prote sabbatou’ the way you misunderstood me as having done it " ONE WORD AT A TIME" as you said, then I would have come up with only 3 words.

Incorrect. You did translate it one word at a time. However, some words in foreign languages translate into MULTIPLE words in english (eg: french “Comprend?” would translate into “you understand?”)

As to your ‘first day after the sabbath’ for ‘prote sabbatou’, can you please cite a verse where the genitive ‘sabbatou’ received the same treatment you gave it? If none, then why condemn others in a way as if you were born with koine Greek in your tongue?

I don’t have to cite a verse. That’s ridiculous. I cited Vine’s dictionary. Vines is a professional and an expert in greek translation. You are an amateur, who is probably getting this arguement from another misinformed amateur.

In other words, YOU cite a source more authoritative than yourself on translating the PHRASE “prote sabbatou” as meaning on the sabbath. Thus far you have presented us amateur work which is unacceptable.

And I am not a copycat. I would be very grateful if you can show me anybody else who brought up this issue on ‘prote sabbatou’ before.

This guy is one example of a few I found in less than three minutes: awakenedchurch.com/foundations/cbb/the-sabbath

It’s a common line of argument from Messianic Jews and SDA types. You’re not the first person to pitch this false translation by me.