Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Mattai 28:1 A question regarding the word 'first of the week
shlomo Mark,

It says in the Peshitto:
bramSHo d??n bshabtho, dnoGHah Had bSHabo, eTHoTH ...
In the evening of the Sabbath, dawns Sunday, came ...

This part just means that after the Sabbath had end they came to see the tomb.

noGHah <= This is the word that you were refering to as "twilight"

The word "noGHah Had bSHabo" means in the beginning of Sunday, for an actual example of its continuous use in this manner please look at the following link:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""> ... amsho.djvu</a><!-- m -->
On page 2. This text requires the DjVu pluggin in order to view it.

The starting part of that page says => noGHah dHad bSHabo
(this signals the first set of prayers for the beginning of Sunday; as has been previously mentioned by others, in Semitic culture we start our days in the evening (i.e. the evening of the previous day vis-a-vis the western time system.))

push bashlomo,
Greetings in the name of Yeshua, ???markt???,
Thank you for the opportunity to view some of the forum discussions you have been involved in concerning the death and resurrection of our Master Yeshua the Messiah.

The opinions presented continue to reflect the differences that sincere Believers have had for almost two millennia now, which are responsible for two prime groups of ???Christians??? (Mishikaye): ???Sabbath keepers??? and ???Sunday keepers???, on the basis that Yeshua was resurrected on either one or the other of those days.
It is interesting to me that the interpretation of the Aramaic text is the same as that from the Greek text that appears in most Bible versions, which I believe is demonstrably incorrect.

Although many Believers know that the ancient texts did not contain chapter or verse they are incapable of breaking free from their powerful and enduring influence on the understanding of the context of the text under scrutiny, which is apparent from the continual reference to the almost obligatory, ???Matthew 28: 1???.
The original Believers (readers) knew nothing of (Matthew) ???28: 1???.

The only way to understand this is to extend the text to ascertain the correct context and literally translate it, which I have done below (the ancient texts contained a continuous stream of letters, but I have divided it and added bold type to make the intended meaning clear):
Now they being gone secure the tomb with the detail now it is the evening of the Sabbaths
At the lighting up into one of the Sabbaths came Miriam???etc.).

It is obvious that the perennial argument that the text refers to consecutive days is an error and is much like trying to put two square pegs into one round hole!
The text refers to two different Sabbaths: the festival Sabbath, the 15th of Aviv and the seventh-day Sabbath, the 18th of Aviv.

This error is compounded by the fact that the text quite clearly reveals that (broadly speaking) the same time of day was identified in different ways: ???the evening of the Sabbaths???, at the conclusion of the festival Sabbath and ???lighting up into one of the Sabbaths???, prior to the seventh-day Sabbath, which is completely misunderstood.

This is exacerbated by the appearance(!) of ???light??? in the text (Greek: phos: epiphoskouse = lighting up(on)), which was dealt with in the same misguided way as the rest of the text, in spite of the witness to this latter aspect in Luke 23: 54:
??????and it was the day of preparation and the Sabbath lighted up??????.

Unlike Matthew???s account which was able to be mistranslated to mean after the seventh-day Sabbath when it was growing light the next day, the translators, who were clearly unaware why this text should refer to the appearance of light at the end of the day, the 14th of Aviv, as it rapidly gets darker and before the moon rises, were unable to manipulate the text as was done in Matthew so omitted all reference to ???light???, paraphrasing the words instead as: ???the Sabbath drew on??? or similar.

???Epiphoskouse??? in Matthew and ???epiphosken??? in Luke are both referring to the same Jewish custom of lighting up lamps before a Sabbath (not at the conclusion of the Sabbath as one forum member suggested), something that is lost in the interpretations of most Bibles and may I say, those in your forum also.

There is also ample witness to the obvious and consistent meaning of one of the Sabbaths elsewhere in the texts, for example:
Acts 20 6 ??? 16: ??????yet we sail off from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread???(v7): Now on one of the Sabbaths (the text does not contain the interpolation ???the first day of the week???) at our having gathered to break bread???for he hurried if it may be possible for him to be in Jerusalem by the day of Pentecost??????.

The ancient texts couldn???t make it any clearer, could they?
The early readers of Acts 20: 7 would have readily identified ???one of the Sabbaths??? as one of the Sabbaths between the days of unleavened bread and Shavuot (the feast of weeks (Leviticus 23: 15)), yet the leaven of the pseudo-Jewish ???first day of the week??? has replaced ???one of the Sabbaths??? in every instance where it appears in the texts, just as Paul foretold: ??????Who hinders you not to be persuaded by the truth? This persuasion is not of Him Who is calling you. A little leaven is leavening the whole kneading (lump)??????.

Although these things are just ???the tip of the iceberg???, they obviously have an important bearing on your reference to the ???primacy??? of the Aramaic text.
To deny other ancient texts is akin to closing one eye while seeking the truth and looking at ???the bigger picture???.
It is not by accident that we have been blessed with these texts, something that is not appreciated by many.
The fact is that both the Aramaic and Greek texts are influenced by other cultural idioms, for instance, in Acts 20: 16 the Aramaic text contains the word ???Pentikaust???, which indicates a Greek influence and in Acts 11: 26 the Latinized ???Krist???yana???, instead of the Aramaic ???Mishikaye???, just as the Greek texts must contain Hebraic ones, as I have explained above.

Another part of the ???bigger picture??? was alluded to by one forum contributor who cited the astronomical tables, which he claimed were conclusive evidence that Yeshua was resurrected on Shabbat (in 31 AD (CE), I presume). If he were to examine those calculations again he would find that in 33 AD (CE), the year it is claimed that Yeshua died on Friday and was resurrected in the morning of the first day of the week (according to the interpretation given of the Aramaic text), Passover began at sunset on Friday, meaning Yeshua would have been assassinated on Shabbat, which in turn means He would have been ???in the heart of the earth??? for about 12-15 hours, thereby refuting the Master???s words (Matthew 12: 40) and the sign of Jonah (Jonah 2: 1)!

The same astronomical calculations reveal that in 32 AD Passover began at sunset on Monday (the 14th of April, Julian Calendar/14th of
Aviv, Jewish Calendar), consequently Yeshua was assassinated the following day, Tuesday, and was resurrected 3 days and 3 nights later, on the 17th of Aviv, which was discovered when the women came to the tomb at ???the lighting up into one of the Sabbaths???: late on Friday when the Sabbath lamps were lit, exactly as the texts reveal.
This means his theology is also at variance with the true meaning of the Scriptural texts.

I urge you to exercise restraint regarding the inflammatory statements that have been made and follow the apostle Paul???s advice:
2 Timothy 2: 24-26: ???Now a slave of the Master must not be fighting, but be gentle toward all, apt to teach, bearing with evil, with meekness training those who are antagonizing, seeing whether YHWH may be giving them repentance to come into a realization of the truth and they will be sobering up out of the trap of the Adversary, having been caught alive for that one???s will???.

If someone presumes to have greater knowledge than others they have an obligation to teach and encourage, not antagonize and deter anyone who persists in seeking answers to their questions.

As long as your forum associates continue to cling to their self-imposed myopic philosophy of Aramaic ???primacy??? they will, by choice, remain oblivious of the depth of information contained in other texts, integral parts of the ???checks and balances??? process.
All things considered, I respectfully suggest you would be well advised to seek answers to your questions elsewhere.

Shalom alaichem,


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)