These manuscripts were copied and translated by a man called Erasmus in the early 16th century. Even then these manuscripts were fourteen hundred years old and were obviously in a very poor condition and thereby incomplete with many pieces missing. Here, therefore, in Matthew's and Mark's accounts is a good example of how these missing fragments of manuscript have affected the Holy Scriptures with its omissions. We must also take into account that this man Erasmus was a Roman Catholic and that the Good Friday thing is definitely one of their evil corruptions of the Truth so are the missing pieces a deliberate omission or accidental!!?? The TI have covered a fair amount of material thus far in articles 1 and 2, so let's summarise the evidence we have up to now. We know that the two Marys attended the sepulchre when The Lord was laid inside. We also know that whilst the two Mary's rested on the first Sabbath of Unleavened Bread the Romans, at the behest of the Pharisees sealed the tomb and placed a guard of soldiers there. Initially, the two Marys would not have been aware that the tomb had been sealed and a guard set. We know too that the two Marys wanted to purchase ointment and spices for the anointing of The Lord's body. They did this and after the first Sabbath was over they came to the tomb carrying the spices hoping to be able to do so but could not because the tomb was sealed.

Let's now move on to two more things in Matthew's and Mark's accounts that are easy to read over and miss unless we stop and think about them. Matthew first in verses 28:2-6 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. 3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: 4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. 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.

Now here in this account are at least two things that are easy to miss and/or erroneously take for granted as read when they are not written as we might think they are. Notice first verse 5 "And the angel answered the women", answered them for what reason? In order for the angel to 'answer them' there must have been some sort of dialogue going on in the first place, but nothing is recorded here! The women have not said a word to this angel in this account; so on the face of it, this means, there's nothing to answer. So what's going on here, and is something missing in this account? The other piece of information omitted here are the names of the women. The angel answers the 'women' but which women? We can only assume it's the two Marys but that would and could be an inaccurate assumption if we wish to ratify these accounts in Matthew and Mark with those in Luke and, especially, those in John.

Now for some background information; the Greek text upon which we rely for a more accurate rendering of God's Word is known as the 'Received Text'. These manuscripts were copied and translated by a man called Erasmus in the early 16th century. Even then these manuscripts were fourteen hundred years old and were obviously in a very poor condition and thereby incomplete with many pieces missing. Here, therefore, in Matthew's and Mark's accounts is a good example of how these missing fragments of manuscript have affected the Holy Scriptures with its omissions. We must also take into account that this man Erasmus was a Roman Catholic and that the Good Friday thing is definitely one of their evil corruptions of the Truth so are the missing pieces a deliberate omission or accidental!!?? The Tr

th was over they came to the tomb carrying the spices hoping to be able to do so but could not because the tomb was sealed.

Let's now move on to two more things in Matthew's and Mark's accounts that are easy to read over and miss unless we stop and think about them. Matthew first in verses 28:2-6 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. 3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: 4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. 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.

Now here in this account are at least two things that are easy to miss and/or erroneously take for granted as read when they are not written as we might think they are. Notice first verse 5 "And the angel answered the women", answered them for what reason? In order for the angel to 'answer them' there must have been some sort of dialogue going on in the first place, but nothing is recorded here! The women have not said a word to this angel in this account; so on the face of it, this means, there's nothing to answer. So what's going on here, and is something missing in this account? The other piece of information omitted here are the names of the women. The angel answers the 'women' but which women? We can only assume it's the two Marys but that would and could be an inaccurate assumption if we wish to ratify these accounts in Matthew and Mark with those in Luke and, especially, those in John.

Now for some background information; the Greek text upon which we rely for a more accurate rendering of God's Word is known as the 'Received Text'. These manuscripts were copied and translated by a man called Erasmus in the early 16th century. Even then these manuscripts were fourteen hundred years old and were obviously in a very poor condition and thereby incomplete with many pieces missing. Here, therefore, in Matthew's and Mark's accounts is a good example of how these missing fragments of manuscript have affected the Holy Scriptures with its omissions. We must also take into account that this man Erasmus was a Roman Catholic and that the Good Friday thing is definitely one of their evil corruptions of the Truth so are the missing pieces a deliberate omission or accidental!!?? The T

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.

Now here in this account are at least two things that are easy to miss and/or erroneously take for granted as read when they are not written as we might think they are. Notice first verse 5 "And the angel answered the women", answered them for what reason? In order for the angel to 'answer them' there must have been some sort of dialogue going on in the first place, but nothing is recorded here! The women have not said a word to this angel in this account; so on the face of it, this means, there's nothing to answer. So what's going on here, and is something missing in this account? The other piece of information omitted here are the names of the women. The angel answers the 'women' but which women? We can only assume it's the two Marys but that would and could be an inaccurate assumption if we wish to ratify these accounts in Matthew and Mark with those in Luke and, especially, those in John.

Now for some background information; the Greek text upon which we rely for a more accurate rendering of God's Word is known as the 'Received Text'. These manuscripts were copied and translated by a man called Erasmus in the early 16th century. Even then these manuscripts were fourteen hundred years old and were obviously in a very poor condition and thereby incomplete with many pieces missing. Here, therefore, in Matthew's and Mark's accounts is a good example of how these missing fragments of manuscript have affected the Holy Scriptures with its omissions. We must also take into account that this man Erasmus was a Roman Catholic and that the Good Friday thing is definitely one of their evil corruptions of the Truth so are the missing pieces a deliberate omission or accidental!!?? The T

have not said a word to this angel in this account; so on the face of it, this means, there's nothing to answer. So what's going on here, and is something missing in this account? The other piece of information omitted here are the names of the women. The angel answers the 'women' but which women? We can only assume it's the two Marys but that would and could be an inaccurate assumption if we wish to ratify these accounts in Matthew and Mark with those in Luke and, especially, those in John.

Now for some background information; the Greek text upon which we rely for a more accurate rendering of God's Word is known as the 'Received Text'. These manuscripts were copied and translated by a man called Erasmus in the early 16th century. Even then these manuscripts were fourteen hundred years old and were obviously in a very poor condition and thereby incomplete with many pieces missing. Here, therefore, in Matthew's and Mark's accounts is a good example of how these missing fragments of manuscript have affected the Holy Scriptures with its omissions. We must also take into account that this man Erasmus was a Roman Catholic and that the Good Friday thing is definitely one of their evil corruptions of the Truth so are the missing pieces a deliberate omission or accidental!!?? The T

These manuscripts were copied and translated by a man called Erasmus in the early 16th century. Even then these manuscripts were fourteen hundred years old and were obviously in a very poor condition and thereby incomplete with many pieces missing. Here, therefore, in Matthew's and Mark's accounts is a good example of how these missing fragments of manuscript have affected the Holy Scriptures with its omissions. We must also take into account that this man Erasmus was a Roman Catholic and that the Good Friday thing is definitely one of their evil corruptions of the Truth so are the missing pieces a deliberate omission or accidental!!?? The Truth is we don't know, but don't forget the uproar it would have caused in the 'Holy' Roman Empire if Erasmus had included all the evidence, with the possible threat of heresy hanging over him. He could also have risked excommunication and/or even torture and death for his 'heretical' activities.

Whatever the Truth of this matter, this passage in Matthew 28 is incomplete and therefore renders it totally disjointed. The reality and Truth of it is this: The two Marys visit the tomb between the two Sabbaths and return home disappointed because the tomb is sealed - we then have a short space in time - the hours between the two Marys first visit and the end of the weekly Sabbath. In other words the earthquake occurs later for the benefit of the Roman guards only (to give them a 'wake up call' and to use them as witnesses) and to break the seal on the stone door. The angel also appears, first to roll away the stone from the door and then, for the 'benefit' of the Romans, to put the fear of God into them so they freeze as dead men. The two Marys were not present at the time of the earthquake; how do we know that? Quite simply, because 1) What would be the point? We know The Father God is not into putting his children into unnecessary frightening or dangerous situations (see my series of articles on Ogre gods). 2) The Father God knew that the earthquake episode and angelic appearance would be reported back to the Pharisees even though they would, and did, do all they could to silence the soldiers and hush the event up. OK, after the earthquake there is now another short gap in time until the arrival of the first visitor(s) to the empty tomb. According to Matthew's account there then follows a conversation between these women and the angel which is only half recorded, but are these unnamed women the first visitors? All will be revealed.

We can now have a look at Mark's account for there is a similar disjointedness that's easy to miss and read over. Mark 16:1-2 And when the sabbath was past, (the first Sabbath) 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, (after the second Sabbath) 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. (Brackets mine)

Here we can see support for Matthews account in ver