Some years back I received an email from a so-called Apostolic prophet. He informed me I was teaching a false doctrine by claiming Jesus was resurrected on Sunday morning. His first argument was against the day Sunday. He tried to set me up against a Sunday (first day) resurrection with his sabbath doctrines. How the Catholic changed the sabbath to sunday. And how sunday was a pagan day. How any church on sunday was worshipping the sun god. He used the usual Seventh Day Adventist quotes. I guess he believed he could convert me to sabbath keeping while correcting my doctrine on a Sunday morning resurrection. Well, he was wrong on that attempt. I am an Apostle Paul follower when it comes to doctrine for Gentile Churches.
His second approach was to quote the statement of Jesus that as Jonah was in the whales belly three days and three nights so would the son of man be in the heart of the earth. He took this and tried to convert me to the doctrine of Herbert W. Armstrong's 72 hour resurrection. In other words, Jesus would not be resurrected within the 72 hours but after. So Jesus had to be resurrected on the fourth day. I mean even a rocket scientist knows 72 hours is three days, three 12 hour nights and three 12 hour days. It works like this:
24 + 24 + 24 = 72
Of course I knew he was false right off the bat. There is not a single scripture in the New Testament where Jesus arose from the grave on the fourth day.
His calculations based upon the 72 hours went like this:
"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" (Mat 28:1). He said they came to the tomb after the setting of the sun. He took from this that Jesus was resurrected in split seconds after sundown of the sabbath. Which he said means he was resurrected very early on sunday. By early he said it meant the beginning of the day, and since sunday began at sundown, then Jesus was resurrected after sundown saturday. Once he believed he had explained his "day" meant "between the evenings" and not the daylight cycle, he proceeded then to announce the day of the week Jesus was crucified.
He worked backwards:
Resurrection after the sabbath sundown
Sabbath day = 3rd day
Sabbath night = 3rd night
Friday day = 2nd day
Friday night = 2nd night
Thursday day = 1st day
Thursday night = 1st night
Jesus was therefore crucified on wednesday and buried at sundown which began thursday.
He established by this cunning craftiness that the Passover Jesus observed was then on wednesday evening (which began he said at sundown of tuesday).
He then proceeded to cite the passages of the women coming to the tomb at sundown after the sabbath was over. It says they rested the sabbath, prepared spices, and then went to the tomb. He claimed they went to the tomb at sundown, actually after sundown since they could not travel on the sabbath. So they arrived at the tomb while it was dark.
There he had it. All neat and tidy. And now, since I had all his truth before me, wouldn't I want to change to sabbath keeping? Wouldn't I want to receive his doctrine? After all, he had proven Jesus was not resurrected on sunday morning. Well, I was taught very well in the Word of God about the resurrection of Jesus. His deceptions did not deceive me. And I certainly was not going to leave Jesus my sabbath and go back to the types and shadows of observing a day. I was not about to be suckered into law keeping via taking up the sabbath day doctrine. I already knew there is not a single person in the world who keeps the sabbath law. NOT ONE!
Ok, let's examine some words here in the resurrection account by the Apostles. Now I know there are novices out there who think the value of words is stupid. They believe that their doctrine should reign over any value of words. Like the "trinity" doctrine should reign over words like "me, my, mine" which God used to speak of himself. But words are important. The wise disciple said to Jesus: "thou has the words of eternal life." What man in his right mind would say words do not matter, do not mean anything, and if we learn the truth and value of words this may destroy our doctrine? What nonsense is this babbler speaking? Words are the vehicles of Truth. And we should speak only the Truth. If we do not know, then of course we cannot say something is the Truth. But when it comes to the Apostle's Doctrine, which we believe is a series of sacred statements of spiritual fact, we refuse to say the words to identify them are of no value.
Here we go:
Matt 28:1 "dawn" to grow light (Strong's # 2020).
Matt 28:1 "first day of the week:" while at first glance we may think day here refers to a 24 hour cycle, this is not the point here. "First day" means the first daylight portion of the first day. Since the sunday 24 hour day cycle began at sundown saturday, the first portion of the 24 hour cycle was night. On sunday morning at daybreak the first daylight portion of the first 24 hour cycle of a new week began. It is here we must place a value on the word "dawn." No where in the Scriptures does dawn mean the beginning of a day at sundown. We know by simple observation that at sundown night begins and there is no dawn. We also know that the resurrection took place on a daylight portion of the first 24 hour cycle of the week. There must be a great revelation here for us. If the resurrection of Jesus was on the first daylight portion of the beginning of a new week, a new time sequence, a new counting cycle: does this not speak to our own salvation? How that when we are raised with Christ (Rom 6:4) we begin a new life? For us a new time sequence begins? There is now a new counting cycle with old things passed away? And when we are baptized in Jesus Christ name a new week begins in our life. A week is like a chapter of the year. That is how I view it. And for us, after our resurrection baptism there is a new chapter of time? I see nothing in the words "dawn" and "first day of the week" that would convince me the resurrection occurred at night and not very early in the morning.
Let's continue:
He said they came to the tomb "after" the setting of the sun. Does the sacred history bear this out?
"And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun" (Mark 16:2).
"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" (Luke 24:1).
"Very early" cannot mean sundown.
"In the morning" cannot mean sundown.
"First day of the week" cannot mean a 24 hour cycle but the first daylight cycle of a new week.
"Rising of the sun" cannot mean the sun rose after sundown and there was no night.
I could spend more time on this clever foolishness by this and other deceivers, but those who love the Truth do not need any more to convince them a sunday morning resurrection is accurate. Those who are of an otherwise opinion, well, let them perish in their gainsaying. They deserve it for their cunning crafty way of not rightly dividing the Word of Truth.
If men want to go to hell perverting the Word of God and its meaning, that is their choice. I will not follow them and I will not give them ANY RESPECT. My honor and respect is reserved for men who labor in the true doctrine and Word.
Jesus was resurrected on sunday morning, the 3rd day, just as he himself said in Luke 24:46. And by third day we mean the 3rd daylight cycle of the 3rd day. If anyone should know the day of the resurrection it would be Jesus. And he said the third day. Otherwise, he would have had to say the fourth night.
Jesus bless all you people who love the Truth.
Preaching the Truth about the resurrection is still a very important part of our Apostolic doctrine.
Bishop Reckart
A Man God Loves
No comments:
Post a Comment