Free Republic

I have updated:

http://www.torahtimes.org/Debunking_the_Gender_Argument.html

and

http://www.torahtimes.org/Additional%20Considerations.html

O.k. clearly you interpret differently, but the question is do you agree that “Later of [the] Sabbaths” is a possibility? Or do you maintain that it is impossible? And if so, then for what specific reason? I mean on the merits of the syntax and grammar alone without bringing in the larger context to tip the balance one way or the other.

I know what Grimms Lexicon says. What you left out was Thayers editorial notes questioning these definitions. BLASS already stated that οψε was used like υστερον. Why did you ommit the editorial comment, and why do you not want to comment on BLASS?

Of course Robertson does not include all of the possible senses of the gentive and Matthew 28:1. He only includes the ones that make sense to him. Once he says it is a matter for exegesis, he is allowing the whole range of meaning for the genitive. That's the point. One has to separate the linguistics from the personal conclusions of the author. The quotation from BLASS is more revealing, as BLASS shows that one the way to his argument "Late from the sabbath" one must pass through the possibility of later of the sabbaths. Yet still they are ignoring the plural σαββατων.

I looked at your blog. We discussed whether Yeshua ate the 15th seder or not on CARM quite a bit, and Diego here also, but I have not written a focusd paper on it yet, just forum comments -- nothing organized and formal. After stumbling on to ראשית המצות and concluding the basis of my former paper, I now have the writing of the 15 seder/vs. 14 seder one on my agenda. Heretofore, there are only brief remarks in my book.

My views on Matthew 28:1 οψε δε σαββατων are explained here:

Daniel's Literal Translation and Commentary

 

The Later Sabbath After the Passover Sabbath

 

"Matthew 28:1 And the later of the Sabbaths, as it began to dawn on the first of the Sabbaths, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulcher" (DLT: torahtimes.org).

later...Sabbath: There were two Sabbaths in Passover week.  The annual Passover Sabbath was on Thursday, Nisan 15, and this was followed by the weekly Sabbath on Nisan 17.  The "later of the Sabbaths' refers to the weekly Sabbath.  "Later" is used in the sense of "former" and "later".  The former Sabbath was the annual Sabbath.  The later Sabbath was the weekly Sabbath.

first...Sabbath: The weekly Sabbath was also called the "first of the Sabbaths" on account of Leviticus 23:15, where instructions are given to count seven Sabbaths after the annual Passover Sabbath".

later: Οψε.  The proper definition of this word when used with the genitive case is later.  "The genitive with Οψε and μετ ολιγον  have become associated in meaning with  υστερον τουτων [later of these], προτερον τουτων [former of these]" (BLASS, 164.4, pg. 91, A Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature).  Thayer's Lexicon observes concerning the errant rendering "after": "but an examination of the instances just cited (and others) will show that they fail to sustain the rendering after." (DLC: torahtimes.org)

1. Mt. 28:1, Moulton, Robertson, and likely B-D-F justify the pragmatic sense "after" in Mat. 28:1 with the ablative. Moulton describes it best, "This use of οψε = after involves an ablative gen., "late from." (pg. 72, Prolegomena).

 

 2. Robertson, pg. 646, "It is a point, for exegesis, not for grammar, to decide."   The reason Roberston must say this is that it depends on the interpretation of the following gentive, and not on the lexical meaning of οψε, whose meaning is implicitly conceeded by the use of this argument NOT to be "after", and thus agrees with the main thesis of the editorial objection in Thayer's Lexicon.   As for the further claim of the editor that the ablative is not in fact used in examples provided, the jury is still out until the source contexts of those examples can be rechecked.

 

3. Daniel B. Wallace, "For example, the genitive of separation [i.e. ablative], a common idiom in the Attic dialect, is rare in the Koine.  It has been replaced, by and large, by απο + genitive" (pg. 163, Basics).  Απο, of course, means "from".

 

4. Therefore, "Later [from]" where "from" is the interpretation is a rare interpretation in Koine, and the Koine normally inserts the word απο to mean "from" in a case like this.

 

5. B-D-F allows οψε in the sense of υστερον τουτων [= later of these]

 

6.  For οψε BDAG provides an example "later than", but as we have seen the "than" is merely a dynamic equivalent gloss for the ablative "from" interpretation.  Therefore, we merely need to interpret the genitive the normal way, "Later of the Sabbaths" in Mt. 28:1 to arrive at the intelligible sense that it means the second of two sabbaths, i.e. the weekly Sabbath after Passover.

 

7.  Where Moulton and B-D-F (pg. 72) translates οψε των Τρωικων "at a late [stage] in the Trojan war" they are being less than accurate, since the Greek says "Trojan wars" in the plural.  So it would be "later of the Trojan wars" or "late in the Trojan wars"; it would be impossible to distinguish "late in" here from "later of".

 

8.  Liddell and Scott qualify the sense "after" with "perh." = "perhaps" showing they are less than certain.

 

9.  Liddell and Scott supply an example οψιγενης = later born, "later-born, i.e. younger", with notice that the prefix form, οψι, is from οψε.

 

10.  Moulton vol. III regarding οψε speculates, "A Latinism? Just After," (Nigel Turner) regarding Mt. 28:1.

 

11. Regardless of the personal opinion of any of these men, the evidence presented by them supports the sense "later of sabbaths".

 

12.  The following concordance shows that consistent sense can be made with "later":

 

Gen 24:11 toward a later time, when the women fetch

Exo 30:8 And when Aaron shall light the lamps later,

Isa 5:11 who linger till later, for wine will inflame them

Jer 2:23 And know what you did later.  Her voice cried

Mat 28:1 And the later of the sabbaths, at dawning for

Mar 11:19 And when later it became, he was going

Mar 13:35 cometh, either later, or at midnight, or at

Ant 16.218 he went at the later hour to refresh himself

Bdag 3.1 later of  the hour decided on;  from?

Bdag 3.2 he arrived later  of/in/from?  the mysteries;

Bdag 3.3 later of/in/from? these

Bdag 3.4 later of/in the fight

Blass 164.4a later of/in the Trojan wars

Blass 164.4b at a later hour

Blass 164.4c later of/in/from? the games

Thay 471 later of/in/from? the times of the king

 

13.  Notice "from?" in some examples. This is because those examples actually have to be checked in the original source again to see if the ablative is required to make sense of the context.

 

14.  Regardless of the personal opinion of these men, they show uncertainty and confusion over the pragmatic sense "after", and though a bit uncareful in their statements clearly appear to reject the lexical sense "after" leaving it to the lexical sense + ablative to yield that pragmatic sense.

 

-----------------------------

   

 

 

Daniel's Literal Translation and Commentary: (http://www.torahtimes.org/translation/mat2801.html)

All Rights Reserved, 2009 by Daniel Gregg.   No part of this article may be copied without including the above reference to the author's original: torahtimes.org.  It is preferable only to include what is in the boxes, however the live link in the second box may be omitted if necessary.

 

Policy

Return to Index Page

Torahtimes Home Page

 

I explain this ablative position of the traditionalists more fully in my latest article.

Debunking the Gender Argument

and proving that Μια των Σαββατων

means "first of the Sabbaths"

Daniel Gregg

Newly posted: http://www.torahtimes.org/Debunking_the_Gender_Argument.html

I consider this article a massive break through in showing that the traditionalist position is based entirely on Church tradition and has no inherent support in Greek grammar or syntax.  I was afraid to make the argument in the past due to a few loose technical details.  Wheel and axel finally went together and now the paper flies:

 

Debunking the Gender Argument

and proving that Μια των Σαββατων

means "first of the Sabbaths"

Daniel Gregg

 Abstract: I use the various phrases for "first day of unleavens" which is grammatically the same as "first of the sabbaths" to show that this should be the grammatical and syntactical normal sense.

I’ve been researching this for years, and this is by far the best article I’ve seen. It proves that murder by words written by Israel’s enemies is every bit considered legitimate warfare as real bullets and suicide bombers.

I have posted a new article at torahtimes:

Additional Considerations on μια των σαββατων.

http://www.torahtimes.org/Additional%20Considerations.html

It takes up the issue of the feminine gender of the Hebrew word, and the possible construtio ad sensum of the Greek, also examples from Greek showing that "one of the sabbaths" follows a regular literal pattern.

 

 

Hi Ruffian,

I'm a very careful and demanding researcher, even of myself. I must confess that I was not absolutely confident of such a radical disagreement with tradition until I used the solution to Solve Daniel 9 and the rest of biblical chronology. So I don't blame you for doubts. The Sunday traditon is like Goerbells proverbial repeat a lie often enough that it becomes the truth -- very compelling if you don't have absolute truth to counter it. Anyway, I did the hard work and left the means to verify it. Just follow the links to the chronology book.

Bump:

The Sabbath resurrection also works with Daniel 9:

John 19:39-40 is a parenthetical comment of what took place on Friday. When Yeshua was first put in the grave, they wrapped him in one linen sheet. But later, after the annual Sabbath Joseph came back with Nicodumus and the did the proper burial with linen strips this time.  W. Graham Scroggie, D.D. explains in "a guide to the gospels":

 

Achi,

      Diego answered your question about the women "working" on the Sabbath the same way I would have—by quoting the relevant section of the Mishnah.   I would add that in Jewish culture, that when tasks of like nature were required that it was usually left to the women to do it.   The body of Yeshua was wrapped in a single linen sheet on the eve of the Passover Sabbath, then after that Sabbath, on Friday Joseph and Nicodemus wrapped the body in linen strips with the 100 weight of spices.   The remaining task was left to the women to complete the anointing on the third day.  The Mishnah Shabbat 23:5 is directed toward the situation when the body is already in the grave, and defines what housekeeping may be done for the body on the sabbath.   It specifically allows them to "anoint" the "corpse".

I don't know where you got the list in your post.   However, it is entirely contrived to correspond with the grammar and syntax of "first of the sabbaths".

Please see (http://www.torahtimes.org/images/ChartoftheWeek02.jpg)

The facts.

1. The alleged usage does not occur in either English, Greek, Syriac, or Aramaic.

2. The alleged use does not occur in vernacular speech of Hebrew or any language.

3. The alleged usage only occurs in written form in parts of the traditional Jewish literature after AD 140.

4. The alleged usage does not occur in any language before AD 100, but only after the Church altered the meaning of the phrase, "first of the sabbaths", for which the first evidence of the alteration is the Didache.

5.  In the actual Hebrew usage the phrase is אחד בשבת, the earliest instance which is AD 140.

6.  In the Hebrew there is a lack of correspondence between the Greek σαββατων which is in the plural, and the Hebrew שבת which is singular.

7. Further, there is a lack of correspondence between the Hebrew preposition ב and  the genitive case used by the Greek.   To make it correspond would require the dative case in Greek.

8. Further the Hebrew word אחד is in the masculine gender whereas the Greek word is in the feminine.

9.  The Hebrew expected from μια των σαββατων is אחת השבתות.

In linguistics even exact correspondence of a phrase may still have different meanings:

1.  When will the ambassador arrive?  HEISNOWHERE and I hear him knocking at the door.

2.  When did you last see the ambassador?  We've looked all over for him, and HEISNOWHERE.  Whatever shall we do?

In linguistics a slight alteration of grammar can change the whole meaning of a phrase:

1. This is to be the "first of the months" 2. It is the "first of the month"

We see that the plural makes all the difference in the world.

     Now since we have shown that there are three major differences, it cannot be shown that the one phrase was meant to mean the other phrase.   And just as I have said before, just because a monkey has 98% the same DNA as man does not mean that man came from monkey.   The same thing works here.  Just because there are some similarities between two phrases does not mean one means the other.

Therefore this list is contrived and misleading.  It was made to order to look like "first of the sabbaths" but has so many differences with the limited Mishnaic usage that it has the be ASSUMED they are the same.   But the evidence does not warrant the assumption.

 

The Friday-Sunday theory cannot claim one objective straightforward piece of evidence that uniquely supports it.

I am not saying you made this list up Achi,  it looks to me like Bishop Lightfoot first created it:

    You will notice two things about the Bishop.  First he believed in Sabbath transference theology to Sunday, and second, he mistranslated the Hebrew or Aramaic where he wanted to to make it look like it matched up with the NT, mostly out of ignorance of Hebrew, Aramaic, and wishful theology that the Talmud would rubber stamp his beliefs of NT usage.   His ignorance shows up right away in supposing that שבא means  "Sabbath".  Actually this word is the same as שבע

 

in which Aramaic has transmutted the ayin for alef.   The word simply means "seven", i.e. "one in seven" in the larger phrase.  Its a dead giveaway when the tav is only used for "preparation of sabbath" and "sabbath" itself.

      Notice the Bishop's last comment?  The "new sabbath".   Well this is just the original Gnostic theology.   Like good cultists the 2nd century Gnostics admitted the grammar was "first of the Sabbaths" but since their followers had no Torah context, they reinterpreted the phrase like any cultist would:  they made it the "first of the sabbaths" of the new creation, i.e. the first sabbath of the new dispensation --Sunday to go along with their Mithraic syncretism.

Luke will now show us that the women prepare those spices (obviously on a non Sabbath day) and then they rest for another Sabbath.....Saturday. [Luke 23:56] And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.

Hi Diego, you might want to consider the following

Luke 23:54-24:1, Two Sabbaths with Spices prepared between them

 

        The Greek structure shows that the chapter division must go in the middle of the Luke 23:56.  This is because the second half of the verse is one coordinated sentence with Luke 24:1.  This is shown in J.P. Green's Interlinear Bible and explained in the Concordia Commentary by Arthur Just.  This proper chapter division is of critical importance to the chronology.  In 23:54, the annual Sabbath on Thursday that year is referenced.  Then 23:56a tells us that they prepared spices.   The initial verse of the next chapter (23:56b-24:1) fills in the detail that they rested on the annual sabbath, but then brought the spices on the first of the sabbaths after the annual sabbath.   Necessarily then the spices were prepared on Friday between the two Sabbaths.   Mark 16:1 gives us explicit confirmation that the spices were bought after the annual Sabbath.

Photo of J.P. Green's Interlinear:

 *Correction from J.P. Green, John 20:1.

comment: "23:56b-24:1. το μεν σαββατον ... τη δε μια των σαββατων—The μεν ... δε construction links these two days together and prompts consideration of a literary and theological link. (In Nestle-Aland²⁵ 23:56b begins a new paragraph that continues with 24:1-11; 23:56b is separated from 24:1 only by a comma.  In Nestle-Aland²⁶ and Nestle-Aland²⁷ 23:56b has been separated from Luke 24 and ends with a period.) The close relationship between 23:56b and 24:1 forms the transition from Luke 23 to Luke 24.  The double use of σαββατον and the way Luke has phrased the sentence suggest theological implications as the narrative moves from one day to the next.  This is why 23:56b is best considered part of Luke 24 and the resurrection narrative" (Concordia Commentary, Luke 9:51-24:53, Arthur A. Just Jr., 1997).

 

END OF CHAPTER 23

 

Luke 23:54 And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on. 55 And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid. 56 And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments. 

 

CHAPTER 24

 

 [24:1]  Now they rested the one Sabbath, [[according to the ordinance,]] 24:1 But upon the first of the Sabbaths, at deep dawn, they came unto the sepulcher, bringing the spices which they made ready, and certain others with them"

Matthew 28:1 is explained in the article in this paragraph:

Matthew 28:1 teaches a Sabbath resurrection: "On the later of the Sabbaths, at the dawning for the first of the Sabbaths, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the tomb." It begins, "On the later Sabbath ..." because there were two Sabbaths in Passion Week. One Sabbath was the annual Passover feast day, and the other was the weekly seventh day Sabbath which followed. In Passion Week, the annual Sabbath was on Thursday. "On the later of the Sabbaths" tells us that the resurrection was on the weekly Sabbath, and not on the annual Sabbath. Jewish believers in Yeshua know that the annual Passover feast day is a rest day as well as the weekly Sabbath.

"In the end of the sabbath...

οψε has the sense of "later" when used with the genitive case in the sense of υστερον (latter). This is mentioned in BLASS's grammar.

The only problem i see is yours seems to say He was buried wed morning but he was buried in the evening. It was the 9th hour in line with the Pesach lamb sacrificings.

That's a rather minor problem Achi, because its only a misunderstanding.  Here is the detail for you:

 

Dr. David Regan's view goes like this:

Fatal problems:

    1. The resurrection was in the morning:

KJV Hosea 6:1 Come, and let us return unto the LORD: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up. 2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight. 3 Then shall we know, if we follow on to know the LORD: his going forth is prepared as the morning; and he shall come unto us as the rain, as the latter and former rain unto the earth.

   2. Luke 24:21 would necessarily take place on Sunday:

KJV Luke 24:21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.

     But clearly, Sunday can do no better than be the 4th day since these things were done.

 

Ref: (http://www.lamblion.com/articles/articles_issues14.php).

 

    Now you will see that this has neither problem:

 

1. For Luke 24:21 count days since the crucifixion making sabbath day after the resurrection the 3rd day "since" (counting exclusively just like in Dr. Regan's scenario.

Acts 20:7, J.P. Green/Concordant Version

1Cor 16:2/Concordant Version

Luke 18:12/Concordant Version

   Since you must be new to pre-Catholic history, I would point out that "Lord's Day" in Revelation 1:10 is a reference to the weekly Sabbath before paganism and anti-Semitism took over Christianity.  Of course after this well known political change, propaganda was developed to de-judaize the NT documents.

   Luke 18:12 means that they skipped two of the three meals on Sabbath.  Jews are supposed to feast three meals, but some extra pious Jews  skipped two in order to study and pray.   Eliezer Segal of the U. of Calgary explains how some extra pious Jews fasted on Sabbath.

   There is no evidence of a connection between the "first of the Sabbaths" and the rare Jewish counting of days to the Sabbath you reference.  That's like saying that because monkeys and man share 98% DNA that they must be related.

    

J.P. Green's Interlinear shows "first of the Sabbaths" in John 20:1 and other passages.

The article? How about from Scripture? What day was it when Mary found the tomb open? It was not on the Sabbath when she found the tomb empty. And the day began at sunset not midnight.

You still haven't even read the article enough to understand its basic positions. The Greek texts that put the resurrection and the visit of the women to the tomb on "the first of the sabbaths" are Scripture. And that paragraph that you didn't read? It proves that the day does not begin at sunset in these circumstances. I know that you don't actually want to quote what the paragraph says to prove this, but that's because I think you are afraid of the evidence.