Buying not allowed on a 'high day sabbath'?
Because you are believing Christians, I ask you for a moment to stop, and listen, and not be listened to. Comment is a duty, a Christian's most sacred duty, a believer's obedience to the Word of God. Therefore only is comment a privilege, and the right to it, cherished by especially the Reformed Protestant believer; for that reason I pray God I may undaunted honour the Lord Jesus Christ, and respect his written holy Word the Scriptures.
But I know that my plea won't be heeded, and that you won't publish my admonition, for it concerns our Reformed Christians' pet sin --- the worship of the lord sun and his day of worship, Sunday.
Jesus Christ arose, quote: "In the Sabbath", Matt. 28:1, KJV; / "On the Sabbath"; not, 'on the first day of the week', but, quote: "towards = before the First Day of the week". He entered into his rest from labor, Hb4:4, "the Seventh Day"; not on Sunday, (the first day of the week). As Jesus entered into his rest "Sabbath's", "Sabbath's fullness" ('opse sabbatohn'), so He encourages us to end the week and all our own works by resting in the confidence that He provided for all our needs for salvation and eternity as well as this life by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. "Therefore let no one condemn you with regard to .... feast of Sabbaths'-feast". Col2:16.
Don't you yourself argue Jesus was crucified and died on Thursday afternoon, Abib 14? Then was the passover eaten in the same day that it was killed also? Or was it eaten after sunset on the next day? So, while the passover was eaten in the following night and first part of that following day, sir, "it by now being after sunset the evening having had come already", it must have been Friday, by "now".
4) The crux – next to this – of your dilemma, dear JV, is that you try to do the impossible; you want to reconcile the theory of a Wednesday Crucifixion with a Thursday Crucifixion actuality. You want to create two days in between Crucifixion and Resurrection. For that, you depend on the fallacy it was unlawful to purchase on any 'sabbath' of any kind.
How correct would you have been, JV, had you admitted, and not denied, "Passover had already started the evening before". The thought must have dawned upon you for good reason, but you without enquiring dismissed it unconditionally. That's where you have gone wrong : from the outset. You from the word go contradicted Mark and John where they affirm it was the Preparation that had been the great day sabbath, coinciding; that Preparation and Fore–Sabbath were the same day, as well as 'great day sabbath', and that this day of Fore–Sabbath and great day sabbath, had begun with "the evening" that "was" introductory, 'before–part', of it, "already".
1) Therefore, yours is the 'reasoning' and 'arguing' of assumption and then to apply your assumption as indiscriminating rule of law. You use your own assumption as were it the law; you are not even supposing the real law for the rule. And you merely allege the real law permits no buying on the sabbath of unleavened bread, because declared JV, "Passover ('sabbath') ..... ranked as High a Sabbath as the 7th day Sabbath." In real life the law allowed for buying on 'ceremonial' or 'feast' sabbaths; in fact, from its very nature, demanded and commanded it! We see this 'law', forcing itself upon its subjects in the very instance in hand. Nevertheless the religious requirements of it was obvious since the first passover recorded in Exodus and Leviticus.
Because to buy "was something (Joseph) could not do if Passover had already started the evening before" (Wednesday evening), he could not have 'bought', as long as it was 'Passover' until sunset still. So Joseph could not buy on Wednesday evening (.... why would he, since Jesus was not even crucified yet?) nor could he have bought linen on Thursday afternoon, because Mark says it had become evening and it was afternoon no longer when Joseph did buy. .... and JV tells us it would have been unlawful for Joseph to have done.
But Joseph could not buy linen after the day of Crucifixion because by "now", "it had become evening and was the day of Preparation already" and JV is of the opinion buying linen "was something (Joseph) could not do if Passover had already started" – whether having started "the evening before" or sunset the evening after, the evening of "now".
It didn't matter if Joseph could not buy linen on the evening after the Thursday JV says Jesus was crucified on, or if Joseph could not buy linen on the evening before the Thursday that JV says Jesus was crucified on. Joseph had no chance to purchase the linen ––– according to JV.
I answer, JV, Joseph then could also not have bought the linen because what you here are saying is simply again, ".... something he could not do if Passover had already started the evening before", and while still before sunset afternoon of "Passover", that "ranked as High a Sabbath as the 7th day Sabbath, and there could be no marketing....no buying and selling". You are contradicting yourself. Why have I to say it for you, that you are contradicting the straight forward statements from the pen of Mark?
Dear JV, why did you say, "something Joseph could not do if Passover had already started the evening before" but while 'Passover' was still going on "before sundown" could do? Or do you believe a Wednesday Crucifixion? How come then you said you believed a Thursday Crucifixion?
Therefore having said that "Jesus died at 3:00 Thursday afternoon. Passover was that evening. Thursday itself was called "The Preparation Day", is tantamount to declaring exactly what JV declared without blushing, "Here we have Mark calling 2 different days, days of "preparation". One the day before Jesus died, and one on the day that Jesus died." Joe means, 'back to back', chronologically consecutive days, both of them.
So what is the result because JV didn't write, Mark calling 'one day the day after Jesus died', "The Preparation which is the Fore–Sabbath", and so implying the other, the day Jesus died ....? So what is the result JV instead, actually wrote, "Here we have Mark calling 2 different days, days of "preparation". One the day before Jesus died, and one on the day that Jesus died" ....? The result is that besides that JV gave no 'explanation' and could not have come to arguable 'conclusion', he is trying to propagate great delusion.
Now what is further wrong about JV's time–scheme? That JV ascribes the start of this, "great day sabbath", the start of the passover's and first unleavened bread's Feast Day–sabbath, to the day before, this day, to the day of Jesus' crucifixion!
What is further wrong is that JV ascribes this day's 'evening–beginning' to the day before this day, to "Passover had already started the evening before"— to the day past and finished, to the day of Jesus' crucifixion and his having remained on the cross, forlorn and deserted by all! Lk23:48–49.
What is further wrong is that JV tears from the passover's sabbath day its evening–beginning, and pastes it onto the day that had finished before it; that had closed when the sun had set and "evening having had come, it was The Preparation .... that great day–sabbath" of passover, 'Friday', after, 'Thursday', and not, "the evening before", Thursday.
And if things could not get worse, JV concocted his chronology and bungled his days despite the eye catching and attention demanding, glaring presence of "the day they had to kill the passover" and "always, killed the passover on" and had to "remove leaven on / day without leaven", Ex12:14, mentioned and implied and taken as landmark in time, in each of the four Gospels; placed, conspicuously, at the beginning–time and important event of that Fifth Day's ('Wednesday–') "evening", namely, The Last Supper "In the evening / when the evening had come" Mk14:12,17 / Mt26:17,20; Lk22:7,14; Jn13:1, 1Cor11:23b ..... twenty four hours before the day or the time of day referred to "here in Mark 15:42"!
Because here we have Mark and John, calling two different days, the very day of "preparation". One, the day which was, "The Preparation which is the Fore–Sabbath", Mark. (The day after Jesus died and not as JV pretends, "the day before Jesus died".) And the other, "that day (that) was a great day sabbath" (John), the day the very same which was "The Preparation which is the Fore–Sabbath" and day after Jesus had died and not as JV pretends, "the day that Jesus died".
"The year Our Lord died, it ("the 14th Nisan") fell on a Thursday evening." That is – you, JV – saying, 'on Friday'! Nisan 14 fell on Thursday and that was Nisan 14 that had begun on 'Wednesday evening'.
".... so that they could anoint and bury Jesus' body, before the High Holy Sabbath–Feast, which would begin in a few hours." How many are your "few hours", JV? "A few hours" mean at least two hours. So from that Joseph appeared on the scene, he within one only hour had closed the grave; two hours before sunset, "and went home", Mt27:60c. That, you say, happened on Thursday afternoon. Part represents whole; therefore the two hours of Thursday left, you should reckon for one day of daylight. And you have established, you claim, Jesus resurrected on Sunday morning; which He must have after sunrise, if we may judge by John 20 from verse 11 on where Mary saw Jesus for the gardener who by then had started work, and assumed as Jesus once said, the day has 12 hours to work, it would have been after sunrise by the time Mary saw Jesus? Had it been then that He actually had risen, you have four daylight parts representing four days of daylight; not three only. You did say 60 plus hours, did you not, Joe? Are those 'plus hours' these of Sunday morning?
Truth is, JV, you, do not have "three days"; you at the same time have more than three "days" and, less than "three" days; more parts than three days' parts; and much less than three days' hours.
Absolutely right! The core and key and essence of everything else as far as understanding the days and dates and times of Jesus' Passover is concerned! How could you get so confused, dear JV?
"Our Lord did not speak in "idioms". He always spoke with mathematical accuracy and truth." That is nonsense and untrue, and you know it. The very case in hand is one of our Lord's speaking in figure or symbolically – in "idioms" – as you have it. "The Son of Man shall be three days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth", yes. Yes, "three days and three nights" Jesus clearly intended literally; no problem. But just as clearly Jesus meant his words "shall be in the heart of the earth" both idiomatically and figuratively. "Shall be" is the idiomatic use of Tense for retrospective Past affirmation. "In the heart of the earth" is figurative, symbolic language of concepts, or metaphor, definitely not by any stretch of the imagination applicable or true if "spoke(n) with mathematical accuracy and truth". And that is exactly with mathematical accuracy where JV loses grip on both reality and truth.
Figuratively, symbolically, metaphorically "in the heart of the earth" is what makes all the difference between going wrong or keeping right. Not that literal, 'mathematical accuracy' also make a difference; it does. Let us begin to apply this literal, 'mathematical accuracy and truth' to our understanding of Matthew 28:1. So that we shall find that we are to start "Backing up 3 days", not "from Sunday", but from "On the Sabbath" if we intend to reckon inclusively. Because we know that Jesus literally and mathematically accurate and true had to have been "in the heart of the earth" —not "in the grave" as JV has it—, "three days and three nights" all inclusively; —not as JV has it "in the grave Saturday, Friday and part of Thursday before Sundown"!
"Matthew 28:1 is Absolutely 100 % accurate when it states that Jesus arose on Sunday." Wrong. No, false! Matthew 28:1 is absolutely 100% accurate when it states that Jesus arose, quote: "In the Sabbath". Where you should be 'mathematically accurate and truthful', dear JV, you are not; and as a result also 'idiomatically' are inaccurate and untruthful.
"Matthew 12:40 is Absolutely 100 % accurate when it states that Jesus was in the grave 3 days and 3 nights." Wrong. No, false! Matthew 12:40 is absolutely 100% accurate when it states that Jesus was, quote: "in the heart of the earth, three days and three nights." Where you should be 'idiomatically' or rather by figure of speech or metaphorically be 'accurate and truthful', dear JV, you are not, and as a result you are also 'mathematically', inaccurate and untruthful.
What are you, telling us, JV? That "today (Sunday) is the third day since these things were done"? Fine! What are you saying? Who objected? Then how does "Backing up 3 days from Sunday" prove ".... we know that Jesus had to be in the grave, Saturday, Friday and part of Thursday before Sundown"? Where do you read about a grave or a burial back then? Sunday morning was the first time these disciples learned about the grave, when the women "surprised" them, having informed them on the grave and the missing body!
2) How do you, JV, 'parallel' "the time that the Passover Lamb was being slain in the Temple", with, "John 19:14"? Was the passover lamb slain in the temple "six o'clock" – that is, sunrise? No; it was not. The usual and instructed time was 3 o'clock in the afternoon; which was the time Jesus died in fact, Mk15:25, "the third hour" 'Jewish' time, 'mid–afternoon'.
It is a pity you ended your disputation in this manner, JV. Nevertheless, thank you for the opportunity to have answered you; I benefited greatly, and thank you, and God, for it. I would have been the poorer in the knowledge and understanding of the Gospel of Christ but for our discussion.