Archive for nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Nglreturns is a forum to discuss religion, philosophy, ethics etc...

NGLReturns Daily Quiz - Play here!
 



       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Bible study
cole209

Mark 16:9

A poster on another forum, the topic of which was questioning the authenticity of the last 12 verses in the book of Mark, wrote that it doesn’t really matter because there is no doctrinal teaching in Mark 16:9-20 that cannot be proved elsewhere in agreed Scripture.


I made the mistake of sticking my nose into the discussion by pointing out that actually there is a statement in verse 9, as the KJV and similar versions have it, that is used for a doctrinal teaching that is to be found nowhere else in Scripture. As the KJV translates it, it is the only place that puts the resurrection on the first day of the week. I then suggested that whenever the discussion of seventh day observance versus first day observance comes up, first day proponents usually use the idea of a first day resurrection to justify the change, and when questioned about the day of resurrection, quote Mark 16:9. The poster came back with: “Quote a published author who has done that.” - I have not yet been able to come up with one.  Does anyone here know of one?
Lexilogio

Published, no. But Bible Gateway has some interesting comments on this which may be of help?

Let us know how it progresses. It had never occurred to me that the Gospel of Mark might be seen as controversial.
cole209

Lexilogio,

re: “ But Bible Gateway has some interesting comments on this which may be of help?”


Thanks for the link, but I’m afraid that it doesn’t mention Mark 16:9.  It uses Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1; and John 20:1 which do not say when the resurrection actually took place.
jeremyp

Re: Mark 16:9

cole209 wrote:
As the KJV translates it, it is the only place that puts the resurrection on the first day of the week.

Mark 16:2 "And very early in the morning the first [day] of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun."

Matthew 28:1 "In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first [day] of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre."

Luke v24:1 "Now upon the first [day] of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain [others] with them."

John 20:1 "The first [day] of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre."

I realise that none of them say explicitly that Jesus rose on the first day of the week, but the narrative implies it very strongly.
cole209

jeremyp,

re: “I realise that none of them say explicitly that Jesus rose on the first day of the week, but the narrative implies it very strongly.”

I don’t see how it does that.  Nothing in those verses precludes a seventh day resurrection.
jeremyp

cole209 wrote:
jeremyp,

re: “I realise that none of them say explicitly that Jesus rose on the first day of the week, but the narrative implies it very strongly.”

I don’t see how it does that.  Nothing in those verses precludes a seventh day resurrection.

Why does it matter, anyway?
cyberman

cole209 wrote:
jeremyp,

re: “I realise that none of them say explicitly that Jesus rose on the first day of the week, but the narrative implies it very strongly.”

I don’t see how it does that.  Nothing in those verses precludes a seventh day resurrection.


They pretty much do. Bear in mind that the day started at sunset.
cole209

jeremyp,

re: “Why does it matter, anyway?”

Because I was asked to provide an author, and I was hoping to be able to do that.
cole209

cyberman,

re: “They pretty much do.”

I wonder if you might point out where they do that?


re: “Bear in mind that the day started at sunset.”

I’m afraid that I do not see the point you are trying to make with that comment.
cyberman

I just wondered if that was the cause of your confusion - the reason you thought those quotes could suggest a Saturday resurrection.
cole209

cyberman,

re: “I just wondered if that was the cause of your confusion...”

I’m sorry, but I still don’t see what the ending of the day at sunset has to do with the “discussion”.


re: “... reason you thought those quotes could suggest a Saturday resurrection.”

I’m not saying that they suggest a Saturday resurrection; only that they don’t preclude one.  I think that the resurrection probably did occur on the first day of the week, but only Mark 16:9 - as translated in the KJV - says so.
rstrats

Since it's been awhile, perhaps someone new looking in will know of an author.
Farmer Geddon

As Jews the first day of the week would have been?
rstrats

Farmer Geddon,

re:  "As Jews the first day of the week would have been?"

It would have been the first day of the week.
Truster

Re: Mark 16:9

cole209 wrote:
A poster on another forum, the topic of which was questioning the authenticity of the last 12 verses in the book of Mark, wrote that it doesn’t really matter because there is no doctrinal teaching in Mark 16:9-20 that cannot be proved elsewhere in agreed Scripture.


I made the mistake of sticking my nose into the discussion by pointing out that actually there is a statement in verse 9, as the KJV and similar versions have it, that is used for a doctrinal teaching that is to be found nowhere else in Scripture. As the KJV translates it, it is the only place that puts the resurrection on the first day of the week. I then suggested that whenever the discussion of seventh day observance versus first day observance comes up, first day proponents usually use the idea of a first day resurrection to justify the change, and when questioned about the day of resurrection, quote Mark 16:9. The poster came back with: “Quote a published author who has done that.” - I have not yet been able to come up with one.  Does anyone here know of one?


Messiah was staked  at 9am on Passover Wednesday April 25th 31 AD (14 Nisan 3791) < Mark 15:25, Dan 9:1, 24-27>
Messiah died at 3pm <Matt 27:45-50, Mark 15:33-37, Luke 23:44-46>

Messiah resurrected Saturday evening  April 28th 31AD <Matt 28:1, Mark 16:2,9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19>
Derek

Re: Mark 16:9

Truster wrote:
cole209 wrote:
A poster on another forum, the topic of which was questioning the authenticity of the last 12 verses in the book of Mark, wrote that it doesn’t really matter because there is no doctrinal teaching in Mark 16:9-20 that cannot be proved elsewhere in agreed Scripture.


I made the mistake of sticking my nose into the discussion by pointing out that actually there is a statement in verse 9, as the KJV and similar versions have it, that is used for a doctrinal teaching that is to be found nowhere else in Scripture. As the KJV translates it, it is the only place that puts the resurrection on the first day of the week. I then suggested that whenever the discussion of seventh day observance versus first day observance comes up, first day proponents usually use the idea of a first day resurrection to justify the change, and when questioned about the day of resurrection, quote Mark 16:9. The poster came back with: “Quote a published author who has done that.” - I have not yet been able to come up with one.  Does anyone here know of one?


Messiah was staked  at 9am on Passover Wednesday April 25th 31 AD (14 Nisan 3791) < Mark 15:25, Dan 9:1, 24-27>
Messiah died at 3pm <Matt 27:45-50, Mark 15:33-37, Luke 23:44-46>

Messiah resurrected Saturday evening  April 28th 31AD <Matt 28:1, Mark 16:2,9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19>


Yes, that is my understanding as we, not that it matters, it is sufficient to know that he died and was resurrected. Although we should consider why it normally took three days for someone to be crucified yet it took just 6 hours with Christ, despite the fact that he had nails driven through his hands, wrist and feet as opposed to the usual ropes, and was pierced in his side. It suggests that he had power over his own mortality.
Powwow

Staked? That's very JW sounding.

http://tribunesandtriumphs.org/roman-life/roman-crucifixion.htm
Lexilogio

Re: Mark 16:9

Truster wrote:
cole209 wrote:
A poster on another forum, the topic of which was questioning the authenticity of the last 12 verses in the book of Mark, wrote that it doesn’t really matter because there is no doctrinal teaching in Mark 16:9-20 that cannot be proved elsewhere in agreed Scripture.


I made the mistake of sticking my nose into the discussion by pointing out that actually there is a statement in verse 9, as the KJV and similar versions have it, that is used for a doctrinal teaching that is to be found nowhere else in Scripture. As the KJV translates it, it is the only place that puts the resurrection on the first day of the week. I then suggested that whenever the discussion of seventh day observance versus first day observance comes up, first day proponents usually use the idea of a first day resurrection to justify the change, and when questioned about the day of resurrection, quote Mark 16:9. The poster came back with: “Quote a published author who has done that.” - I have not yet been able to come up with one.  Does anyone here know of one?


Messiah was staked  at 9am on Passover Wednesday April 25th 31 AD (14 Nisan 3791) < Mark 15:25, Dan 9:1, 24-27>
Messiah died at 3pm <Matt 27:45-50, Mark 15:33-37, Luke 23:44-46>

Messiah resurrected Saturday evening  April 28th 31AD <Matt 28:1, Mark 16:2,9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19>


Now that is an interesting turn of phrase. One you don't get in mainstream Christianity.
Truster

Re: Mark 16:9

Lexilogio wrote:
Truster wrote:
cole209 wrote:
A poster on another forum, the topic of which was questioning the authenticity of the last 12 verses in the book of Mark, wrote that it doesn’t really matter because there is no doctrinal teaching in Mark 16:9-20 that cannot be proved elsewhere in agreed Scripture.


I made the mistake of sticking my nose into the discussion by pointing out that actually there is a statement in verse 9, as the KJV and similar versions have it, that is used for a doctrinal teaching that is to be found nowhere else in Scripture. As the KJV translates it, it is the only place that puts the resurrection on the first day of the week. I then suggested that whenever the discussion of seventh day observance versus first day observance comes up, first day proponents usually use the idea of a first day resurrection to justify the change, and when questioned about the day of resurrection, quote Mark 16:9. The poster came back with: “Quote a published author who has done that.” - I have not yet been able to come up with one.  Does anyone here know of one?


Messiah was staked  at 9am on Passover Wednesday April 25th 31 AD (14 Nisan 3791) < Mark 15:25, Dan 9:1, 24-27>
Messiah died at 3pm <Matt 27:45-50, Mark 15:33-37, Luke 23:44-46>

Messiah resurrected Saturday evening  April 28th 31AD <Matt 28:1, Mark 16:2,9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19>


Now that is an interesting turn of phrase. One you don't get in mainstream Christianity.

If you check the original Greek you’ll find a noun stauros which is wrongly translated as cross. You’ll also find a verb stauroo wrongly translated as crucified.

The Hebrew word yathed  means a tabernacle or tent stake. The Greek also means stake. For some reason the translators went with cross, but a tabernacle peg, pin or stake has never been called a cross.

When in doubt check the original meaning of the word in the context in which it was used.
Farmer Geddon

What are you doing?

How is Huw supposed to respond if you fuckin' mod him. This forum is getting like R&E by the day!!

Truster

Farmer Geddon wrote:
What are you doing?

How is Huw supposed to respond if you fuckin' mod him. This forum is getting like R&E by the day!!



Dare I say?…yes I dare, Amen.

I might add, that I say amen, in full knowledge of what it means.
Truster

Truster wrote:
Farmer Geddon wrote:
What are you doing?

How is Huw supposed to respond if you fuckin' mod him. This forum is getting like R&E by the day!!



Dare I say?…yes I dare, Amen.

I might add, that I say amen, in full knowledge of what it means.


And the next mod please….
Truster

Truster wrote:
Truster wrote:
Farmer Geddon wrote:
What are you doing?

How is Huw supposed to respond if you fuckin' mod him. This forum is getting like R&E by the day!!



Dare I say?…yes I dare, Amen.

I might add, that I say amen, in full knowledge of what it means.


And the next mod please….


Just proving a point….
trentvoyager

Moderators Note: Truster is on pre-mod as he is a new member. This has been explained elsewhere by Lexi. Unfortunately we can't always respond immediately.

I guess you'll just have to be patient Farmer.
Truster

trentvoyager wrote:
Moderators Note: Truster is on pre-mod as he is a new member. This has been explained elsewhere by Lexi. Unfortunately we can't always respond immediately.

I guess you'll just have to be patient Farmer.


I'm actually a returning member.
trentvoyager

Truster wrote:
trentvoyager wrote:
Moderators Note: Truster is on pre-mod as he is a new member. This has been explained elsewhere by Lexi. Unfortunately we can't always respond immediately.

I guess you'll just have to be patient Farmer.


I'm actually a returning member.


Moderator Note: Your profile has you down as a new member on 21 October 2013. You may have been here as a member under another profile previously - but that is not showing to me. So to all intents and purposes you are a new member.
Derek

trentvoyager wrote:
Moderators Note: Truster is on pre-mod as he is a new member. This has been explained elsewhere by Lexi. Unfortunately we can't always respond immediately.

I guess you'll just have to be patient Farmer.


I do not think that any body is ear marking your role in releasing post. You do your best. I don't think anybody can critique Lexi's efforts to release post either. She is very busy. It does seem like Ketty spends to much time else where though, whilst you try and do your job as a moderator.
Sebastian Toe

Truster wrote:
trentvoyager wrote:
Moderators Note: Truster is on pre-mod as he is a new member. This has been explained elsewhere by Lexi. Unfortunately we can't always respond immediately.

I guess you'll just have to be patient Farmer.


I'm actually a returning member.


By any chance are you a professor?
Lexilogio

Truster wrote:
trentvoyager wrote:
Moderators Note: Truster is on pre-mod as he is a new member. This has been explained elsewhere by Lexi. Unfortunately we can't always respond immediately.

I guess you'll just have to be patient Farmer.


I'm actually a returning member.


Then you will kindly tell me who you were previously.
Truster

Lexilogio wrote:
Truster wrote:
trentvoyager wrote:
Moderators Note: Truster is on pre-mod as he is a new member. This has been explained elsewhere by Lexi. Unfortunately we can't always respond immediately.

I guess you'll just have to be patient Farmer.


I'm actually a returning member.


Then you will kindly tell me who you were previously.


Either aTruster or A truster or atruster.

I wanted to use the name Truster on the BBC, but it had been taken. I them opted for a truster which simply means ''a truster'' as in a fly fisherman'' and not, without trust. Unfortunately due to a typo it came out as atruster and could not be corrected as the good old Beeb did not have the facility.

Trust is the abandonment of self into the care of another. Truster is simply one who exercises the trust he has been given.

One of the above should be either current or I deleted my stuff and left?
Farmer Geddon

It was aTruster Lexi ...  common, surely you must remember Huw?
Lexilogio

Farmer Geddon wrote:
It was aTruster Lexi ...  common, surely you must remember Huw?


Nope. Sorry. But the Beeb site was a long time ago now.
Lexilogio

Truster wrote:
Lexilogio wrote:
Truster wrote:
trentvoyager wrote:
Moderators Note: Truster is on pre-mod as he is a new member. This has been explained elsewhere by Lexi. Unfortunately we can't always respond immediately.

I guess you'll just have to be patient Farmer.


I'm actually a returning member.


Then you will kindly tell me who you were previously.


Either aTruster or A truster or atruster.

I wanted to use the name Truster on the BBC, but it had been taken. I them opted for a truster which simply means ''a truster'' as in a fly fisherman'' and not, without trust. Unfortunately due to a typo it came out as atruster and could not be corrected as the good old Beeb did not have the facility.

Trust is the abandonment of self into the care of another. Truster is simply one who exercises the trust he has been given.

One of the above should be either current or I deleted my stuff and left?


I have no record of an aTruster on this site I'm afraid.
Farmer Geddon

Must have been one of the members you executed back in the day!!


rstrats

Since it has again been awhile, someone new looking in may know of an author.
LeClerc

Re: Mark 16:9

Morning

cole209 wrote:
A poster on another forum, the topic of which was questioning the authenticity of the last 12 verses in the book of Mark, wrote that it doesn’t really matter because there is no doctrinal teaching in Mark 16:9-20 that cannot be proved elsewhere in agreed Scripture.


I made the mistake of sticking my nose into the discussion by pointing out that actually there is a statement in verse 9, as the KJV and similar versions have it, that is used for a doctrinal teaching that is to be found nowhere else in Scripture. As the KJV translates it, it is the only place that puts the resurrection on the first day of the week. I then suggested that whenever the discussion of seventh day observance versus first day observance comes up, first day proponents usually use the idea of a first day resurrection to justify the change, and when questioned about the day of resurrection, quote Mark 16:9. The poster came back with: “Quote a published author who has done that.” - I have not yet been able to come up with one.  Does anyone here know of one?


If you read the scripture without wearing the glasses of mans tradition the scripture teaches Y'shua appeared to Miryam on the first day of the week. The scripture does not teach Y'shua rose on the first day of the week.

If one moves the comma of the tradition of men

Mark 16 KJV
9 Now when Jesus was risen, early the first day of the week he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

This is consistent with Mark 16 KJV
2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

Regards

LeClerc
rstrats

Since it has again been awhile, someone new looking in may know of an author.

       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Bible study
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum