Posted on 12/12/2010 9:11:08 AM PST by bibletruth
What ARE you talking about?
I gave you an answer, or don't you really want to know the truth?
As Sayuncledave said no need to Hijack Bibletruths thread, but if you are looking for an excuse not to participate in honest intellectual dabate.... well.... I guess you have it.
You gave me an answer to where Catholics were spoken of in scripture and that devine revelation was through them in the beginning?
Lord, No Wonder you find those Yahoo intellect folks so intimidating!?
You don't need to argue .. facts .. You just need to argue that someone else, (usually an Intellect) told you so!
Please .. Run along and play now.
Yeah I knew you were just blowing smoke, I guess every one can see it now as well.
Nothing you have said has answered The question.
I guess you’d have to call this a draw .. My Smoke to .. Your Mirrors!?
Gotta go, be back later .. to argue.
Am watching a Star Trek movie about some alien thing or other ‘Claiming’ to be the “Original” voice of God.
(Going to try and find a group on Yahoo about it later)
Like I said i am not into thread Hijack, You want tostart a thread and ping me great, or join one of the degbate forums i suggested, if not well we all know where you stand.
All the canonical books of the NT were written by AD70. The Church for the main part had a complete and sufficient apostolic written tradition from her very beginning. The claim that the Church had or needed an oral tradition for several centuries is entirely bogus.
Applying your logic to the scriptures themselves would be very problematic.
Nowhere in scripture is it designated which 4 Gospels constitute the synoptic canon of scripture.
There are a number of other Gospels which did not meet the cut and the simple historical fact is that Peter’s church selected and canonized those four gospels.
If you disagree... please let us know who selected and popularized these books.
Why are you giving pliny facts, you are just going to confuse him!
The Bible is a Catholic document, given to the whole world. You said, “BTW: Before using the Built upon the Rock argument...Don’t.” I asked you why you consider Holy Scripture an argument. I then reminded you that YOU brought up Matthew 16:16-18, not me. I then added that, in all seriousness, you should enlighten me as to why you, personally, think that I, personally, shouldn’t believe what my Church has taught for the last two thousand years, since they were taught those things, through the Holy Spirit. And in the interests of NOT threadjacking, I invited you to use freepmail to prove your point. I also asked for you to be civil in the course of trying to prove your point, and I added that I, too, would be, when listening. Now which part of that was too tough for you? My request was serious. If you have a point, sarcasm aside, make it.
For over 1700 years now, since confusion in theology was introduced on a wide scale by the main stream churches.... this verse has caused much error. If you notice....no where is the word "Tomb" used. People have just assumed that Matthew was referring to that when he said, "Heart of the Earth".
Many folks do get the chronology correct when it comes to the supper, the arrest and mock trial (early A.M.), the appearance before Caesar the next morning and the crucifixion, death and burial before sunset. All these events took place on the 14th [Leviticus 23:5] which was the preparation for the Passover. I noticed that you correctly named Wednesday, Nisan 14 as well.
Let's review somethings that The Lord said must happen before He could resurrect himself from the Tomb:
[Matthew 16:21] From that time began Jesus to shew to his disciples that it is necessary for him to go away to Jerusalem, and to suffer many things from the elders, and chief priests, and scribes, and to be put to death, and the third day to rise.
The reason I highlighted was to emphasize that there was more to this "Heart of the Earth" thing than just laying in the tomb.
Here are some more: [Matthew 17:22-23] 22 And while they are living in Galilee, Jesus said to them, 'The Son of Man is about to be delivered up to the hands of men, 23 and they shall kill him, and the third day he shall rise,' and they were exceeding sorry.
Matthew 20:18-19]18 'Lo, we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man shall be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, 19 and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the nations to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify, and the third day he will rise again.'
There was quite a bit that was going to happen to Him during this period other than his death....and reposing in the tomb. All these things.....were part and parcel of the Metaphor,"Heart of the Earth".
I'll list the rest so you can see them yourself and realize that much was going to happen to Our Lord during these "Three Days and Three Nights".
[Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34][Luke 9:22; 18:31-33; 24:7;]
This one in particular kind of narrows in on just what I'm saying: [Luke 24:20-21] 20 how also the chief priests and our rulers did deliver him up to a judgment of death, and crucified him; 21 and we were hoping that he it is who is about to redeem Israel, and also with "all" these things, this third day is passing to-day, since these things happened.
These scriptures all list that which would happen and they all conclude by saying He would rise the third day. It doesn't take too much understanding to realize that He was speaking of the other "Things" as part of His total ordeal which would conclude with the resurrection on the third day.
Now....stop and think about the prophecy in Isaiah [53:5] And he is pierced for our transgressions, Bruised for our iniquities, The chastisement of our peace is on him, And by his bruise there is healing to us.
The KJV says: "By His stripes we are healed". If His sign to His disciples [Matthew 12:40] only included the death, the time He spent in the tomb and the resurrection how was the blood he spilled earlier accounted for? He began to bleed innocent blood almost immediately upon his arrest and mock trial. He had no blemish on Him prior to his arrest [I Peter 1:19] and His blood was what redeemed us.
No where in the scriptures I provided does it say simply, "He must die and be raised the third day. They all say.... He must suffer other "Things" as well. This is the "Heart of the Earth"....under the control and command of mortal mankind which He purposely entered into. He knew He would be the Passover.....and He knew what he must endure.
Well.....where does this place the chronology? He would have entered the "Heart of the Earth" probably very early (our time) in the morning of the 14th (3:00/4:00 A.M.). They had eaten the last supper (Tuesday evening, the 14th) and had gone to the garden. The arrest would have occurred when Judas showed up with the troops and this would have been the beginning of His Three Days and Three nights under the control of mankind. It would have been early Wednesday morning (Our Time) but still the darkness of the 14th)(Hebrew Time).
Three days and three nights later.. places Him resurrecting from the tomb early Sabbath morning, the 17th of Nisan. All four gospels show (In the Greek) that the women all appear early at the tomb on the Sabbath.....and HE is already..........risen!
Thank you for that informative post. Not sure I recall the “heart of the earth” phrase. Seeing it here, I can easily see it referring to the earthly things such as trials, judgements, punishments, arrests, etc. And Jesus submitted to ALL of it. Knowledge of the original language (greek?) might shed some light on the phrase as well.
He could have just “disappeared” as he did earlier in the gospels when the people tried to grab Him. Or perform a miracle as He so often had in the past. But this time he submitted to the ways of earthly men.
You’re welcome.
I meant to say, “Caesar’s court convened by Pilate”....but my grandson hit me with a nerf ball as I was typing and I forgot the rest of the phrase. Obviously....The Lord did not appear before Caesar.
Well....for one, I would like to see your proof (in the Greek) that the word SABBATWN [Matthew 28:1][Mark 16:2][Luke 24:1][John 20:1] means anything other than a "Special Sabbath" ordained of God. I believe you may be confusing this word with SABBATON which indeed does mean a Saturday Sabbath. And.....by the way....if the Greek would have been trying to say, "First day of the week".....it would have been rendered thus: PROTO HEMERA TE EBDOMA.
Out of four different gospel writers (all familiar with the Greek language).....why do you suppose not one of them got it right? Maybe.....because it doesn't mean what the Main Stream Churches have been attempting to sell/tell us for 1700 years? Possible!
As you can see....there are a few different forms of the word Sabbath in the Greek. All of the resurrection passages use the word SABBATWN when describing the day of resurrection. When ever the word SABBATON is used in scripture it just describes a normal weekly Sabbath. It also gives the plural form of both words (SABBATA for SABBATON) and (SABBATW for SABBATWN). SABBATOU and SABBASIN are descriptive adjectives for both as well.
The reason you see this Greek word, SABBATWN in all the resurrection verses is because it was indeed a "Special Sabbath" to the Hebrew people. We are told in [Leviticus 23:15-16] to count off the fifty days to Pentecost from Passover and number these weekly Sabbaths during the count.
They were considered ordained Sabbaths so that's why they are spelled differently. They do not.....and never have.....meant "The first day of the week".
Here are the pertinent verses translated literally by Young's:
[Matthew 28:1] 1 And on the eve of the sabbaths, at the dawn, toward the first of the sabbaths, came Mary the Magdalene, and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre,
[Mark 16:2] 2 and early in the morning of the first of the sabbaths, they come unto the sepulchre, at the rising of the sun,
[Luke 24:1] 1 And on the first of the sabbaths, at early dawn, they came to the tomb, bearing the spices they made ready, and certain others with them,
[John 20:1]1 And on the first of the sabbaths, Mary the Magdalene doth come early (there being yet darkness) to the tomb, and she seeth the stone having been taken away out of the tomb,
Mr. Young translates everyone of these resurrection passages literally and he does not mention a first day of anything. The resurrection occured early on a Saturday morning before sunrise!
Outside of eight texts in the New Testament [Matthew 28:1]; [Mark 16:2,9]; [Luke 24:1]; [John 20:1, 19]; [Acts 20:7], and [1Cor. 16:2]1, where we find μια των σαββατων translated as "first day of the week", there is no example of σαββατων having the meaning of "week" in any Greek literature before AD 100, and then only in "Church" Greek after that. The first attested use in this sense is Didache 8.1. This sense is entirely wanting in Secular Greek, the LXX, Josephus, Philo, or any other Greek literature of Jewish provenance before the destruction of the Second Temple except for these eight texts. That sense is also entirely lacking in classical and Koine Greek except for its alleged use in these eight texts. Furthermore, these eight texts are not just ordinary examples where nothing is at stake. What is at stake here is the original separation of Christianity from its Hebrew roots, and the justifications supplied for this schism. Therefore, we may rightly suspect that the alleged sense of "first day of the week" is due to opportunistic revisionism based on sectarian religious and political motivations.
I responded to your thread....twice as a matter of fact and have not yet received a reply from you in defense.
I thought you may have been away for the holidays so I never pressed the issue......but now I’m curious.
Did I convince you that quickly of your error....and you now see the correct interpretation.....as mine?
If that’s the case I would really like to know. Usually I get some argument....but in your case it’s been just silence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.