Yes really and subsequent posts in the thread discuss the particulars.Really?
John 20:1New International Version (NIV)
The Empty Tomb
20 Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance.
John 20:1King James Version (KJV)
20 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
Huh.....How do you know if "you're in"?You don't even need that. All that you need is for God to say: "You're in."
Days were but Night is part of the day... Three days... three nights.....Yes really and subsequent posts in the thread discuss the particulars.
The basic is this, days are/were counted from sunset to sunset. So before sunrise, while it is still dark is INDEED the next day - still early but for several hours already.
Well, I'm not going to rehash the annual arguments here. In the USA days are counted 'midnight to midnight' based on a solar calendar. We (Americans in general) do not count days like ancient culture.Days were but Night is part of the day... Three days... three nights.....
Again. Why the stubbornness.... it has been described very well that Christ was removed from the Cross before the Sabbath.... an annual Sabbath and rose after the weekly Sabbath...It is perfect logistics with no stretch or compression of time...
Taken down just before the setting sun and beginning of a weekly Sabbath and rising before the sun rose after this weekly Sabbath, while calling it three days and three nights, is time gymnastics.
In the previous scenario used as a comparison...
If I paid for three days and three nights in a posh all inclusive resort.. and they landed me Friday, just before sundown and I was wheels up, on my way home before sunrise Sunday....... I would be a tad miffed.
But,,, it's your money.
But wait... he doesn't follow traditions.According to Tradition.
Huh.....How do you know if "you're in"?
Also, this would mean, Twins... one a rebel, drinker, thief, gambler, liar, violent... The other a repentant soul living for Christ, saved by the method that I presented.....
Yet they could both be "in" if God said to both "you're in"?
I find that very difficult to believe.
how do you know what Luke wrote?Tradition (just kidding).
The context of Luke's writing sort of confirms him being the physician.
Tradition (just kidding).
The context of Luke's writing sort of confirms him being the physician.
Why? Luther's act of nailing his Theses to the door only said "I don't think the Church is reforming fast enough." It was a personal act of will. And it was wrong. The Church was in the act of reforming, even as she is today, and has always been, and will always be.Even the RCC of today, which still has a lot of things that I question, is better for what happened after Martin Luther nailed his document to the door.
There was far to much power and corruption and far to little salvation in that early "church".
Luke wasn't an apostle, he was an evangelist.Wasn't Luke a doctor too?
It is also Tradition that Matthew wrote first, in Hebrew to the Hebrew Christians in Jerusalem, Mark wrote second to the the Roman Christians, Luke wrote third to Theophilus and John wrote last to Asia Minor.No, you were right. Luke never signed anything he wrote as "Luke". It's Tradition that assigns the third Gospel to Luke. And then tradition that assigns the role of "doctor" to Luke.
There's nothing in the Gospel of Luke that says that its author was a doctor.
In fact, it's Tradition - just tradition - that tells us that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, respectively, wrote the various Gospels. Paul only named himself as the author in a couple of the letters. The other letters are ascribed to their authors by Tradition.
Tradition tells us that Peter was crucified head down.
Tradition tells us THAT the Apostles were killed, and how. Acts tells us of the death of James, but the deaths of the others are not in Scripture.
Virtually everything that we "know" about the early Church comes from Tradition.
It is also Tradition that Matthew wrote first, in Hebrew to the Hebrew Christians in Jerusalem, Mark wrote second to the the Roman Christians, Luke wrote third to Theophilus and John wrote last to Asia Minor.
Why? Luther's act of nailing his Theses to the door only said "I don't think the Church is reforming fast enough." It was a personal act of will. And it was wrong. The Church was in the act of reforming, even as she is today, and has always been, and will always be.