Mark 16:9
- Thread starter rstrats
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Yes, the reference is to the Lord's Day, which to me is the Day Yahweh chose to keep Holy........the Seventh Day or Shabbat. Here is the quote and there is no actual other definition given for "The Lord's Day." Please think, and please believe Jesus Christ.
Rev 1:10
I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
Rev 1:11
Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and senditunto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
Rev 1:10
I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
Rev 1:11
Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and senditunto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
I don't think so.
Because the word "Lord" in the NT is used chiefly of the Son, not of the Father.
And there is the testimony that Christians met on the first day of the week for the Lord's Supper (Ac 20:7).
There is also testimony they took up collections when they met on the first day of the week (1Co 16:2).
There is much Biblical evidence that the Lord's Day was the first day of the week in the NT.
Because the word "Lord" in the NT is used chiefly of the Son, not of the Father.
And there is the testimony that Christians met on the first day of the week for the Lord's Supper (Ac 20:7).
There is also testimony they took up collections when they met on the first day of the week (1Co 16:2).
There is much Biblical evidence that the Lord's Day was the first day of the week in the NT.
-
1
- Show all
Elin,
re: "What about Rev 1:10?"
What is your point in asking that question?
re: "And there is the testimony that Christians met on the first day of the week for the Lord's Supper (Ac 20:7)."
Actually, as far as the Bible is concerned, there are only two times mentioned with regard to anybody getting together on the first (day) of the week - John 20:19 and Acts 20:7. There is never any mention of them ever again being together on the first. The John reference has them together in a closed room after the crucifixion because they were afraid of their fellow Jews. Nothing is said about a celebration, worship service or day of rest. The Acts reference has them together most likely because Paul happened to be in town and he wanted to talk to them before he had to leave again. The breaking of bread mentioned (even if it were referring to the Lord's Supper) had nothing to do with placing a special emphasis on the first (day) because Acts 2:46 says that they broke bread every day.
re: "There is also testimony they took up collections when they met on the first day of the week (1Co 16:2)."
There is nothing in that scripture that says anything about meeting together on the first day of the week. The text merely says that everyone should "lay by him in store" on the first day of the week. The Darby Translation reads: "On the first of the week let each of you put by at home, laying up in whatever degree he may have prospered, that there may be no collections when I come.". The New Swedish and Norwegian Bibles read: "At home by himself." The Lamsa Translation reads: "Let each of you put aside and keep in his house". The Wemouth reads: "Let each of you put on one side and store up at his home". Ballantine's Translation reads: "Let each of you lay up at home". The Syriac, on this passage reads: "Let every one of you lay aside and preserve at home" , and the New Catholic Edition of the Bible reads: ".......let each one of you put aside at home and lay up whatever he has a mind to". This verse says nothing about going to church on the first day or even assembling together on the first day.
re: "There is much Biblical evidence that the Lord's Day was the first day of the week in the NT."
I'm not aware of a single scripture that ever refers to the first day of the week as the "Lord's Day". What do you have in mind?
re: "What about Rev 1:10?"
What is your point in asking that question?
re: "And there is the testimony that Christians met on the first day of the week for the Lord's Supper (Ac 20:7)."
Actually, as far as the Bible is concerned, there are only two times mentioned with regard to anybody getting together on the first (day) of the week - John 20:19 and Acts 20:7. There is never any mention of them ever again being together on the first. The John reference has them together in a closed room after the crucifixion because they were afraid of their fellow Jews. Nothing is said about a celebration, worship service or day of rest. The Acts reference has them together most likely because Paul happened to be in town and he wanted to talk to them before he had to leave again. The breaking of bread mentioned (even if it were referring to the Lord's Supper) had nothing to do with placing a special emphasis on the first (day) because Acts 2:46 says that they broke bread every day.
re: "There is also testimony they took up collections when they met on the first day of the week (1Co 16:2)."
There is nothing in that scripture that says anything about meeting together on the first day of the week. The text merely says that everyone should "lay by him in store" on the first day of the week. The Darby Translation reads: "On the first of the week let each of you put by at home, laying up in whatever degree he may have prospered, that there may be no collections when I come.". The New Swedish and Norwegian Bibles read: "At home by himself." The Lamsa Translation reads: "Let each of you put aside and keep in his house". The Wemouth reads: "Let each of you put on one side and store up at his home". Ballantine's Translation reads: "Let each of you lay up at home". The Syriac, on this passage reads: "Let every one of you lay aside and preserve at home" , and the New Catholic Edition of the Bible reads: ".......let each one of you put aside at home and lay up whatever he has a mind to". This verse says nothing about going to church on the first day or even assembling together on the first day.
re: "There is much Biblical evidence that the Lord's Day was the first day of the week in the NT."
I'm not aware of a single scripture that ever refers to the first day of the week as the "Lord's Day". What do you have in mind?
Last edited:
I was just reading about this section of Mark. Not necessarily concerning Mark 16:9 but the last 12 verses of Mark but concerning baptism and salvation. Here are some authors listed that have some notes on Mark 16:9-20 being added at a later date. . .
B.F. Wescott and F.A. Hort Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek, Appendix 1, pp 29-51
Bratcher and Nida, A Translator's Handbook on the Gospel of Mark, pp. 506-522
Roger Omanson, A Textual Guide to the Greek New Testament
William Lane, The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel of Mark.
Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, pp. 102,103
Hope this helps in your study.
B.F. Wescott and F.A. Hort Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek, Appendix 1, pp 29-51
Bratcher and Nida, A Translator's Handbook on the Gospel of Mark, pp. 506-522
Roger Omanson, A Textual Guide to the Greek New Testament
William Lane, The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel of Mark.
Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, pp. 102,103
Hope this helps in your study.
I'll let you tackle that one.
Does your Bible not have 1Co 16:2?
Is that Scripture talking, or you talking?
No, it doesn't.
They met in the Temple courts every day.
They broke bread in their homes, and it does not state how often they did it.
Gee, wonder why the first day of the week is even mentioned then.
They could lay by store any day of the week.
Why Sunday?
Every Sunday they were to bring what they had set aside for the Lord's work, so it could be collected at the worship service, not at home.
Justin Martyr's Apology, 1. 67-68, indicates that in his time (c. 150 AD) offerings were brought to the church on Sundays.
But don't let the evidence affect you.
I have in mind three things:
1) correct hermeneutics that doesn't require a simple declarative English sentence to establish what the Scriptures mean;
2) for Scripture does not state: "God is sovereign," but it is nevertheless the testimony throughout Scripture (Da 4:35; Ro 9:16-19); and
3) your theology is driving the meaning of Scripture, instead of Scripture driving the meaning of your theology.
Does your Bible not have 1Co 16:2?
Is that Scripture talking, or you talking?
No, it doesn't.
They met in the Temple courts every day.
They broke bread in their homes, and it does not state how often they did it.
Gee, wonder why the first day of the week is even mentioned then.
They could lay by store any day of the week.
Why Sunday?
Every Sunday they were to bring what they had set aside for the Lord's work, so it could be collected at the worship service, not at home.
Justin Martyr's Apology, 1. 67-68, indicates that in his time (c. 150 AD) offerings were brought to the church on Sundays.
But don't let the evidence affect you.
I have in mind three things:
1) correct hermeneutics that doesn't require a simple declarative English sentence to establish what the Scriptures mean;
2) for Scripture does not state: "God is sovereign," but it is nevertheless the testimony throughout Scripture (Da 4:35; Ro 9:16-19); and
3) your theology is driving the meaning of Scripture, instead of Scripture driving the meaning of your theology.
One may think, one may vote, one may agree with others, one may organize a synod, one may call for a conclave, one may believe anything man says, but taking up a collection on the first day of the week is not saying the Lord's Day is the first day of the week. Of course the Lord is Jesus; Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are One. There is nothing written stating the Lord's Day was changed from the Seventh Day to the First except by man, and that centuries after Christ. You have many folks who agree with you, but the Lord's Day is the Sabbath given in the Word, not by traditions of man.
The assumption here is that the Lord's Day is changed to the first day of the week in the Word. It is not. As for the Son being the Lord, of course He is. In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He made all that is, and when He finished creating He designated the Seventh Day as the Day of Rest with Him. Now, with the new covenant as people understand it, there is no problem with some observing the Sabbath on Sunday by the dictate of the Catholic Church, however for anyone to say God changed the order of things is not true. He is the same today, yesterday and forever.
If you think it foreign to your faith to celebrate the Sabbath on the same day as did our Lord, Jesus, this is yours, and many others' choice, no condemnation, but never say God changed the order or seasons. He is consistent, while man is not.
If you think it foreign to your faith to celebrate the Sabbath on the same day as did our Lord, Jesus, this is yours, and many others' choice, no condemnation, but never say God changed the order or seasons. He is consistent, while man is not.
Elin,
re: "Does your Bible not have 1Co 16:2?"
You know darn well it does, and it doesn't say that anyone assembled together on the first of the week. Your theology is driving scripture to say something that it doesn't say.
re: "No, it doesn't. They met in the Temple courts every day. They broke bread in their homes, and it does not state how often they did it."
Acts 2:46 - "And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts" (ESV) So you can see that this scripture says that day by day they attended the temple together AND broke bread in their homes.
re: "Gee, wonder why the first day of the week is even mentioned then. They could lay by store any day of the week. Why Sunday?"
I don't know. Scripture doesn't say.
re: " Justin Martyr's Apology, 1. 67-68, indicates that in his time (c. 150 AD) offerings were brought to the church on Sundays."
Justin Martyr's Apology isn't scripture. Whatever he says men were doing in the second century doesn't prove that it was scriptural.
re: "correct hermeneutics that doesn't require a simple declarative English sentence to establish what the Scriptures mean..."
Perhaps not, but it does need some sort of scriptural support, and there is none that supports the idea that Revelation 1:10 is referring to a day of the week, much less to the first day of the week.
re: "Does your Bible not have 1Co 16:2?"
You know darn well it does, and it doesn't say that anyone assembled together on the first of the week. Your theology is driving scripture to say something that it doesn't say.
re: "No, it doesn't. They met in the Temple courts every day. They broke bread in their homes, and it does not state how often they did it."
Acts 2:46 - "And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts" (ESV) So you can see that this scripture says that day by day they attended the temple together AND broke bread in their homes.
re: "Gee, wonder why the first day of the week is even mentioned then. They could lay by store any day of the week. Why Sunday?"
I don't know. Scripture doesn't say.
re: " Justin Martyr's Apology, 1. 67-68, indicates that in his time (c. 150 AD) offerings were brought to the church on Sundays."
Justin Martyr's Apology isn't scripture. Whatever he says men were doing in the second century doesn't prove that it was scriptural.
re: "correct hermeneutics that doesn't require a simple declarative English sentence to establish what the Scriptures mean..."
Perhaps not, but it does need some sort of scriptural support, and there is none that supports the idea that Revelation 1:10 is referring to a day of the week, much less to the first day of the week.
Amen! - 7-lords-day.htm