Interesting question: According to scripture alone, what is "the Lord's day" (Revelation 1:10)?

Interesting question: According to scripture alone, what is "the Lord's day" (Revelation 1:10)?


Is the Bible the final authority in all matters of faith and practice for you as it is to me? - see Isaiah 8:20. Then how does the Bible itself, line upon line, define this phrase, and where is John getting this idea from, as inspired of the Holy Ghost? What is the context?

If the Bible is not the final authority in all matters of faith and practice, and you subscribe to the traditions and doctrines of men (Matthew 15:9; Mark 7:7; Colossians 2:2), self-made councils, vain priests and pretended popes who all contradict one another, and pick and choose their religiousity, well, you are already adrift in the miasma of self-made religion, as Paul warned about in Colossians 2:


This thread is not about those vain traditions, pseudo writings, spurious letters, blatant forgeries, and imaginations of the carnal heart, but rather about the sure word of God on the matter, for God cannot lie, while men documentedly have. If you rely upon those things, they will be shown to be what they really are, vanity.

Here is what someone has presented from the scriptures itself:

"The Lord's day" according to scripture, is the 7th day, the sabbath day of the Lord.

Here are those texts in full:

Doing an entire search in the Bible shows that the phrase "the Lord's day" is never associated with the phrase "first [day] of the week", anywhere, but is always associated with God's rest day from the beginning, the seventh day, the sabbath of the LORD.

Well, what say you, who claim the Bible as your final authority in all matters of faith and practice?

The context shows that the "day" spoken of, in each texts presented is "the LORD('s)". John as a physical Jew, who was following the Messiah (Jesus), thus a Christian, was on the Isle of Patmos, for what reason?


It is even given in other places:


What is this "word of God" and the "testimony/witness of Jesus"? We do not have to in any way guess, for John tells us in parallel fashion:


This is found way back in the OT:


So, when John references "the Lord's day", it is in the context of "the word of God", which are God's Commandments. Well, which commandment then? Again, we do not have to guess, for John tells us:


What specific commandment, was John citing? The 4th Commandment, specifically, Exodus 20:11,


The whole Commandment:

That little word "of" is possessive. Thus when God speaks, by His own voice, the He (the LORD) has chosen a specific (definite article) "day", it is thus "the LORD('s) ... day", being His sabbath, the 7th day, from the foundation of the world in Genesis 2:1-3,4, where therein it is "God('s; the LORD's) ... day".

The "word of God" = God's commandments:


and the "testimony of Jesus" is the Spirit of prophecy (Revelation 19:10), and as found all throughout scripture:


Therefore, notice again the connection of the Apostle and prophet John, who receives a "vision", in connection with keeping God's commandments, and was resting specifically on "the LORD's day":


The Law (Lord's day) and the testimony (spirit of prophecy) again are witnessed therein in its proper context.

It always speaks of the 7th day the sabbath of the LORD, His holy day.

Line upon line, and no need for a single non-scriptural source to re-define by the man of sin's tradition."

Revelation 1:10 a bit further:


The word "κυριακη" (translit. "kuriake") is an Adjective - Dative - Singular - Feminine. This means it is being used as a 'possessive' ("of", see 1 Corinthians 11:20, "the Lord's supper"), which means the "day" in context belongs to "the Lord". It is literally "the Lord's (belonging to) day". This means, that the "day" in context is uniquely "the Lord's" out of all the 7 days of the week, for the day under consideration is that which exists within the week, as a day which repeats weekly. This is extremely important, as those who incorrectly assume it to mean "the first [day] of the week" in lieu of Jesus' resurrection, cannot get a weekly occurrence out of a one-time event, in fulfilment of typology of the Firstfruit/Wavesheaf in Leviticus 23:9-14, as made known in 1 Corinthians 15:20,23.

This is not as the phrase "day of the Lord" (ἡμέρα κυρίου) which is written in the genitive masculine case (see 2 Peter 3:10, etc, and also so called septuaginta uses).

In Latin, we see it similarly used in Exodus 20 (Latin is without the definite article, as Latin does not use definite articles):


Which is akin to Genesis' "God's day":

Whereas the differing apocalyptic day, "the day of the Lord" in Latin is "dies Domini" as in Zephaniah 1:14,

Further, we can see some honest persons, among the many commentators that like to simply assume their apriori into the text, or to place future definition back into the text, from non-scriptural materials.

Peter Pett's commentary makes this accurate note:


Dr. Thomas Constable likewise states the same truth:

Richard Chenevix Trench has stated on record, and accurately that:


Likewise, Foy E Wallace states:

Considering how many times this question has been brought up here I don't find it that interesting.

Another thing I have found, is that people attempt to define "the Lord's day" by the so-called "ECF" (easily confused fellows; of the 1-4th century AD, etc), instead of going back to the real "fathers"; the Patriarchs and Prophets of Scripture themselves, like John, James and Peter and Paul, and even further back unto Abraham, Moses, David, and those like them, and have those "fathers" tell us, as mouthpieces for God. I find them in the inspired and preserved words of God, and I do not find people like spurious Ignatius, imaginary Didache, self-refuting pseudo Barnabas, etc.

They would place those persons in afteryears above the definition that Jesus gave.

Spurious and Imaginary?

Yes, Spurious, Imaginary, etc:

The writings so often cited to try to define "the Lord's day" outside of scripture, and long after John passed from the scene, are often forged (like Ignatius) and also abused, of which any may see that here - Sunday Fraud: Church "Fathers" on the Lord's Day

The Bible says:


God even warned all that they would "think" to "change times and laws" (of which the 4th Commandment, the 7th day the Sabbath of the LORD is both time and law) of the Most High God:

Notice some of the fraud:

Here is the long form of the citation from Irenaeus, since there are several conflicting:


Let's examine the longer form first, with which the reader will immediately notice a severe problem. The very quote that is supposed to prove that "Christians . . . never [worshipped] on the Sabbath" actually commands "every" Christian to "keep the Sabbath"! Moreover, since the quote also forbids Judaizing, it follows that the writer of the long form of this epistle believed that Sabbath keeping transcended Judiaism. In other words, a Christian could tell people that they needed to keep the Sabbath without being guilty of Judaizing!

The words "and after the observance of the Sabbath" were intentionally deleted from the quote. Another example of fraud?

Now to the other shorter form. The epistles of Ignatius are spurious or forgeries - Link or Link.

Amazing, having to rely upon spurious writings, pseudo-works, which are forgeries.

The original Greek (Didache 14:1) does not have the word for "day" anywhere in that sentence and secondly, neither is the word "Sunday" present.


Where is the word for "day" (hemera)?

Where is the word for "Sunday"?

Where is the word "first"?

It literally reads, "κυριακὴν δὲ κυρίου" (Lord of Lord). Even if this did refer to some day like what is now called 'easter', that would refer to a once in the year event, not a weekly, yet even here, there is no evidence that it refers to such, as others think it means the Lord's life.

The translation that most propose to prove Sunday sacredness or that it is the 'Lord's day' is imaginary.

So far, we have spurious and imaginary.

Then they attempt Pseudo Barnabas:

According to pseudo-Barnabas (ought we to really trust a letter that claims to be from another, didn't Paul warn about such letters being circulated? 2 Thessalonians 2:2), we are too wicked (Christians are too wicked???) at present to keep the 7th day the Sabbath of the LORD, and will not be able to keep it until we are sanctified when Christ returns (so we are going to keep Sabbath again in the New Heavens and New Earth, that doesn't sound like people use this quote for). Because we are too wicked to keep the Sabbath now, we must keep Sunday instead. What good does this reasoning do for the cause of Sunday sacredness or holiness if we are too wicked?

Pseudo Barnabas also teaches the earth ends in the 7,000th year from creation. Do they accept this also?, No, as they believe in the false philosophy of evolutionism and long-agism.

Any may also see the forgery of Justin Martyr here - Doctrine - Sabbath - William H Shea - The Justin Martyr Forgery About Sabbath And Sunday The First Day Of The Week : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive "

Thank you for participating at least this once.

I find it most interesting, as I hope others do too.

So, what happened to make people think that "the Lord's day" refers not to the seventh day , the sabbath of the LORD thy God, but to some other day?


Where did this take place in history, and by whom? Well, we do not have to guess, as the one's who did so, are very open about doing so:

For instance:

Latin:
Translated English:


Further:

Council of Trent:


... and many more such citations.

Isn't it of interest that the Beast in Daniel 7, with Ten Horns, has another "little horn" that uproots three of the Ten? Horns in scripture, are associated with Kings, this is true, but looking a bit deeper, it is also associated with authority, power, rulership, commandments, law.

There are Ten Commandments.

Isn't it interesting that the very same persons which claim to have changed God's law, did so to three of the Ten Commandments, as seen here (Commandments 2 (Exodus 20:4-6), 4 (Exodus 20:8-11) and 10 (Exodus 20:17), as given in scripture):

Catechism of the Catholic Church - The Ten Commandments

Just look at the clear difference between the Left Side (Scripture) and the Far Right (traditional).

Even Philip Melanchthon (on Daniel 7:25) understood this:

So what about that part that in Matthew 4:4, "but every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live"

Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.2 Cor 3:6

But I can relate to being in the Spirit on the LORD's day

To the OP:

Who are you quoting all of this from? Please give credit to the "Source." By that, I mean, who are you copy/pasting your comments from? Did you actually compile all of this yourself? If not, who did?

The Lord's Day is THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK (the eighth day) when the Lord's Table has the Lord's Supper for Christians. The first day of the week is extremely significant in the New Testament since eight is the number of a New Creation, just as one was the number of the first creation. Also the Sabbath was given to Israel, but the first day of the week was given to the Church.

Had the apostle John meant that he was speaking of the sabbath, he would have simply called it the sabbath. But he used a special term by divine inspiration, and ever since the Christian Sabbath has been the first day of the week.

The first day of the week is also called "the morrow after the sabbath" on which both the Feast of First Fruits and the Feast of Pentecost were observed. The Feast of First Fruits prefigured the resurrection of Christ and the Feast of Pentecost prefigured the harvest of the Church.

When Paul visited the church at Troas he waited to meet with the Christians for seven days, so that he would preach to them on the first day of the week after the breaking of bread (the Lord's Supper):

ACTS 20
5 These going before tarried for us at Troas.
6 And we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days; where we abode seven days.
7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

When Christ met with all the disciples after His resurrection, Thomas was absent. Therefore the Lord waited for eight days in order to meet with them again on the first day of the week. And it became the Christian day of worship after Thomas said "My Lord and My God".

JOHN 20
19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peacebe unto you.
20 And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord.
21Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: [Note: the Holy Spirit given to the apostles on the first day of the week]
23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.
24 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.
26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

Based on the above SCRIPTURES your assertion is TOTALLY INCORRECT. And since Jews who reject Christ continue to observe the 7th day sabbath, that is further proof that you are totally incorrect.

Indeed, here are the words of the LORD that directly proceeded out of His mouth:

Remember, Jesus spake those words.

Moses then reminds them in Deuteronomy 5-8.

Indeed, as the words of God, as spoken at Mt. Sinai are spiritual:


For without the Holy Spirit of God, which wrote the Ten Commandments [Exodus 31:18; Deuteronomy 9:10; Luke 11:20; Matthew 12:28], none can keep God's law, but by the Holy Ghost, and through Christ Jesus, all (Philippians 4:13) may be kept. The letter cannot be kept without the Spirit, which wrote it, which is why the Holy Ghost is central to the New Covenant, Jeremiah 31:31-34; Isaiah 56:1-8; John 10:16; Hebrews 8:8-13, 10:16 and so forth.

I do desire persons to actually address the OP and subsequent material. The focus is specifically, what is "the Lord's day" of Revelation 1:10, as defined by scripture.

The rock music is of satan, and is the wrong "spirit", the spirit of rebellion, none of which will ever be found in Heaven's music. Feel free to ponder these materials:

Inside Rock Music (PDF)

Drums, Rock & Worship (PDF)

Drumming Up Spirits In Our Service (PDF)


Then contemplate some of that Holy Spirit filled music:


With all said, the OP stands as valid, without any serious contestation.

I cited the person (on the OP) who chooses to remain anonymous at present, when I wrote:


That "someone" may be me, or it may not. This is the age of the internet, where everything written does not carry a persons signature, or even time of origin. If it is me, I am not telling you. It is irrelevant to the material presented. Deal with facts. Jesus did not go around saying, "Whose doctrine is this ... or who stated that ...", that was something the Pharisees did (see them sending to John, to Jesus, to Peter, to Paul, etc).

From mine own perspective, I do not care who wrote or said something. I only care does it agree with God in His word.

I gave you the source as the source desires to be identified - "someone".

All appropriate citations are given, by links to those which desire to be identified.

Why is it relevant to the issue of the OP?

The OP stands at present as unrefuted, and from this position at present, unrefutable. Thank you for your true concern. My concern is what saith the LORD, as the OP gives.

Well said.

According to the Word it is what the Lord, Himself, has taught us the Seventh Day is the Sabbath of the Lord.

If you find another Lord's day, please afford the Holy Scripture, otherwise keep it to yourself.

In HEBREWS 4:8-12 Tells us that JESUS didn't change the Sabbath That it still REMAINS,
And GOD warns us that Satan would try to change it in Daniel 7:25, The only law of GODs, that's got to do with time is GODs Sabbath
GOD bless as sees fit for you all.

You are without a single scripture for that assertion. If you had it, you would have cited it here. You did not. I shall address what you have given below momentarily.

Also, from that same (ogdoad) theology you cannot get a one time event into a weekly event, and neither does such appear anywhere in the whole of scripture.

Again, you are without scripture on this point, and if you had it you would have cited it here. You did not. I shall address what you have given below momentarily.

Actually the "first [day] of the week" is not prominent in the New Testament. You are again without scripture support here, and if you had the evidence, you would have cited it here. You did not. There are many other things which are prominent, and of that which you did cite, I shall address momentarily.

Eight is the number of circumcision (Leviticus 12:3; Luke 1:59; Acts 7:8), which follows not a weekly cycle, but is counted from after the birth which could land on any day of the week, or any day in the month, including the 7th day of the week, the sabbath (John 7:22). The scriptures also relate the "eighth" as the day in which the firstfruits were given, such as an animal (Exodus 22:30; Leviticus 9:1, 22:27), and was also the day of "offering" after cleansing (Leviticus 15:14), both of which were not weekly events. It (8) was also associated with the Feast of Tabernacles/Booths (a one time event, yearly; Leviticus 23:36,39), and did not follow a weekly pattern, and could land on any day of the week, in a given month (based upon the New Moon sightings).

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 are cyclical, weekly. 8 is not. So, even accepting that 8 is symbolical (as all numbers are) and refers to the New Heavens and New Earth, it begins on the new day 1, all over again:


That is what the Feast of Tabernacles points to with it's eighth (one time, not weekly). So even within the New Creation, is the cycle of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (sabbath) - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (sabbath), ad infinitum.

Scripture states that the sabbath was "made" (creation; Genesis 2:1-3; Exodus 20:8-11) for "the man" (Adam; Mark 2:27; Ecclesiastes 12:13-14), both first and second (1 Corinthians 15:45,47; Colossians 1:16). It, after the Egyptian period of slavery, wherein they had 'forgotten' to keep God's laws, was God that also gave them by Reminder, the sabbath of the LORD (Exodus 20:8-11; Deuteronomy 5:12-15). Moses was a sabbath reformer (see Exodus 5-16, etc).

Finally, "Israel" was a name given from the True Israel to a man, who would be the type of the True Israel to come - Jesus Christ.

Jesus is the True Israel (Matthew 2:13-15,19-21; Hosea 11:1; his children are his disciples; Hebrews 2:13; Isaiah 8:16,18; John 13:33), the true "overcomer" (John 16:33; Revelation 3:21), the real "Prince" with God (Isaiah 9:6; Daniel 8:11,25, 9:25, 10:13,21, 11:22, 12:1; Acts 3:15, 5:31; Revelation 1:5), being Lord over His own house, whose house are we (Psalms 98:3; Hebrews 3:6; Jeremiah 31:33), who himself is the "elect" (Isaiah 42:1; Matthew 12:18; 1 Peter 2:6) of the Father, in whom all the promises of God find their realization (2 Corinthians 1:20). The promises made by God were all based upon condition (Exodus 19).

Mat 2:13-15; Hos 11:1; Jer 31:33; Rom 9:6-8; Heb 2:13; Isa 8:16,18; Jhn 13:33, 16:33, 17:12, 18:9, 21:5; 1 Cor 15:46; 2 Cor 1:20; Gal 6:16; Heb 3:6, 8:8,10; Rev 3:21

'Israel' after the flesh, as a 'nation', is left desolate (Matthew 23:38; Luke 13:35), to bear no more fruit ever again (Matthew 21:19), cursed, withered away (Mark 11:21), dried up from the roots (Mark 11:20), "twice dead" (Jude 1:12), and the axe already laid at their root (Matthew 3:10; Luke 3:9), cut down and to be thrown into the fire.

Also, the "church" were those in the wilderness with Moses:

I can also cite many septuaginta 'ecclesia' passages also if necessary, showing the same things.

You are again without scripture support here, and if you had the evidence, you would have cited it here. You did not. I shall address what you have given below momentarily.

All 7 days are in the commandment of God, and we are responsible to God in all of them, at all times:


It is of the highest and grossest presumption to even think to deign what the Apostle (or any writer of the Bible) 'ought' to have said, wrote or "meant", while under inspiration of the Holy Ghost. John wrote what he wrote, under that inspiration., and I for one do not ever intent to have it changed, as some seem inclined to do, by attempting, without a single scripture, to make it say 'first [day] of the week'. I point you to the warnings given in Revelation 22:18-19. John understood, as already pointed out, all the scriptures that had been written before, and the context shows him speaking directly of "the word of God" and the "testimony" (see Isaiah 8:20, etc, as already cited).

See previous response.

I couldn't agree more with you here, and as shown by the OP, "the Lord's day" was known even in Isaiah 58, as the seventh day, the sabbath of the LORD thy God. John, agrees with the other Gospel writers, Matthew, Mark and Luke, when it is written that Jesus is still "the Lord" of the sabbath "day". All four witnesses, agree - perfectly. Not one witness, is heard from Genesis to Revelation, as to the mythology, the carnal and vain imagination, of the Lord's day being the 'first [day] of the week'. If you had such evidence you would have produced it. You did not. I shall address what you have given below momentarily.

That is the oft repeated 'mythos', that has stood upon nothing for so long, but even error so hoary, is still error.

True. What does that have to do with the OP and evidence therein? That has never been in argument, and still is not (at least by any competent in the things of God's word).

In that year of Jesus resurrection and outpouring of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles/Disciples, true. Both were one time events - as forshadowed by their yearly types. None of it was weekly. Again, how do you get such an yearly event of type, or a one time in all future history, as reality, to being a weekly event by scripture? Produce those texts. You cannot, because there are none. Additionally, it is even a nonsequitur, to the OP in first instance. Neither Firstfruits, nor Pentecost, are ever called "the Lord's day" - anywhere in scripture.

Why place the emphassis merely upon Firstfruits and Pentecost, simply because in that year (AD 321) they landed upon the 'first [day] of the week'? You do realize that Passover was upon the 14th, the preparation day (6th day of the week), and the First day of Unleavened Bread was upon the 7th day of the week (thus an High sabbath that year). That the final day of the Feast of Unleavened bread, 7 days later, was also not upon the first day of the week. What of the other feasts?

Why pick and choose what you desire, and ignore what doesn't fit the pattern you hope for?

Yes, and? What does it do with the OP and Revelation 1:10 and its phrase "the Lord's day"? Nothing. It is merely red-herring.

There is no question as to what day Jesus arose from the dead. It was the "first [day] of the week", the day which followed the 7th day the sabbath of the LORD, see Luke 23:54-56, etc. That is not in question at all. It is merely distraction to bring it up.

Last Supper was 'thursday night', beginning of the 'sixth day'.
Crucifixion and Death was 'sixth day'.
In the Tomb was Sabbath, the 7th day.
Resurrection was 'first [day] of the week'

All are required. All needful. None of it changes the Commandment (Exodus 20:8-11), nor negates obedience to it in all that it says. Jesus death proves its eternality.

Yes, do you know why? The sabbath was the day that would end the week (as the koine Greek says*), wherein they would all meet at gathering for public worship (see Acts 20:7) and then afterwards when the sun had set, they would get together for a private farewell to Paul (who was leaving on the following work day, 'the first [day] of the week', when the sun came up).*


That the Sabbath [of the Lord thy God], [being] the 7th day, is always the culmination of the week in God's Created order and is always referred to as such in all of scripture.

Therefore, every single “first [day] of the week” text upholds the 7th Day Sabbath, and is undeniable evidence of its continued existence and prominence.

The body of believers may gather on any and every day with no injunction anywhere found in scripture against such, and in truth they met "daily", "continually", etc (Mat 26:55; Mar 14:49; Luk 22:53, 24:33,36; Acts 19:9) and likewise among the followers of Jesus Christ (Luk 24:51,53; Acts 1:3,9, 2:46-47, 5:42, 6:1, 16:5, 17:11,17; Heb 3:13, etc).

Not a single one of those texts state that the "first [day] of the week" is "the Lord's day". Far from it. They all acknowledge that the 'first [day]" is simply a number in association with the "sabbath", the culmination of every week, which as Isaiah 58 shows is "the Lord's holy day".

Oh, you overreached yourself there, by saying, "the Lord's supper". That is nowhere present in the text, and you assumed it, without contextual evidence even.


This is an evening meeting, after Sabbath was over, for we see lights, and evening meals being eaten, and timeframe of preaching to Midnight and beyond. In fact, Paul travels some 19-21ish miles (from Troas) to the next city, Assos, by foot during the morning time. There is no “Sunday” (a word never mentioned in scripture) service here. The day, scripturally begins at “evening” (Genesis 1, etc), and thus it is technically what the western mind would call “Saturday night” (which is the "first [day] of the week"].

There is no continual pattern here, as it is a special meeting and farewell for Paul, who is forever leaving them, and because of the events of Eutychus.

The disciples eat a common meal, as they did every day, for there is no mention of the “cup”, “Lord's table or supper”, “footwashing”, “fruit of the vine”, etc. It is the same phrase used in taking a common meal (Acts 2:46, etc).

The phrase in koine Greek is again demonstrative that the 7th day the sabbath is the culmination of the week, “εν δε τη μια των σαββατων”, as every single “first [day]” text reveals.

There is no special designation for the day.

This is a one-off event amidst a series of one-off events.

Even as a pattern, it is at night time, held until midnight and beyond. Do they really follow this as an example in their practice? No. Seems hypocritical to me.

Nowhere in Acts 20, is the 'first [day] of the week' ever designated "the Lord's day", and Luke wrote Acts, years after the ascension of Jesus Christ. He simply calls the first day the first day in relation to the 7th day, the sabbath, as they all had done, and continued to do.

Acts 20 is again a red-herring.

Indeed. Do you know when that was? It was actually "the second [day] of the week', being the first "evening" portion. Notice:

Let's consider the so-called gatherings on the 'first [day] of the week':

John 20:19

In scripture, though, there are several "evenings". The "evening" of about 3 PM to sunset, known as the "going down of the sun":

Then there is another and final "evening" which brings the next day as in Genesis 1, this "evening" is known as the beginning of the "day", see Genesis 1, etc.

Therefore, when we are reading Mark, Luke and John, we need to take that into consideration. Look again:

We can see that they (disciples and Jesus) were still walking to Emmaus while it was yet "day" (light out, with the sun still out), and yet it began to grow late in the day, and the sun was beginning to go down. It was getting near supper time. It was not yet night (sun down). Yet, while they eat, Jesus makes known who He is, and vanishes from their sight (no, Jesus is not aethereal, He is simply invisible to their eyes), and they being astonished, run all the way back to Jerusalem where the other disciples were hiding behind closed doors. Now the distance from Emmaus to Jerusalem, we are told, is "threescore furlongs" ("A Greek measure of length, being 600 Greek ft., or 100 orguiai equal to 606 3/4 English ft., and thus somewhat less than a furlong, which is 660 ft." - Link and thus is about 7-8 Miles as we would know them).

7-8 Miles is a long way to run when the sun is setting, going back uphill (Jerusalem, the city on a hill). This would take several hours. It would be dark, by the time these reached Jerusalem and the other disciples, being the final "evening" (when the sun did set, see Mark 1:32).

Therefore, when John says, "Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you."

We know the timeframe it refers to. It was the end of the first day of the week, in the "evening", when the sun was set, which in reality, is another way of saying the 'second [day] of the week', contextually. The text refers to the "evening" at the end of the "first [day] of the week" which scripturally means the actual "second [day] of the week". I am not rewriting the text here. I am simply demonstrating that John is using a parallel language to say the same thing another way. It would be akin to saying the "Robe is purple.", and another person saying, the "Robe is a mixture of the shades of red and blue."

Thus it was in actuality the second day of the week that Jesus appeared to them. Then we see another appearance "after eight days", which would place the following meeting, again, no matter how it is calculated (inclusive or exclusive), not upon the "first [day] of the week", but either the second or third:

You are mistaken. It was "after" "eight days". No matter how you try to calculate that, inclusively or exclusively, after 8 is 9 or more. There are only 7 days in a week.

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

We know that Jesus met with them on the evening of the 2nd day (first part) [2] which I will here break into [A / B], A being the evening unto morning and B being the morning unto next evening.

[1A / 1B][2A / 2B] From 2 A (evening) we count "after eight days", a "day" being either in part or in whole.

[1A / 1B] (had already passed and it was evening)
[2A / 2B] = 1 (inclusive) (met with the disciples)
[3A / 3B] = 2 (exclusive)
[4A / 4B] = 3
[5A / 5B] = 4
[6A / 6B] = 5
[7A / 7B] = 6
[1A / 1B] = 7
[2A / 2B] = 8
[3A / 3B] = 9th day (after eight days)
[4A / 4B] = 10th day (after eight days)

Yet, even if we ignored all the context about Jesus meeting with the disciples upon the evening portion of the second day of the week, and tried to count from the [1B] portion (where he had actually walked and talked with the two on the Road to Emmaus), the saying "after eight days" cannot ever calculate to landing upon [1A or 1B].

Please do the math. Please read the context of when Jesus first met with the disciples. Open all four gospels and compare them together.

As much as you spoke many words, you did not actually once address the OP. What you did was flash a bunch of non-sequitur at me hoping some of it would stick. Most of what you wrote was either irrelevant, in error (as documented from actual scripture study) or already agreed upon.

There is not a "jew" on earth that can rightly observe the sabbath of the Lord, as they reject that Lord of the sabbath (Mark 2:27-28). Think about it. Most 'jews' today have 0 descent from what existed in th OT/NT times, and are either askenazic, or sephardic.

To equate me with such persons (whom all need Jesus Christ), is a hidden attempt to say I am rejecting Christ. I reject such a hidden assertion. It is most certainly untrue.