Disputed Ending of Mark 16.

[BluhdoftheLamb]

I don't see why anyone would write what you're hoping to find. There are plenty of reasons to see that Jesus rose on the 1st day, and there is also counter-cultural position saying He died on a completely different day, which would have had Him actually in the grave more like a full 3 days.

 

[rstrats]

Since it's been awhile, perhaps someone new looking in will know of an author.

 

[Radagast]

Well,

(1) This is some serious thread necromancy.

(2) Christians are not permitted to start threads here.

(3) Verse 2, which is not disputed, puts the Resurrection on the first day of the week, as does Luke 24:1.

 

[rstrats]

Radagast,
　
re: "Verse 2, which is not disputed, puts the Resurrection on the first day of the week, as does Luke 24:1."
　
I don't see where those 2 verses say that the resurrection took place on the first day of the week. What do you have in mind?

 

[Radagast]

I don't see where those 2 verses say that the resurrection took place on the first day of the week. What do you have in mind?

I can only assume that you're being deliberately obtuse.

In any case, this thread is in breach of EC rules.

 

[rstrats]

Radagast,

re: "I can only assume that you're being deliberately obtuse."

How do you define "obtuse" as you are using it?
　


re: "In any case, this thread is in breach of EC rules."

Perhaps you could move it to where it belongs. And I trust that you don't think that that should be the trash bin.

 

[hedrick]

I see the point. We know that the empty tomb was discovered on Sunday. But that's not necessarily when Jesus rose. Mark 16:9 says that Jesus rose on the first day. Mark 16:2 says that the women went to the empty tomb on the first day. Not exactly the same thing.

Mat 28 has a great earthquake with the angel rolling away the stone, all on the first day. Again, this isn't unambiguously stated as when Jesus rose.

 

[rstrats]

hedrick,

re: " Mark 16:9 says that Jesus rose on the first day."


And that is the only scripture (as it is in the KJV and similar ones) that says that. And that was the point being explained to the poster mentioned in the OP.