crucifixionresurrection

The pagan adornments that decorate the Easter-Sunday
Resurrection doctrine and observation should be adequate proof
that Easter Sunday celebration came from the temples of Babylon.
However, on page 91, -second paragraph, of the second edition of
The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop, we have the following
quote, emphasis added:

“The festivals of Rome are innumerable; but five of the most
important may be singled out for elucidation -- viz., Christmas-day,
Lady-day, Easter, the Nativity of St. John, and the Feast of the
Assumption. Each and all of these can be proved to be Babylonian.”

On page 103, first paragraph under Section II.–Easter, of The Two
Babylons we have the following quote:

“What means the term Easter itself? It is not a Christian name. It
bears its Chaldean origin on its very forehead. Easter is nothing
else than Astarte, one of the titles of Beltis, the queen of heaven,
whose name, as pronounced by the people of Nineveh, was
evidently identical with that now in common use in this country.”

On page 107, beginning in the second paragraph of The Two
Babylons we have this comment:

“The hot cross buns of Good Friday, and the dyed eggs of Pasch or
Easter Sunday, figured in the Chaldean rites just as they do now.
The "buns," known too by that identical name, were used in the
worship of the queen of heaven, the goddess Easter, as early as the
days of Cecrops, the founder of Athens -- that is, 1500 years before
the Christian era.”

Easter was the goddess known as “the queen of heaven”. The
Easter-Sunday tradition of today is nothing more than a pagan
celebration of the Babylonian Mysteries dressed up in enough
“Christian” cosmetics to fool the masses into worshipping at the
feet of Satan!

We completely agree with Bacchiocchi that the word <dawn> in
Matthew 28:1 does not prove that the women arrived at the tomb,
just as the Sabbath ended. The Jews referred to the beginning of
the Sabbath, at sunset, as well as to the beginning of a new day, at
dawn, with the same Greek word: Strong’s #2020. We use the
English word <dawn> in much the same way. We use the term
<dawn> to refer to the beginning of something; it may be the dawn
(beginning) of morning or it could be the dawn (beginning) of
history. The word <dawn> does not always mean the light period
before sunrise. The bible uses Strong’s #2020 only twice. In
Matthew 28:1, the KJV translates the term, “as it began to dawn”
(the parsing of the verb is <present tense>, voice <active>, mood
<participle>) and the KJV translates the term in Luke 23:54 as,
“drew on” (the parsing of the verb is <imperfect tense>, voice
<active>, mood <indicative>).

There is no question of how we must understand the word <dawn>
in these two different treatments of the Greek word. Matthew
and Mark name Mary Magdalene in each of their accounts. Mary
Magdalene had already seen the empty tomb according to
Matthew’s account and the angel’s assurance that the Messiah had
risen; therefore, it would be inconceivable that Mary Magdalene
would bring spices for the Messiah’s dead body the following
morning, as per Mark’s account – once again meeting an angel who
gives her the same message as the evening before. Furthermore,
Mary Magdalene should have registered no question concerning
the stone to the door of the sepulchre. One creates a contradiction
in the Word of God – if he persists in believing that Matthew
speaks of the women coming to the tomb just as the Sabbath ends.

Mat 28:1 In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn <2020> (5723)
toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary
to see the sepulchre.

Matthew 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not
ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the
Lord lay.

Luke 23:54 And that day was the preparation, and the Sabbath drew on
<2020> (5707).

Mark 16:1 And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the
mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might
come and anoint him.
2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the
sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from
the door of the sepulchre?
4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was
very great.
5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right
side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.
6 And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth,
which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they
laid him.

Of course, neither do these Scripture prove a Sunday morning
resurrection!

The New Testament culture, did not account for time, as strictly as
in our modern age, notwithstanding, one should not contrive error
in the Scriptures. We cannot agree with Bacchiocchi’s vagueness
of time concerning the subject at hand. Therefore, we want to go
over some of his loose examples of biblical time.

John 19:14 informs us of the time when Pilate released the Messiah
for crucifixion. However, John says nothing concerning immediate
crucifixion, in this verse of scripture. Mark 15:25 informs us of the
actual time when the soldiers crucified Christ. John and Mark
were not wrong by 4 hours (remember the time it would take to get
to the crucifixion after Pilate’s release) concerning the time of the
crucifixion. We understand these Scriptures only when we realize
that John 19:14 is a day earlier then Mark 15:25. We have gone
over this in a previous chapter. The third hour was 9 AM, the time
of the morning sacrifice; surely, the Jews were well aware of when
the morning sacrifice began. The use of a sundial would have
provided consistent time in the New Testament era, for the
ancients had refined its use by degrees, even in the time of Ahaz.

John 19:14 And it was the preparation of the Passover, and about the sixth
hour (12 noon): and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!

Mark 15:25 And it was the third hour (9 am), and they crucified him.

Isaiah 38:8 Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is
gone down in the sundial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. o the sun returned
ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down.

One may also coordinate the four Gospels as to the time the
women came to the tomb without a great deal of vagueness.
Matthew shows that it was during the period that we call dawn, at
its very beginning. Therefore, when John says it was still <dark>
he is by no means saying that it was night, but that there was a lack
of light. Luke says that it was very early in the morning, and dawn
is part of the morning.

Mark says that it was very early in the morning, but includes that
they came <to the sepulchre> at the rising of the sun. One may
reasonably accept that dawn was just beginning when the women
left for the tomb, but the sun would have just begun to rise by the
time they arrived at the tomb. The verb <rising> is in the Aorist
Tense, therefore, the concept of the verb is considered without
regard for past, present, or future time. Therefore, the sun began
to rise, at a certain point, and Luke tells us that it was as the
women came to the sepulcher. This agrees with the other Gospel
accounts, and seems to be in contrast to the time they left for their
journey, which was “dark” or as dawn first began.

The translators seem to have understood the vagueness of the
Greek Tense, so they translated, “at the rising of the sun” which
one could translate as “toward the rising of the sun”. Therefore,
when we put all the Scriptures together, we have the following:
The women left their homes and headed to the tomb just as dawn
began while it was still “dark”. They arrived at the tomb just as
the sun began to edge toward or just above the horizon.

Online Bible:

The events described by the aorist tense are classified into a
number of categories by grammarians. The most common of these
include a view of the action as having begun from a certain point
("inceptive aorist" or having ended at a certain point ("cumulative
aorist"), or merely existing at a certain point ("punctiliar aorist").

Matthew 28:1 informs us of the beginning of the women’s journey to the
sepulchre.

Mat 28:1 In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day
of the week, came (went) Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the
sepulchre.

RSV:
Matthew 28:1 Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the
week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the sepulchre.

Mark 16:2 informs us of the end of the women’s journey to the
sepulchre:

Mark 16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they
came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

Luke 24:1 informs us of the beginning of the women’s journey to
the tomb:

Luke 24:1 Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning,
they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices, which they had prepared,
and certain others with them.

RSV:
Luke 24:1 But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they went to the
tomb, taking the spices which they had prepared.

John 20:1 informs us of the beginning of the women’s journey to
the tomb:

John 20:1 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.

NKJV:
John 20:1 Now on the first [day] of the week Mary Magdalene went to the
tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw [that] the stone had been taken
away from the tomb.

The word <cometh> in John 20:1 is probably a historical present,
and could have been translated, “The first day of the week Mary
Magdalene went early, when it was yet dark, to the sepulchre…” –
notice the NKJV translation. This better indicates that it was early
dawn or “dark when the women left from home to go to the tomb.

There is just no reason to accept that one writer informs us that
they came to the tomb when it was dark and another writer that
they came to the tomb as the sun was rising. One of the writers
would be very wrong in such an instance. However, the Greek
allows for the women to have left their homes when it was “dark”
(at the beginning of dawn) and for the sun to have begun rising
when they arrived at the tomb.

Of course, Bacchiocchi makes the same mistake that all Sunday
morning resurrection advocates make. He assumes that because the
women arrive at the tomb as the sun begins to rise, and because
there was an earthquake that the Messiah arose from the tomb that
morning.

This is dead wrong! None of the accounts tells us that the Messiah
arose that morning. There is no indication that the angel removed
the stone from the tomb in order to release the Messiah!
Unquestionably, He would not have needed that assistance, for John
shows that He rose as spirit, not as human when the very wraps that
were upon Him had just collapsed upon themselves never having
been touched. The angel had come down to open the tomb for the
women and the disciples, and it happened before they arrived at the
tomb. For they were surprised to see the stone was rolled away.
They probably did not connect the rolling away of the stone with the
“earthquake”. They could have understood that later by
information from the Messiah.

Of course, the guards did not realize that they were guarding an
empty tomb! However, after the “earthquake”, just before dawn,
they went to the chief priests and told them what happened. It could
easily have still been dark when the earthquake took place because
of the story that the chief priests paid the soldiers to tell the people.
“His disciples came by night and stole Him away while we were
asleep.”

However, the common mistake that the earthquake was for raising
the Messiah from the dead is baseless. It is part of the reason that
many cannot come to the truth of when the resurrection really
occurred.

While it is true that the women did not arrive at the tomb until the
beginning of sunrise, and while it is true that the earthquake seems
to have taken place during the dark sometime before dawn, this in
no way proves that the resurrection took place at that time.

Brink:

for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven ...rolled back the
stone and sat on it. The word 'for' introduces a subordinate clause
(with the verb in the aorist, indicating a completed action) which
explains the earthquake, the appearance of the angel and the
opening of the tomb. The women would have felt the earthquake
while on their way to the tomb, but they did not see the angel
descend and remove the stone. This appears from the form of the
verb 'sat upon it' (imperfect). This shows the state of affairs the
women encountered when they came to the tomb. The angel had not
come to release Jesus, but to open the grave for the women and to
show them that it was empty.

The angel came down to roll away the stone so the women and
disciples could witness that the Messiah had arisen <as He said>.
Moreover, as we have seen, He was to be three days and three
nights in the tomb and to rise on the third day. One should not
construe the earthquake mentioned here as 7 points on the Richter
scale! The word means a shaking, a commotion, a tempest, or an
earthquake. The angel created enough confusion to scare off the
guards, and he rolled the stone away and sat upon it waiting for the
women to arrive at the tomb. The “earthquake” was not something
to announce the supposed resurrection of the Messiah. One may
suppose such an earthquake would have leveled the city of
Jerusalem!

We should make one observation concerning Brink’s statement
above. The women may have just started their journey when the
“earthquake” took place. They may have never noticed the
“earthquake” at all! One could conceive the shaking so localized
that the women did not feel it at all from their points of origin.
History records the earthquake that took place when the Messiah
died. For it ripped the veil in the temple from the top to the bottom.
That was a true earthquake. However, what does history record
about an earthquake on Sunday morning after the resurrection? It
is true that the bible uses the same Strong’s word #4578 to
designate a true earthquake, but the word can mean anything from a
commotion to an earthquake of great magnitude. The evidence
seems to indicate that only a commotion of some sort took place just
before dawn – at the tomb site – and then the angel removed the
stone from the tomb. It would be certain that if an earthquake took
place at the time the women approached the tomb that they would
have themselves fled back home to safety!

Matthew 27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the
top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

4578 seismov seismos sice-mos'

from 4579; TDNT-7:196,1014; n m

AV-earthquake 13, tempest 1; 14

1) a shaking, a commotion
2) a tempest
3) an earthquake

Continue ...