First book of GE - Chapter 2 vs 3??

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Gerhard Ebersoehn, Jan 10, 2008.

  1. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    Originally Posted by Gerhard Ebersoehn
    GE

    Friday – after night had fallen, Joseph took the body from the cross, took it elsewhere, embalmed it, and the next day brought it to the place of burial, Joseph’s grave in the ‘garden’ “near the place where He was crucified”. “There laid they Him” – “and the day turned Sabbath-wards”. That was the second day where Jesus was ‘during the 3 days after He had been crucified’.


    First book of GE - Chapter 2 vs 3??

    I think I recognize it.



    I think it is from the recently released "no limit" translation of the book of GE.
     
  2. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    GE
    BobRyan, it was a very wise man who first said, sarcasm is the CHEAPEST wit. Your remarks here are as tasteless as they are senseless and void of 'substance' (your, most feared, word).

    I shall open a thread where I and you can take this subject further.

    This is it!
     
  3. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    5.2.2.1.4.
    Joseph Asked

    5.2.2.1.4.1.
    After This

    Luke introduces Joseph’s unexpected appearance in the Passion narrative with probably the best word for the purpose, kai idou, “Then, Look!” Not only is Joseph an obscure character who needs introduction. The turn in events is just as unexpected. The reader must be prepared for what is now to follow in the history of Christ’s passion. “Now, Notice!” – kai idou
    Mark changes the subject of the narrative by first inserting a finishing parenthesis of the women’s presence during the crucifixion, and then to draw a very visible line under the time at which Joseph, started acting, “When it was evening.
    Matthew inserts not less than four parentheses (of the veil that was torn, of the graves that were opened, of the centurion’s confession, and of the women’s attendance at the crucifixion) to complete his statements on the day of crucifixion, before he commences with Joseph’s story.
    John prepares the way for the readers’ acquaintance with Joseph, by a preparatory parenthesis which brings perspective on the possibility of Joseph’s interview with Pilate – The Jews saw Pilate first and were granted their request. That Joseph’s wish – a lonely individual’s – was also tolerated and Jesus’ body could be taken off the cross is therefore not too improbable.
    In the four of the Gospels, not a word is told of anything happening at the cross after Jesus died. All the parentheses complete the story of crucifixion by adding every possible relevancy to the crucifixion – to what happened before and while Jesus died. In the four of the Gospels, the turn of events and change in the nature of events and style of narration, is as if cut by knife where the story dealing with Jesus’ burial starts.
    The words, “After this”, in John 19:38, mean, “After the Jews asked Pilate. In John’s Gospel the main story is interrupted after verse 30 – the Jews asking Pilate that the bodies of the crucified be removed. John tells this first in order to give perspective to Joseph’s actions. This background, contained in the bigger parenthesis of verses 30 to 37, is further filled in with more “of John’s parentheses” (Ryle). There are three bracketed sections in the first sub-parenthesis: a – “because it was the preparation”; b – “that the bodies should not remain on the cross”; c – “for that day was an high day”. The second sub-parenthesis is about the witness to the piercing of Jesus’ side, 35 and a third is about the prophecies. 36-37 Even the remainder of the containing parenthesis is compiled of remarks in brackets: Verse 32 :- “Then came the soldiers and brake the legs of the first (and of the other [which was crucified with him])”. Verse 33 :- “But when they came to Jesus (and saw that he was dead already) they brake not his legs”. Verse 34 :- “But one of the soldiers (with a spear) pierced his side (and forthwith came there blood and water).
    After this bigger parenthesis about the doings of the “Jews”, the main story is resumed with “After this”. Within the bigger parenthesis details are contained which in time came after Joseph’s interview with Pilate. In the context of narration they come before Joseph’s actions, but in time of occurrence they followed. What Joseph does “after this”, happens while the soldiers were sent todo as the Jews requested.
    “… Joseph realised that the body of Jesus would shortly be hauled down and thrown into the common criminals’ grave along with the corpses of the two thieves. Wenham p.63c (Not corpses but alive.)
    How would Joseph have come to realise this? He was one of the Sanhedrin, member of the chamber of rulers. He (and possibly his family if any attended this Passover) had his Passover Meal with these Jews, and heard them conspiring. This was the occasion which not only brought the Jews back on their “normal” track after the calamities of the afternoon, but which must have shocked Joseph into focus on what really was happening around him. Straightway after the Meal he went over to Pilate’s palace, but the Jews were quicker. The Jews made their request first. Joseph’s absence from the team would have made them suspicious. So Joseph had to hide and wait his turn. It was nerve wrecking and he had to “pluck up courage”. But “providence forced his hand – he must act now or not at all. Wenham Just as the Jews left Pilate’s house, Joseph, “secretly for fear of the Jews”, “took courage” and despite the chance of being detected and to have his plans thwarted by them, “entered in, and begged Pilate for the body of Jesus”. “No. He can’t be dead yet!” said Pilate. “I promised the Jews that their legs may be broken so their bodies and crosses can be removed. They never told me that Jesus was dead. But I’ll ask the centurion, he should know. He is right here now. Call him here!” And the centurion confirmed, I myself saw him die, and what happened as he died. He is dead all right.’ So “Pilate gave the body”. Joseph made haste – he had to forestall the soldiers. “He came therefore”, says John, and, one must understand, he came with all his might therefore. As Joseph arrived at Calvary, the soldiers shivered with cruellest blow the legs of those crucified left and right of Jesus. A strange silence prevailed; the suffering must have lost consciousness. “When they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they break not his legs; But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side.Joseph, in the nick of time, prevented the soldiers from further action. “Pilate gave me the body of this one”. And he took Jesus’ body from the cross himself – and away where he could leave him while he went to buy linen.
     
  4. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    5.2.2.1.4.2.
    Joseph Entered “Secretly

    Joseph went to Pilate’s and entered in, and “secretly besought that he might take away the body”. John says he entered secretly “for fear of the Jews”. Mark says Joseph “went in boldly”. Matthew and Luke simply say that Joseph “approached Pilate”. Joseph acted, “fearing”, or, “boldly”? It is not a matter of either or, but of how. John defines Joseph’s fear as wariness of the Jews. It was in the face of this wariness or “fear” that Joseph “plucked up courage” and “boldly”, the Jews notwithstanding, entered the palace and asked. The conclusion must be reached that Joseph was not afraid to be Jesus’ disciple. It is argued that Joseph did not enter and ask “in secret”, but “was Jesus’ disciple secretly”, “because he feared the Jews”. Jn.19:38a Matthew, who also mentions the fact of Joseph’s discipleship, says nothing of secrecy or fear. 27:57 On the contrary, by mentioning the fact of Joseph’s discipleship, Matthew explains how it could be possible for Joseph to have done such a courageous thing. He implies courage only, and courage on the part of Joseph from before the event took place. Matthew does not imply timorous and secret discipleship – neither does John – “He indeed was a disciple himself!” Luke’s description of this man Joseph’s character is most apt: “A good man, and just. The same had not consented to the counsel and deed of (the rulers)”. No, in fact, “He indeed singularly waited for the kingdom of God”. Indeed, “a man”. Joseph asks Pilate because “he was discipled to Jesus” – ematheteutheh. Mt.27¨57 “He asked being a disciple of Jesus”, ehrohtehsen … ohn mathehtehs Iehsou. “Who himself indeed was a disciple”, hos kai autos emathehteutheh. “This man, he went unto Pilate”, verses 50 to 52. What a credential! Seldom is something of the like seen in Scripture. Of no other “disciple of Jesus”, is anything near said. The insinuation that Joseph, because he feared the Jews, was a disciple of Jesus only secretly, can not be reconciled with the testimony given of this
    man’s undaunted stand for Jesus. The rest of all argument must agree with this finding, and does in fact agree.
    Joseph entered “secretly”. It implies Joseph’s avoidance of the Jews on entering upon Pilate. He did it stealthily like a preying lion, not like a scared criminal. He used his surroundings to purposeful effect. The dark of the after-evening provided shelter.
    “It was evening proper” – Mk.15:42. “Secretly”, kekrummenos, suggests the darkness of night, not only here in John 19:38, but throughout Scriptures. This word is used where obscurity and light are in contrast and where obscurity and darkness are associated, e.g. Mk.4:22, 1 Cor.4:5. In the context of Jn.19:38 the only subject kekrummenos can be associated with, is the implied darkness of the time of day.
    The secrecy, in which Joseph went to ask, had nothing to do with his discipleship. Mark expressly states that Joseph, “boldly went in unto Pilate, and craved the body”, tolmehsas eiselthehn kai ehitehsato to sohma. It all had to do with this bold step he now for fear of the Jews secretly takes to thwart their plan with the crucified Jesus. What Joseph “dared” to do (tolmehsas), is that which he would “secretly” (kekrummenos), but courageously do, to enter and to ask Pilate for Jesus’ body.
    Joseph “asked” not “because he was a disciple secretly for fear of the Jews”. That makes no sense and simply isn’t true. “Secretly” does not apply to Joseph’s discipleship. Why did Joseph ask? “Because he was a disciple”. The participle, ohn, “because he was”, supplies reason for the act of the subject: being / because a disciple, Joseph asked that he might take away the body”. The predicate of the sentence is not beingohn, which cannot be the verb because it is a participle. How did Joseph ask? “Secretly”.Being a disciple of Jesus (ohn mathehtehs tou Iehsou) Joseph after these things (meta de tauta) asked Pilate (ehrohtehsen ton Pilaton Iohsehf) – but secretly for fear of the Jews (kekrummenos de dia ton fobon tohn Ioudaiohn) – that he might take the bodyof Jesus away (hina arehi to sohma tou Iehsou).Kekrummenos is an adverbial participle, telling how Joseph asked: He “asked secretly. The verb is “asked”, and the adverb, “secretly”, applies to the verb. Kekrummenos combines with “Joseph asked” – not with “being a disciple”. If Joseph did not ask secretly, he might not have been able to take the body of Jesus away.Being” – ohn is a participle that explains reason. How could Joseph ask? Joseph, “being a disciple” of Jesus, could ask.
    If Joseph does not fear to be a disciple, why is he afraid then? He fears the Jews and their plans – which he obviously knows. They had no intention to bury Jesus respectably. He had to prevent their plans to realise. He must see Pilate in person and in private. No one must discover what he wanted to do. Wait till the Jews are gone. Then quickly enter. Fortunately it was relatively dark, the moon providing just enough light to see where he was going, but not to be conspicuous. The Jews never saw Joseph when he entered Pilate’s house. They knew nothing of his request or of Pilate’s braking contract with them. They had different plans. They did not realise that they lost Jesus. They were ignorant of what the providence of God had in stall for him. They yet did not regret his burial as they would before the morning of the Sabbath that followed this day.
     
  5. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    5.2.2.1.4.3.
    Already Dead”, Palai Apethanen
    And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead; and calling to the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead. And knowing of the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph. Mk.15:44
    Pilate wondered if Jesus could have been dead already (ehdehtethnehken) by the time Joseph asked. That implies that the time that elapsed since Jesus died till Joseph asked was relatively short. Arguments to the effect that Joseph buried Jesus before sunset, revert to this statement, “already”, for the assumption that after sunset would be too late for the in between period to be “short”. The point in time, in relation to which it is determined whether the period was short or long, is taken as sunset – which is abstract. Whether a period is long or short, in this case, should be determined against the normal period of staying alive for a person that has been crucified. This period could be several days. Against several days, say, six hours, is just as justifiably a “short” time as, say, two hours. The relative insignificant difference in length of time, is most significant in implication though, two hours implying that it was day’s end; six hours implying that it was day’s beginning “for quite a while already”.
    Pilate asked the centurion if Jesus “had been dead for long” (palai apethanen), or, if Jesus had died “long ago”. The centurion answered affirmatively. Here the period can not be either short or long, because it is not a period of question, but a period of statement. Jesus had been dead for “long” when Joseph asked. If assumed Jesus were dead a “short” while, therefore Joseph must have had finished with the interment before sunset, then, by the same logic, if Jesus were dead a “long” while, it implies that Joseph asked for the body after sunset. The first supposition is based on Pilate’s conjecture. The second supposition is based on the centurion’s sure knowledge.
    This argument underscores the finding in Par. 5.1.2 that ehdeh means “already” / “long since”. It means the same as palai. In the sense of a stated and factual occurrence, as in Mk.15:42, ehdeh means, “It was well into evening”. Mk.15:44 confirms that the time aspect of the Aorist in 15:42 indicates an accomplished ingressive, “punctiliar” transition from the previous afternoon into the current “evening”, “It had become evening” – “already!
    From Joseph’s action “When it was evening already”, it must be inferred that Jesus still hung on the cross when it was late and well into the new day of Preparation for the Sabbath, when Joseph arrived to take the body down and away to attend to it elsewhere. Joseph finished what he set out to do then, only by the following afternoon shortly before the Sabbath would start.
    Joseph’s interview has a further implication – of the centurion’s whereabouts when giving the information about the relative time of Jesus’ death. Where was the centurion when Pilate “called” him? Was he at the cross, or in Pilate’s house or maybe in the barracks nearby? In Acts 23:17 a very similar situation is found, where Paul “called unto him one of the centurions”, proskalesamenos hena tohn hekatontarchohn. The centurion called by Paul was not sent for. He most probably was inside the fort (parembolehn) where Paul was kept in safety. Paul’s nephew, “came and entered into” the fort, paragenomenos kai eiselthohn eis. 16 Joseph, like Paul’s nephew, “came”, elthohn, and “went in”, eisehlthen, (proselthohn, Matthew) into Pilate’s “palace”. (Pilate “went into” the praetorium after he judged Jesus, eisehlthen eis to praetohrion.) Enough indication is given to accept that every individual involved “entered” at some stage and was present inside the building. The centurion was near enough to be summonsed immediately to Pilate and be interrogated without waiting for him to be fetched from Calvary. Pilate learnt from the centurion in person. A message was not sent from Calvary. The centurion was not at Golgotha still. He was with Pilate.
    Not one of the guard stayed at Calvary. The guard“returned”, “fleeing”(“chest beating”, “breathless”) from the cross. After the catastrophes the whole army had to be re-organised from Pilate’s quarters. It was some time after the change of watch. The soldiers, who were sent to brake the legs of the crucified, were a group who knew not that Jesus was dead already. Everything indicates that the centurion could not have been at Calvary still when Joseph arrived. Joseph entered Pilate’s house, asked permission, the centurion was consulted, and Joseph could still catch up with the soldiers sent to break the legs of the crucified, before “they came to Jesus”. The centurion was available in no time to answer to Pilate. One may assume Pilate “called the centurion” from easy proximity, which could not have been the site of crucifixion but most probably Pilate’s own house.
     
  6. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    5.2.2.1.5.1.
    The Body “Delivered

    Matthew states that Pilate “commanded” that the body should be “delivered”, ekeleusen apodohthehnai. Apodidohmi could here imply that Pilate wanted to make amends to Joseph. (Compare Mt.5:26, 6:4 et al, where apodidohmi means to “repay”.) Did his conscience prick? Pilate wished Joseph to be accommodated as far as possible. It may be inferred that the centurion’s testimony influenced Pilate toward a sympathetic decision. The Authorised Version may be understood literally: Pilate “delivered” the body to Joseph. The soldiers were not only obliged by Pilate’s command to assist Joseph to take down the body, but also to “bring” it to be “delivered”, “where” Joseph, “handled” its preparation. The soldiers “brought” the body, but because Joseph is the responsible person, the verb is singular. Joseph is responsible for “taking away” the body after Pilate “entrusted” – epetrepsen, him with everything that would ensue [had Jesus been dead by then of course]. Joseph received authority to give directives to the soldiers for the removal of the body.
    Pilate allowed Joseph to have Jesus’ body. Joseph could waste no time to get to the crosses because the soldiers were sent there already to break the legs of the crucified. This must not happen to Jesus. If there is one person that could possibly be the witness that related first hand to John when he wrote of the events that occurred at the crosses when Jesus’ side was pierced with a spear, it was Joseph, and no other. Least of all he who saw “these things that were done” could have been John. It could not have been John, because he left from the scene of the cross before noon and did not return. When “it was evening already”, John, who is not mentioned again in the story of Jesus’ passion, was nowhere near the cross of Jesus. Joseph, when he came to take Jesus’ body off the cross, was eyewitness to the piercing of his side. It is the most logical conclusion, and the most natural. Joseph is mentioned in the Gospels where he undertakes for Jesus’ burial. His discipleship, though unassuming, came a long way as can be inferred from the references that introduce him to the reader. That he would wish to remain anonymous as witness is in keeping with the aptitude of this “hidden servant of the Lord. Ryle
    Joseph also was witness to a most significant coincidence. The legs of the two crucified next to Jesus were broken but not Jesus’. “That the Scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken”, is quoted from the Passover’s institutional injunctions of Ex.12:46 and Nmb.9:12 verbatim. Its significance for this investigation lies in the fact that this instruction is not given for the slaughter of the sacrifice. It is not said that no bone should be broken when the lamb is killed – that of course as well. It is said, when eaten, nothing should be left over and no bone of the remains should be broken. But the evening after sunset was the “night to be solemnly observed”. It was the time exclusively dedicated to the festal ritual of the Meal. When eaten as solemn observance of this night, no bone of the sacrifice was to be broken. Thus this reference to the fulfilment of Scripture in the passion of Jesus, suggests, indeed strongly indicates, that this Scripture was fulfilled to even the relevant time presupposed thereby. The time of fulfilment was the night when “it was evening already”.
    Another Scripture, says John, was fulfilled that night, the Scripture of Zechariah 12:10. “And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.” Who would not think of Ex.11:4-6, “Thus saith the Lord, About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt: And all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die … And there shall be a great cry throughout all the land”. “Mourn” – “great cry”; “firstborn” – “firstborn” and “only son”; “midnight” – even like the “lamentation of Josiah” after his death and day of battle. 2Chron.35:25
    By night

    Tonight was not the first time Nicodemus “came to Jesus by night”. Jn.19:39b He once before visited Jesus by night. He, this time, “brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound”. 39c “Nicodemus who the first time came to Jesus by night”Jn.19:39 Herein the suggestion is contained that Nicodemus this time as well, came “by night”. Nicodemus is mentioned three times in the Gospel of John, chapter 3, 7:50, 8:2 and each time, the context indicates, directly, or by implication, that it was during night. The argument is consistency. For what other reason than that this time it also was by night, would John have mentioned that Nicodemus the first time came to Jesus by night? Then took they (he and Joseph) the body of Jesus and wound it in linen clothes (bought by Joseph) with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury”. 40
     
  7. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    5.2.2.1.5.2.
    Joseph Took the Body Down

    Joseph “took down” the body – kathelohn < kathaireoh. Mk.15:46 Lk.23:53 If Joseph needed help with taking the body down, the soldiers were obliged to assist him – Pilate “commanded” (ekeleusen) the body “to be given” (apodohthehnai) to Joseph. Mt.27:58 Mk15:45 Jn.19:38 Only John – on Joseph’s testimony – gives a glimpse of what occurred when the body was taken down. One of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side when he saw that he was dead already. The others’ legs were broken. These preliminaries were done in order to remove the crucified from the crosses and of course to remove the crosses as such – an extraordinary exercise to comply with the Jews’ request. Jesus would have received the same fate as the other crucified, had not Joseph
    come” and taken the body down. When the body was freed from the cross, Joseph
    removed it from site. This is indicated in several ways.
    5.2.2.1.5.3.
    Took Away the Body”, Ehren
    The whole objective of the Jews’ request and Pilate’s granting of their request, was to have the bodies and crosses removed. Giving the body to Joseph did not conflict with this objective although it defeated the Jews’ plans as it had Jesus in mind.
    The word used for the action of removing of Jesus’ body is specific and in contrast with the words which describe the other actions taken by Joseph. He “takes down” (kathelohn) the body. Mk.15:46 Lk.23:53 He subsequently “removes”it – ehren < airoh. Jn.19:38 Then he and Nicodemus “handled”, the body (elabon < lambanoh) Jn.19:40 Mt.27:59
     
  8. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    Separate Localities

    Distance between the different places where the first and preparatory events, and the second and completing event of the burial took place, can be discerned. Pilate “gave the body to Joseph”. Herein lies a sense of belonging and harbouring entrusted to Joseph. His abode would suit the purpose. Then another and unfamiliar location is introduced – “a sepulchre hewn out of rock”. Jesus’ body was brought from the cross to the harbour of “entrustment”, and brought again from there to the place of last “deposit”, the sepulchre.
    Joseph, when he had “brought (Jesus) away”, went to a third location where he bought the linen. He then returned to the second one, where he and Nicodemus “treated” the body.
    Nicodemus “arrived”, “came”, ehlthen, at the locality where he and Joseph “prepared”the body, elabon, plural. He did not – like Joseph – “arrive” at Calvary, the locality from where Jesus was “brought”, or, “taken”. Nicodemus “came”, or, “arrived”, there, “where” he and Joseph “treated”, or, “prepared” the body. “Nicodemus also, kai, arrived”. If Nicodemus arrived “as well”, it implies that Nicodemus arrived, like did Joseph. Joseph arrived, or, “came” to the place from the cross with the body.
    “There came Nicodemus”. “Then treated they the body and wound it”. “Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden and in the garden a new sepulchre. There laid they Jesus”. The adverbs, “where”, hopou, Jn.19:41 “there”, ekei,
    42b “near”, engus, 42b and the phrase “in the place”, en tohi topohi, all imply movement between two places. The first place is described as “where he was crucified”. “There was a garden in the place”. The very insert that explains which garden is meant – “the place where he was crucified”, is intended to distinguish it, not in itself, but from the place where he was “handled” by Joseph and Nicodemus in order to be prepared for burial. The second place is where Joseph “took him away” to. In that place Nicodemus joined Joseph. There they “treated” the body. The tomb in the garden, “was near”, 42b the place where Joseph and Nicodemus prepared the body, “according to the ethics of the Jews”.
    The tomb is said to have been “in the garden where they crucified Jesus”. This already says that the tomb was near to the site of crucifixion – but secluded. (Refer Par. 5.2.2.5, p. 167) To repeat in so many words that “it was near”, would be unnecessary. In view of the compactness of the narrative, waste of words must be ruled out. The phrase “there laid they Jesus” (referring to the tomb), indicates relevant “nearness” – relative to the locality implied by the last mentioned action, which was the “preparation” of Jesus’ body for interment – “to be buried”. Much else also occurred before the last mentioned action of preparation of the body. The phrase, “Because the tomb was near”, exclusively and as only possibility, refers to the grave’s nearness to “where” Nicodemus “arrived” (at Joseph’s place), and “where” “they prepared the body”. It was from here, “near” to the grave, that the women “followed after” to see how Joseph “laid the body”. Lk.23:55 Jn.19:42c And it was from the grave that the women, on Friday afternoon before preparation of their spices and the “preparations of the Jews”, Jn.19:42 “returned home. Lk.23:56
    Airoh in Jn.19:38, ehren, indicates Joseph’s own deed of “taking away” Jesus from the cross. He “fetched” the body. Joseph does this before “Nicodemus came there also” – “came” – to where Joseph “brought”, or, “took the body away” to. After Nicodemus “arrived there”, they, the two, “took”, or, “handled”, that is, “treated”, or “prepared” the body. Two locations are implied, the first, the place from which Joseph took the body away – the cross; the second, the place to “where” he and Nicodemus attended to it further. Distance in between these places is implied. Time in between is implied.
     
  9. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    In Luke, all this is taken up in the single action of Joseph: “He took it down and wrapped it”. In the Greek the emphasis is in the “wrapping”: “Taking it down – kathelohn (participle), he wrapped it”, enetulicsen (predicate). The whole procedure is ascribed to Joseph only. Joseph initiated and undertook. The burial was Joseph’s deed. In this, however, it may not be assumed that any number of persons could have partaken in the procedure of the burial. The whole of each narrative is not general, but specific as to whom the partakers were. Nicodemus’ participation is mentioned. It implies no more than his participation. In the Synoptists the women are mentioned. Their names are given specifically. No other women were there. The interment is mentioned to have resulted “without opposition or objection”, (Ryle) which implies the absence of Jews. The Roman soldiers are not heard of again after Joseph has taken the body down. They were appointed at the grave only the Saturday morning, which implies their absence at the grave any time earlier. Airoh means that Joseph took Jesus’ body “away” from Golgotha to the place where he and Nicodemus “prepared” it for burial “to the custom of the Jews”.
    Airoh in Jn.19:38 means the same as in 20:13, 15, “(Mary) saith unto them, Because they have taken away – ehran, my Lord”. “(Mary), supposing (Jesus) to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence (ebastasas), tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him awayaroh. Airoh and bastadzoh are used synonymously, meaning, “to take away from one to another place”.
    In Mk.6:29, Mt.14:12, John the Baptist’s “disciples came and took up the body and buried it”, ehran to ptohma kai ethapsan auton. John was beheaded while he was in prison. His disciples certainly didn’t “take up” AV his body “and buried it” there, neither in terms of location nor in terms of time, immediately. The meaning is the disciples “transported” the body elsewhere where they afterwards buried John. It is all implied in the two verbs used, “to take up”, and “to bury”.
    Everything needs not to have happened on Herod’s birthday. Mt.14:6 Mark says that Herod “made supper”, “when a convenient day was come”, 6:21 implying a party of several days. His daughter requested John’s head “by and by”, 25 meaning “soon”, implying not necessarily the same day. “But”, Mark says, 27 although he could have waited with the decapitation, “the king immediately sent an executioner”. The man was worried and wanted the thing behind him as quickly as possible. Mark ends the pericope, “When (John’s) disciples (mathehtai) heard of it, they came and took up his corpse and laid it in a tomb”. 29 A new subject is introduced in verse 30 when “The apostles (apostoloi) met with Jesus at a “deserted place”. These are Jesus’ disciples, who “told him all, both what they had done, and what they had taught”. They didn’t tell Jesus about John’s death. It seems very likely that what Jesus, according to Matthew, “listened” to Mk.4:3, 33 Mt.4:24 Lk.19:48 Jn.8:43, 47 (while “hearing he departed”), was the apostles’ – the “teachers’ ” – report, of “their teaching”. Jh.12:38 Ro.10:16 Jesus did not “hear of it”, John’s death. “Of it” is supplied. Jesus grieved not John’s death – he showed compassion with the people. Jesus then taught the people. 34 When it “got late” on this day, 35 his disciples wanted Jesus to send the people away. 36 Matthew’s reference in 14:15, after telling of John’s death and burial, “When it was evening”, indicates the beginning of another day that occurred an indefinite period after or before the event that in context precedes it. While in the case of John’s death and burial there is no evidence of his burial to have taken place the same day before sunset, there are indications to the contrary – his body’s “removal” and interment implying distance, time and organisation. Nothing less can be found in the instance of Jesus’ death and interment. Only indications to the effect are more and clearer.
    What airoh means in the case of John’s burial, it means in the case of Jesus’ burial – “to dispatch”, “transport”, or, “to take away”. Jesus was not “taken” or “handled” in the perimeters of the cross. He would afterwards be brought back – to the vicinity of the cross – to the garden where both the cross and the tomb were. Jesus was brought back to this “garden”. “Garden” in the sense of agricultural land, like an olive orchard. It was no garden for esthetical purpose but rough terrain not suitable to “handle” (lambanoh) a body for funeral. Jesus’ body was brought back to the garden, “near” to the place his body was “made ready” for interment. He was brought back to “where”, incidentally, stood the crosses the day before. (They were now removed on Pilate’s orders.) The phrase “where he was crucified” thus recalls something that is past, over and gone. It is yet “another of John’s parentheses”. The actual occurrence going on today, in the same locality, is of quite a different nature than of the occurrence of yesterday.
    Airoh does not simply mean “to take” in the way lambanoh is usually interpreted in this instance. Joseph didn’t “take” the body down, kathelohn, to simply “take” it, ehren, to again simply “take” it, lambanoh, in order to “bury” it. Each word should receive its contextual meaning, which, in each case, is significant.
     
  10. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    Treated”, Lambanoh
    To “take”, lambanoh, in its context, means more than merely to “take hold of”. For example, “to take” a women, means to marry her. Lk.20:29 “Taking” oil, the wise maidens filled their lamps. Mt.25:4 To “take” the Holy Spirit is actually to receive, to be filled with, the Holy Spirit. Jn.20:22 Jesus by “taking” the vinegar he was offered, “tasting” it, refused it. Jn.19:30 cf. Mk.15:36-37 But Jesus “instead”, ho de, expired. Mt.27:34, 48, 50
    Lambanoh is used in the context of Joseph’s undertakings, only in connection with the actual treatment of the body. Mt.27:59 Jn.19:40 It involved the wrapping and embalming, and one could very well imaging that there was more to the care of the body than to unceremoniously wrap it with spices in the sheets. Jesus’ body was inflicted many wounds and bruises during his ordeal. It had to be washed and treated properly before it could be wrapped in sheets. It was an intricate and delicate procedure accompanied with elaborate ritual “to the prescriptions -‘ethics’, kathohs ethos, of the Jews to bury”. Jn.19:40 Here is a definition of the nature of the “handling” or “taking” of Jesus” body. These men did it “as the manner of the Jews is to bury”. It was a very careful and ceremonial homage paid to the deceased. It was the meaningful and orderly ritual of salving and embalming, avowal, mourning, condolences, prayers and procession. The traditional opinion of a hurry-scurry get over with, allows for no suitable location, no suitable time, no suitable procedure, and no suitable aptitude for the thing the Gospels describe as Jesus’ burial. In his burial God’s glorifying of Jesus begins to show forth openly. He was buried. That in itself was something wonderful. The way He was buried was even more against expectation. He would be buried, not only by the rich and honoured, but in the way of the rich and honoured among the Jews. And his grave, eventually, would be among the honoured and rich, and would never have been used before. Prophecy is again come true in the passion and death of Jesus. It was not an occasion where time dictated and the occasion lost against it.
    Joseph took much pains to purchase “fine linen”, and Nicodemus brought hundred pounds of precious spices! The quality of the “treatment” in terms of “handling” was in keeping with the quality and quantity of the materials of both linen and spices and oils. Room – to corresponding quality – is implied for such treatment. Then, time, to quality and quantity, fitted the occasion. The place and time for doing these preparations certainly was not on the ground virtually under the feet of a barbarous crowd – as it is implied by the traditional view. The implicit place and occasion where Joseph of Arimathea would “handle” the body, was, being a man of means, where he stayed in Jerusalem or where he might have camped outside Jerusalem for the Passover. (It probably was not far from the same piece of land where his property of the “new grave” was.) Here he brought Jesus’ body to be “treated” as it should. He has already proved by obtaining the body that he could overcome any obstacle. He disposed of every necessity for a proper burial, and was going to use it. If anything lacked, he would not hesitate to do something about it. He had no linen. O yes, There was linen, but not fine linen, not good enough linen. Not linen never used for anyone else before – like his new grave he was going to give for Jesus, “where never one was laid”. So he set out to find “fine” linen. “But there is no trader available at this time of night”, he might have reminded himself. I’ll wake one from sleep. This is no ordinary matter. If he wants payment later, then I’ll pay him later. But Jesus must be buried today – the law permits burial on the Passover Feast Day and thus demands necessities to be made available. If I keep putting off, the Sabbath might find me with uncompleted duty. Sabbath will also be Day of First Sheaf Wave Offering – then the law permits it not that the dead be buried.’ Joseph returned with the linen. On his way to buy linen, or perhaps even before he went to ask Pilate for the body, he contacted Nicodemus. Meet me at my tent and come help me with Jesus.’ (When Joseph “entered unto Pilate” he acted in faith stronger than even his courage. He believed that Pilate would grant his request and that he certainly was going to bury Jesus.) “And indeed Nicodemus came there” (kai de). Jn.19:39a
     
  11. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    5.2.2.1.6.1.
    Only Joseph?

    The verb ehren is singular – only Joseph “brought” Jesus to his place. Again the soldiers could have helped – they were obliged to. The singular verb indicates that Joseph, even with help from the soldiers, was solely responsible for bringing Jesus’ body away from the cross and to his abode. This must also have been the guard’s last presence at the cross. The soldiers and the guard are not heard of again till a watch is newly appointed at the grave on Saturday morning. If the body had been taken down while everybody else was present, they surely would have co-operated and it would not have been recorded that Joseph only did it. “They” would have taken down,
    and the verb would have been plural.
    John says that “they”, plural, “prepared the body” – Joseph and Nicodemus. But in all the Gospels it is said that only Joseph – singular – “took the body down” and “removed” it. If John had been with Joseph, or the women, these verbs would have been in the plural, for they without doubt would have co-operated with Joseph. The fact that the singular occurs has literal implication – only Joseph was responsible for taking down and removing the body. And this implication has the further unavoidable implication, that the cross was desolated, from “everybody returned”, till the soldiers and Joseph “arrived” to “remove” the crosses and the bodies. They returned “because it was the Preparation”, and “evening already”.
    Joseph asks for the body on his own. Only he as responsible person takes it down and removes it – all singular verbs. Only Joseph is eyewitness to the piercing of Jesus’ side. Later Joseph’s only helper “came (there)”. Then they, he and Nicodemus, “handle” the body, “treating” it to “Jewish ethics”. They “wrap” it – with the view “to bury” the body in Joseph’s new grave. The only explanation for the plural in John is that Joseph and Nicodemus were responsible for the preparation of the body for interment. There is only one explanation for the singular in the Synoptists for the different procedures of preparation for burial of the body where John has the plural. They do not mention Nicodemus’ collaboration. They do mention the women – who had no part in the preparation of the body for entombment.
    Neither the women, nor John, could have been present with the taking down and removal of the body. Neither of them could have been present when the body was prepared for interment. In all the Gospels their absence in person and action in the narration of these events is as obvious as the absence of the names. The women’s absence during these procedures, and their presence at the entombment – while still the absence of John or any other is as obvious as before – imply another occasion after passage of the night following the day of crucifixion.
     
  12. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    5.2.2.1.6.2.
    Condensed History

    In John, “treatment” of the body is qualified by three factors. It is described as the wrapping, with spices, in linen sheets, which procedure was executed “as the manner among the Jews is to bury” – kathohs ethos estin tois Ioudaiois entafiadzein. But this verse can be divided in another way by treating the phrase “as the manner among the Jews is to bury”, as a parenthesis – as John is accustomed to do. Then the procedure had this meaning: “They took the body of Jesus and wound it in linen clothes with the spices to bury (it) (as the manner among the Jews is).” The “treatment” was with the view “to bury” and “according to the custom of the Jews”.
    John’s “treatment” (lambanoh), is in the other Gospels expressed with the words to “take down”, and “wrap”. Mark sees the final ritual – in view of the interment as such – the enfolding of the body in linen, as the main and encompassing act of everything that followed from the moment Pilate “gave the body to Joseph”. In three words, he summarises the whole history between Pilate’s granting of the body and readiness for interment of the body. “And (Joseph), buying (agorasas) a piece of fine linen, taking him down (kathelohn), he wrapped him (eneilehsen) in the linen, and deposited him in a tomb hewn out of rock.” Mk.15:46
    Mark says, “buying linen”, then, “taking the body down”. Mark should not be held to a strict historic sequence. Naturally Joseph would not have taken the body down and left it under the cross and then went to buy linen. He also would not obtain permission to have the body and then leave it on the cross first in order to buy linen. He could not have left the body on the cross in any case because the soldiers would have taken it down and would have removed it, as Pilate guaranteed the Jews. The actions of buying and taking down are not recorded in the indicative, but as adjectival participles. He had to buy linen and remove the body – in whatever sequence – before he could enfold it in linen. Consecutive actions are distinguished with the body “treated” and“wrapped. In John 19:40 the verbs reflect actual sequence. Both “treated” and “wrapped” are finite verbs in the indicative. They are significant as independent and representative actions. The implication of the fact (in Mark) that Joseph had to take the body down, and, had to buy linen first in order to bury Jesus – makes them simultaneous actions irrespectively. Joseph had to “bring” / “remove” the body to safekeeping before he could leave it to go buy linen. The body was not left on the site of the crosses.
    Matthew follows Mark in comprehensive brevity. Mark uses three words to sum up the whole. Matthew uses only two: Joseph “preparing (labohn) the body wrapped (enetulicsen) it in a pure linen cloth”. Then it was “placed”, ethehken, in his new tomb. Luke reduces all – from the procurement of the body to its finished preparation – to the single word: “This man (Joseph) taking down the body (kathelohn) (from the cross) he wrapped it (enetulicsen) with linen. And then he placed it in a new tomb”. Lk.23:54
    Every event in the process of burial is not mentioned in any one Gospel – and not every preparatory measure will be found in all the Gospels collectively. Only John records the use of spices. Only Luke records the women who “followed after”. Only Mark records the purchase of the linen. Only he and Matthew name the women who were sitting at the grave.
    In all it must be concluded and conceded that an undertaking is presupposed by all the authors of the Gospels which cannot be judged to its length in time from the very economic use of words with which they describe it. It cannot be decided from the brevity of recording that it took almost no time to bury Jesus. Much is indeed implied by every word.
    According to any of the theories that Jesus was buried before sunset, at best one hour is allowed for the burial. The Jews’ preparations were to be finished at least an hour before sunset – that is, five o’clock. Jesus died at three o’clock. The Jews were admitted to Pilate first. Then Joseph entered. Joseph could do nothing before permission was granted. Could these visits be within one hour only? In the case of the Jews’ visit, time consuming discussion may be expected. In the case of Joseph’s request the same might be expected. Then perhaps one hour remained for the interment. No matter how hasty it was undertaken it would have been impossible to buy linen and to finish the preparation of the body and the interment before five o’clock. Before five the women’s preparations of spices had to be finished as well as their usual preparations for the Sabbath – which was unusual because of the High Day. Any before-sunset interpretation requires two prerequisites. Every bit of information of a proper procedure for burial (and there is more than enough), and every implication contrary to a before-sunset interpretation (and there are a lot) must summarily be discarded. Every element indispensable for the statement of the before-sunset interpretation, like great haste and the end of day nearing, must arbitrarily be assumed.
     
  13. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    5.2.2.1.6.3.
    As the Manner of the Jews is to Bury

    On the Passover Feast Sabbath?

    Would Joseph do purchases on the Day of Passover Feast? The answer is not difficult to give. The traditional view that dates the crucifixion and burial on the Passover Feast Day of 15th Nisan, has to answer the same question. The burial could be undertaken on the Passover Feast Day because it was an exceptional instance due to the coincidence of feast days. In any case a burial would not be classified as menial labour”, “servile work”, or work for profit making which was forbidden on the Day of Passover. According to Ex.12:16 “no work” was allowed on the first day of the Eating of unleavened Bread. It was “an holy convocation”. But at the same time the remainder of the offering was instructed to be burnt on the day after the meal – the next day of the 15th Nisan, “The First Day of Eating Unleavened Bread”. To remove any doubt, the later prescriptions Lv.23:7 prohibits “labour of profession” – labour at a price and common on ordinary days – thus allowing exceptional and necessary work. According to Dt.33:3 Israel actually on the 15th Nisan Feast Sabbath moved out of Egypt with all their might – a very laborious task. The night of the 15th was the specific holy part of the Passover Sabbath to be “observed stringently”. During this night Israel had to wait on the Lord. The following day they had to act on his command.
    Would Joseph do purchases in the night? The answer again is not difficult. (See Par. 5.1.2.2.) The traditional view is that Joseph bought linen while the body was left at Calvary while the Jews and the crowd were at the site of crucifixion. He then buried Jesus immediately and in their presence. How was Jesus’ body not removed while the
    soldiers came to do just that and found Jesus dead already? Nothing but Joseph’s mandate could have prevented them. If Joseph left the body on the ground under the cross, the traditional view must explain how that was possible and how that was not recorded in the Gospels. It also has to answer how Joseph managed to bury Jesus without interference from the Jews or even their knowing it.
    Any interpretation as would Joseph have buried Jesus after sunset Friday Afrikaanse Bybelkommentaar; Melito’s Paschal Ode must explain how Joseph bought linen on the Sabbath and how he buried Jesus on the Sabbath, because that was not permitted under any circumstance. It was not allowed because it was the Sabbath. The women could not even balm the body on the Sabbath with the spices they have already had prepared for the purpose on Friday afternoon, but had to wait for the First Day. Lk.23:54-56 Mk.16:1-2 Burial on this Sabbath was also not allowed because it was the Day of First Sheaf Wave Offering, symbolising the resurrection of life. Jesus had to be buried the Friday despite the fact that it was Passover Feast Day, because the Sabbath followed, and that Sabbath at the same time was the day of First Sheaf Wave Offering, 16th Nisan. Jesus also had to be buried the Friday, not despite the fact, but because of the fact that it was Passover Feast Day. Passover Feast Day followed the night of exodus from Egypt when Israel ate the Passover. Next day what remained of the sacrifice was burnt. Ex.12:10 Nmb.28:25 Dt.16:4 Jesus as the sinless Lamb of God, would not be burnt, but would suffer hell – would be “in the HEART of the earth as it were – and be buried, on the day of Passover Feast, 15th Nisan. As the paschal offer’s remains were burnt “the next day”, Christ was buried on the next day. It had to be that way. Joseph would not have buried Jesus on any other day.
    As the scene at the grave clearly could not have had anything in common with the scene of the crucifixion, it clearly could not have occurred during night. The description of the interment is vividly one of a daytime event. It ended before sunset, and could not begin on crucifixion day that extended during night till the following afternoon. The crucifixion and interment with their contributory events and actions, therefore had to have been two occasions of consecutive days. After the interment the women “returned”. Their “return” could impossibly have been the same as the first mentioned return after the crucifixion, because, if so, Joseph had to go to Pilate to ask for the body after he had already buried it.
     
  14. D28guy

    D28guy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2002
    Messages:
    2,713
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh my! :laugh:

    When I was in elementary school, if I...for example...had a beef with one of my little fellow 5th graders, there was a time honored way of handling it.

    The one kid would say to the offending kid...in front of witnesses of course..."I'll meet you after school...in the alley", which was behind the gymnasium.

    There we would enter into fisticuffs until one had a bloody nose or something, and he left...leaving the other as the winner.

    This opening post brought all that back! Like a "cyber" version of ..."meet me in the alley!"

    Thanks for the memories, and kids will be kids. :thumbs:

    Mike
     
  15. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Agreed -- pretty funny!

    I am interested in the part where we "take the subject further" -- how about scripture that supports the idea that "Joseph came the NEXT DAY" after the crucifixion to "bury Jesus" -- in all this rambling -- it was not there "from scripture".

    (Also -- I did not know that the first chapter of GE was as long as it was)

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
  16. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    GE
    Now you mention it, it evoked the same memories in me. Strange how little adulthood differs from childhood. Things just get a bit more metaphysical and less physical. I had an older brother about 'grade' 10 who regularly had these skirmishes with matric bulleys who sat there for more than one year to the defense of my eldest brother. He - my eldest brother, suffered from myastenea gravis -(my spelling is not that of a professional). I vividly recall these after-school challenges --- with pride!
     
    #16 Gerhard Ebersoehn, Jan 11, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 11, 2008
  17. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    8,870
    Likes Received:
    3
    GE
    You are not blind; you can read. So I must deduce you did not read - not a word; that's the only explanation for this reply of yours. I won't say a word more. It is on this thread for everybody to witness BobRyan's ethics and character, not to say anything of his respect for the Scriptures.
    I have had enough of you, BobRyan. I shall never again exchange a word with you.

    [Personal attack removed;
    Don't make promises you cannot keep. Please post in a Christ-like spirit.
    DHK]
     
    #17 Gerhard Ebersoehn, Jan 11, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 11, 2008

Share This Page

Loading...