Featured <<<How nonsensical can it get?>>>

Re:
<<<the most dishonest and retarded harmonization attempt of the resurrection accounts on the 4 gospels.>>>

Read this <<<most dishonest and retarded harmonization attempt>>> FROM THE 4 GOSPELS, each and every word and none other than each and every word FROM THE 4 GOSPELS . . . http://www.baptistboard.com/showthre...=1#post2218866

 

This verse <insists> that Mary Magdalene "comes to" the tomb, ALONE.
The time given of her "coming to the tomb", IMPLIES it had to be the FIRST “SIGHT / SEEING of the STONE-ROLLED-AWAY from the tomb". That is what this texts states—<insists>— “she sees the ROLLED-AWAY-STONE”. That was Mary’s ONLY and first observation—her sight from where she was “coming”-“comes”. Not at the grave <stooping> or <peeping> in ---those are Vooks’ corruptions.

SEEING the “stone-rolled-away FROM the tomb, means Mary saw the stone FAR “AWAY” from the tomb as far as the angel of the Lord was able to fling the thing away as were it a pebble. Mary therefore SAW, far away from the tomb, the stone rolled or cast or flung AWAY.

Vooks the liar now thinks I am going to put my trust in HIS, lying <report> and submit myself to his perversions of what went on in Mary’s mind AFTER she had run back and was talking with Peter and John, as if she was talking to others she hallucinated were with her <stooping> and <peeping> into the tomb, and in Vooks’ own emphatic words elsewhere, “ENTERED IN” with into the sepulchre?

Who here is the person hallucinating blaming others –me—they are <<hallucinating>>?!

Mary did NOT <<<upon finding the stone rolled away … quickly conclude… that Jesus' body must have been moved from the tomb>>>. She said that as she concluded that when she got back to Peter and John, in Vooks’ estimation at least one mile’s sprint after!

Exactly Vooks, Mary <<<… never bothers to confirm her assumptions by peeping in>>>, how can she if she’s one mile away from the tomb.

And what sense is there in <<report(ing) … her missing body assumptions to Peter and John>>. Any sane person <reports> real findings; not <<missing>> things and those things, mere <assumptions>.

Mary in fact reported her real findings, as John recorded them “(I saw with mine own eyes) THE STONE ROLLED AWAY FROM the tomb.”

 

I am now beginning to form an idea of who this 'Vooks' person really is. One thing is for sure, he is an ex South African (as anybody can see) -- a 'whitie' and fellow Boertjie like meself ... and we know one another and last have met in a bushveld lodge and conference facility. I may be wrong, but am prepared to bet on it. So you have also aged, brother, I see, like meself. Eish!

PS
A second thing of course has long since been clear, that he is an ex-Adventist.

 

Principles A and B

 

Principles A and B

 

So Mary not only “sees the stone rolled off the mouth of the tomb”, she <<in the dark … peeps in>> and <<in total darkness … finds>> : <<the tomb empty>>!

Everything I can do, you can do better chum! What a song!!

 

Nothing can give me greater pleasure, Sapper Woody than to place it again. Please refer http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=2229960&posted=1#post2229960
Allow me, Ten Visits at the tomb, http://www.baptistboard.com/showthre...=1#post2218866

Condensed:

Visits at the tomb “on the First Day”

1) “Mary sees the stone removed”, “while being early darkness still”, dusk. Then Peter and John go to the tomb to see what Mary has told them. (Jn20:1-10)

2) “Earliest morning- darkness”, just after midnight, “the two women” (variant – the two Marys), “and certain others with them”, for the first time, “came to the sepulchre, bringing the spices they had prepared”. (Lk24:1) “They returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things to the eleven and to all the rest.” (“Then Peter stood up and ran to the tomb; and bending low over, he saw the linen clothes. He went back, wandering by himself about that what had happened.” (Lk24:9-12) Cf. John's account in 20:1-10. I can't say Luke talks of another visit by Peter, but it seems true because Luke doesn't mention John.)

3) These women to make sure, a second time came to the tomb “very early before sunrise”. (Mk16:2)

4) Mary from after the others had fled in fear (Mk16:8) “had had stood without at the grave” (Jn20:11). At the time a gardener should begin work, about sunrise, Jesus “early … first appeared to Mary”. (Mk16:9)

5) Soon after – after they a third time have visited the tomb and “the angel explained” to them what had happened during the Resurrection – Jesus appears to the other women “as they went to tell his disciples”. (Mt28:5, 9)

Mary went to the tomb, three times, Jn20:1, Lk24:1, Mk16:2, and Mk16:9 when she “had remained standing behind” until, Jn20:11, Jesus appeared to her, “first”, Mk16:9, and alone, “at the grave”, Jn20:16.
The other women also went to the tomb, three times, Lk24:1, Mk16:2, and Mt28:5 when “the angel explained” to them what had happened during the Resurrection, and Jesus, as “they went to tell his disciples”, appeared to them. (Mt28:5, 9)
The answer to the ‘Easter enigma’ (John Wenham) is simple: Each Gospel contributed to the whole with one of several sources; each added a personal part that, put together, will bring the whole story of the Resurrection into proper perspective.

Tradition – that is, the Sunday-resurrection approach – makes of these several stories of several visits, the one and simultaneous occasion of Jesus’ resurrection. Contradictions, discrepancies and total confusion are the inevitable result! It was bad enough that this ‘solution’ to a self-created ‘riddle’ was ever offered just to protect Sunday’s presumed status of being the day of the Resurrection. It became a comedy of tragic proportions when Sunday-protagonists began to defend their presumptuousness through unlawful improvements on the Scriptures.

. . . with a praying heart . . .

What have I just heard announced on my little radio next to me as I wrote, 3.24 p.m. Classic FM, 'Two days and one night', a film ... "a thought-provoking film ...???? Must go see it.

 

'apokulindoh' > 'apokulioh' < 'apo' + 'kulioh' . . . interesting word. In the NT used for three things,

A) the stone door of the grave “rolled away” . . .

1) "rolled away" in action as "explained (by) the angel to the women" in Matthew, “late on the Sabbath”;

2) first “see(n) taken / forced / cast [‘ehrmenon’]
out and away from the tomb” [‘ek tou mnehmeiou’]

3) afterwards by "the women found / confirmed rolled away" in Luke “deepest morning of dark”. But this time the women were more interested in what they might find inside the tomb than the stone outside which Mary must have told them about already;

4) finally “inspected / looked at again [‘anablepsasai’] and seen / concluded [‘theohrousin’] was rolled / cast UPWARDS and away” [‘anakekulistai’] the stone [‘ho lithon’] for it was extremely big.” No neat round little primitive stone-wheel was that massive shapeless ROCK! “WHO will roll away [‘apokulisei’] for us (such a) stone out of and up-hill away from the door of the tomb [ek tehs thuras t.m.’]!? Amazing! Absolutely intriguing! Impossible! NOBODY—NO MAN could do that for our lives not!

B, C) 'kulioh' / ‘kuliomai’ - “rolled”, “to wallow (in the ground)” Mark 9:20 2Pete 2:22. No neat sight, but one can see the disc-shaped rock hitting the ground and like a plate on the floor spin and wobble and stop, spun / rolled half-way into the ‘garden-soil’ “about” / “round-about” [‘kuklo-oh’].

So the angel went and SAT on the rock’s upper part still sticking into the air. A more likely scenario as “suddenly there was a great earthquake” I dare say— “like lightning at the angel’s appearing”, and all “in the twinkling of an eye and The Dead ROSE from the dead incorruptible”.

The angel of the Lord, a great earthquake, and lightning the works and the stone was carefully unsealed, and one hundred guards inch by inch helped the strange gentleman to “roll” the stone downhill into the place Joseph had designed for it to rest in when the grave would be opened for some reason or other.

 

Yes.

And Mark 16:9 is as per John 20:11-17.

These are the only two passages with exactly the same persons, place, time of day ---with the same EVENT, the event of Jesus' first appearance, his appearance to Mary Magdalene early on the First Day of the week; to Mary first of anybody and therefore Jesus' first appearance to her, ALONE-- He alone and she alone-- He appearing the first time and Mary seeing Him appearing the first time ---while two angels sat inside the tomb and could see nothing (unless angels can see round corners) where Jesus and Mary were because, remember, John tells us Mary TURNED towards Jesus when she first saw Him, He, AWAY FROM the tomb coming towards her and the tomb where she had had stood after at the tomb after the other women had fled from the tomb and didn't return to or told anybody anything.

 

Re:
<<<Peter's second trip to the tomb alone>>>

Peter's second trip was his only trip to the tomb alone. Peter’s first trip to the tomb was he and John together.

Peter and John were the first to enter the tomb and find it empty. That was after Mary had told them that she had seen the stone was cast away from the tomb. John 20:1-10.

Peter went to the tomb a second time, alone.
He went after and because all the women had “astonished” him with what the TWO ANGELS had told them that Jesus had raised. Compare that with the initial information of an opened tomb which Mary singlehandedly had given him.
One can understand that Peter didn’t hurry this time. He went slowly, all the way puzzled, thinking. But he STILL could not understand or believe. I think either the women could not. Anyway they were the women who brought Peter and the other men the new news about the angels’ story that He had raised from the dead as He had told his disciples before his death.

So you are quite right, Peter made his second errand AFTER the angels had spoken to the woman (in Luke 24:3 further).

I must go check on my mistake. I can’t say more before I have checked. So for now, I’m going to have a look . . .