Mark 16:9

[rstrats]

Does anyone know of a published author who has used Mark 16:9 to support a first day of the week resurrection which in turn they used - at least in part - to justify the establishment of the first day of the week as a special day for rest and worship?

 

[Zeena]

Are the Seventh Day Adventists after you?

 

[rstrats]

Zeena,


re: “Are the Seventh Day Adventists after you?”

Not the I am aware of. 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 doctrinal teaching in verse 9, as the KJV has it, 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, hence my query.

 

[Zeena]

Are the Seventh Day Adventists after you?

Oh...LOL!

I never actual thought this would be posted!
I thought because of the inflamitory decent it would be tossed out the window witht he rest of the trash! :lol:

Excuse me!

 

[Zeena]

Zeena,
re: “Are the Seventh Day Adventists after you?”

Not the I am aware of. 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 doctrinal teaching in verse 9, as the KJV has it, 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, hence my query.

Now searching!

 

[Zeena]

J. M. Rist, On the Independence of Matthew and Mark

I'm not even going to continue reading..For God, our God has given His reply..

The scripture in question;
Mark XVI 9-20

9Now 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. 10And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.
11And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. 12After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.
13And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.
14Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen. 15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;18They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. 19So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. 20And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

For starters, it's not easy to see how the devil and his demons would rail against these scriptures..For by faith are they cast out by the Life of Christ indwelling the believer! He looses all authority to harm the believer by the creation being used against it's creator who indwells us! And he lost his ground in shuting our mouths, for we our now sent! Oh, yea, it also mentions he is damned! LOL!!!

Ok, well, this scripture was contested greatly, for the inclusion of which, into the Canon of Scripture.. And now you can (hopefully) understand why

The book of Mark is a book that was written as a testament to those who both believed and to those who would not for thier hardness of heart..Sure, we can delve into all sorts of historical and validity debates as to who wrote which book first and if any of them used any of the other's teachings as a foundation, but where would this get us? Any farther in Christ? A resounding NO! It's pointless chatter these fellows are interested in, I say you leave them to thier own devices..Who knows, mabey God will have mercy

Matthew 16:24
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

It's God's Law come to Life in Christ! For by the mouth of two or three witness's let every word be established!

Matthew 18:16
But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

There are four in the New Testament, foir God is not One to take this lightly
cum omnibus suis partibus

An interesting read (albiet fruitless) -->
http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=1688