Navigation

• Home
• Introduction
• Sign of Jonah
• Passover Reckoning
• Two Sabbaths
• First Day of the Week
• Mark 16:9
• Calculating The Dates
• Chronology of His Passion
• Supporting Appendices
  • Jonah and the whale
  • Comments on Mark 16
  • Passover on the 14th
• Other Sites Of Interest
  • www.rediggingthewells.com
  • www.earlychurchchanges.com
• Sitemap
• Contact

Special Notes

INTRODUCTION

Introducing the issue of the three days and three nights of Jesus entombment. Discussing the problems with the traditional view and the goals to be attained by this writing.

THE DEMAND FOR A SIGN

Dealing with the literalness of the sign, the circumstances in which it was given, and to whom it was spoken.

PASSOVER RECKONING

The meal that Jesus and his disciples took on the night of his betrayal and arrest was the traditional Passover Seder, observed on the 14th day of the first Jewish month, Nisan. Also that John reports the same meal on the same night, but in a different manner.

TWO SABBATHS

Stating the fact that during the week of Passover, there were two Sabbaths. This is a key element to a proper understanding of the chronology of events.

FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK

The first day of the week must be understood from a Jewish background, and not Roman.

CHRONOLOGY

A time-frame based upon the evidence given, and taking into account the full three days and nights of Jesus entombment.

Comments on Mark 16:9-20

It would be prudent to give some brief explanation here, concerning the abandonment of most modern translations of this text in Mark. One will notice, if you use a translation that has been published within the last hundred years, that this text is either
¹⁾ completely left out of the gospel,
²⁾ is in parenthesis, or
³⁾ a footnote is given, stating "The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20" ( the NIV).

In researching this topic, there are found to be two basic camps on this issue. The first, are those who hold to the integrity of the Textus Receptus, as the truest text of the Greek New Testament. Those in this camp, generally are the defenders of the KJV. Then there are those who follow, what could be called the more liberal position. Liberal, in the sense, that they accept as authoritative, manuscripts which have omitted or changed certain passages or words found in the Byzantine manuscripts (the Textus Receptus).

The best known defenders of this second camp, are those who played a most instrumental part in the creation of this 1881 Alexandrian based Greek text, Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort. Those who defend the KJV have loaded guns, ready to fire on Westcott and Hort. Their ammunition consists of claims that Westcott and Hort deny the deity of Christ, the sufficiency of the atonement of Christ, the second coming, being Romanists and Mary-worshippers, along with an acceptance of Darwinism over the creation account in Genesis. Having looked into these accusations against Hort and Westcott, I concluded that where there is smoke, there is a fire. However, I will leave it to the individual reader to investigate these claims on their own. The scale of this debate is well outside the scope and intention of this writing.

However, what information could be gleaned concerning the integrity of the Textus Receptus, I have deduced from the evidence at hand, that there is not found one sufficient reason, nay, not one scintilla of an excuse, to exclude this passage in Mark, nor any other left out of the text of the New Covenant Writings, by the Alexandrian proponents. Therefore, it stands as a witness to resurrection power of God, inspite of those who would take the scribe's penknife to it.

---

---