Tag Archives: Easter Sunday

Mark 16:1-8 – Jesus appears as an angel to tell the women family members to tell Peter to prepare to meet Jesus

January 20, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

When the sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint Jesus. And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb. They had been saying to one another, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?” When they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had already been rolled back. As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man, dressed in a white robe, sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed. But he said to them, “Do not be alarmed; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised; he is not here. Look, there is the place they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you.” So they went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.

——————–

This is the second option [Track 2?] for the Gospel selection to be read aloud on Easter Sunday, Year B principal service, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. In the season of Easter, beginning with Easter Sunday, the Church makes a certain reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles be read, either taking the place of an Old Testament reading possibility [the First Lesson] or taking the place of the Epistle reading possibility [the New Testament slot]. In some way, by design or chance, this reading from Mark can be chosen over the first Gospel choice from John. The John 20:1-18 option is optional to choose in all three years of the lectionary cycle, whereas Year B primary service is the only shot Mark 16:1-8 has to be read aloud and thereby explained in homily.

Assuming this is the second option for the Gospel and it will be read if the mandatory Acts reading takes the place of the second lesson [the New Testament category], that would mean this reading from Mark will be preceded by a reading from Isaiah 25, where the prophet wrote, “Then the Lord God will wipe away the tears from all faces, and the disgrace of his people he will take away from all the earth.” That will be followed by a selection of verses from Psalm 118, which sings, “The Lord has punished me sorely, but he did not hand me over to death.” Lastly, the mandatory reading from Acts 10 will be read, which states, “They put him to death by hanging him on a tree; but God raised him on the third day and allowed him to appear.”

Before delving into what Mark wrote about the first Easter Sunday, it is important to realize the Gospel of John recounts this differently. There certainly are opponents of Christianity who will challenge any seeming inconsistencies as being weaknesses that make the foundation of faith in stories that approach one event from different perspectives crumble. In this regard, I recommend a true seeker, even an opponent of Christianity read my interpretation of John 20:1-18, because I show how nothing John wrote is contrary to what Mark wrote. It should be realized that Mark wrote the accounts of Simon Peter, so John’s direct mention of Simon Peter entering the empty tomb does not mean that Mark has to also tell of Simon Peter doing that. Not telling of something is not evidence that another who told of something was incorrect.

It is now important that I attest to a divine syntax that I have been led to realize and become somewhat fluent in reading, which is necessary for grasping the deeper meaning of what is written. By reading under a new set of rules of language [by “speaking in tongues”], hidden meaning rises from the surface meaning that is all normal syntax allows one to see. In this regard, one has to admit the texts of the Holy Bible were written in either Hebrew or Greek, such that English translations [beginning with the King James Version and multiplying like rabbits ever since] have been memorized by Christians and made to seem as if the Biblical characters all spoke English – a language with syntactical rules that differ from the divine language all Scripture is written by [from the Godhead]. The source of all holy text is God [Yahweh] and must be realized as perfection as written, therefore any changes made to that perfection [to suit the needs of translators] weakens the truth that is divinely told.

With that disclaimer stated, this reading has verse 1 begin with the benign phrase, “When the sabbath was over.” That is not what Mark wrote. The Greek text shows: “Kai diagenomenou tou sabbatou,” where the first word is a capitalized “Kai.” The Greek word “kai” is ordinarily a simple conjunction that is translated as “and,” according to the normal rules of Greek and that language being translated into English. I have found that the divine rules of syntax say see “kai” as a marker word [not “and”] that does not need to be read in English, just noticed that something important will follow that marker word. In this case, where “Kai” is capitalized, such that another rule of divine language says all words capitalized take on higher meaning, of spiritual essence, this verse beginning with “Kai” [improperly translated as “When”] says the first series of words [to the comma mark] is an important spiritual statement that needs to be seen in that light, above the simple surface meaning that says, “When the sabbath was over.”

A literal translation of the Greek text “Kai diagenomenou tou sabbatou” says, “Kai having passed this seventh day.” Because the capitalized “Kai” is seen as a signal to look for higher meaning in those words, “having passed” becomes a divinely inspired statement of time elapsing. Because the last verse in Mark 15 told about the burial of Jesus [on a Friday], the spiritual meaning of “having passed” is less about the days of the week having gone by, but the timing of Jesus prophesying he would dei and after three days be raised. Seeing that, “having passed” becomes a divine statement of when those three days were officially over. By adding to that meaning “this seventh day” [not capitalized, therefore not Sabbath], Mark is making a very important statement [“Kai”] that the timeframe of Jesus’ prophecy was up on the seventh day, which was the day after his burial on Friday.

From seeing that being the deeper intent of Mark writing those words, the rest of verse 1 states, “Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint Jesus.” While that seems to be Peter telling the names of three women who went to the tomb to anoint Jesus, one has to slow down and realize in these segments of words are six capitalized ‘names,’ each of them having a root meaning that needs to be understood. Those root meaning are as follows [all from Abarim Publications]:

Mary – “Beloved”
Magdalene – “Of The Tower”
James – “Supplanter” [or “He Who Closely Follows”]
Salome – “Peace”
Jesus – “Yahweh Saves”

When these root name meanings are seen as divinely raised to the intent behind the names, the rest of verse 1 can be read as: “Beloved Of The Tower, and Beloved the mother of Supplanter, and Peace brought spices, so that they might go anoint Yahweh Saves.” In this being based on the translations into English and not the literal Greek text, we find with closer inspection that some words have not been translated and the places one find “and” written and where the word “kai” is adding a mark of importance. Based on that awareness, that written literally translates into English as the following segments:

“this Beloved this Of The Tower” ,

kai Beloved this the one of He Who Closely Follows ,

kai Peace ,

purchased perfumes ,

in order that having come ,

they might anoint [the dead] him .

Again, I recommend reading what I interpreted about John having also written (similarly) of “Mary this Magdalene comes early,” where the use of the root names are discussed deeply. Here, I want to focus more on all name “Mary” are women who are deemed “Beloved.” The raised essence that must be seen now is “Beloved” means family relation, not just some friend or follower of Jesus. Because some tend to see Mary Magdalene as some woman Jesus knew, who was a female disciple, this makes it clear that she was related to Jesus [“Of The Tower”] through marriage, as the wife of Jesus. As the wife “Beloved,” she was first in the list of women responsible for preparing the dead body of her husband for transfer from a loaner tomb, to the ‘family plot’ [the one Lazarus had been buried in].

The second most important “Beloved” is the mother of James, the half-brother of Jesus. Still, the word “mother” is not written, but implied from an article – “hē.” That same word [a letter in Greek – “ἡ”] is written before the first “Maria” and before “Magdalēnē,” at neither time implying “mother.” The presence of the word “kai” before the second “Beloved” says this woman has greater spiritual importance than the wife, where “kai” becomes the indication of the mother, one who conceived Jesus without physical penetration or intercourse. This makes “James” become a statement of her having since become a mother who conceived through intercourse with Joseph, her husband, but that couple had more children than just James. Therefore, the meaning of the name says the “Beloved” mother of Jesus also was one “Who Closely Followed He” who was her divine Son of man.

After seeing that identification of Mother Mary, one finds another use of “kai,” which says “Peace” is another element that must be understood. The name of the woman Mary Salome is that of an aunt of Jesus, as the wife of a brother of Mary the mother of Jesus, who is believed to have been Zebedee. This would make Salome the mother of James and John of Zebedee, which says they were cousins of Jesus. By a third woman being announced as important to know on a spiritual level. “Peace” must be read as the strength that held all three women up, able to do the work they were leaving to do, was Mary Salome. She was a presence of calm for two women who were most distraught over the death of a husband and son.

The segment that is separated, saying “purchased perfumes” or “bought spices” has to be recognized as a statement of preparation for this day. Since there would have been no buying nor selling on the Sabbath, these three women had gone on the day of preparation [Friday] and “bought spices” for the purpose of preparing the body of Jesus for transfer, from one tomb to another. They would have done that separate from Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus taking seventy-five pounds of embalming perfumes with them to prepare Jesus’ body for burial. This segment means Jesus was representative of their Sabbath to recognize, based on prior preparations.

Most likely, these women did little more than cry and pray on the Sabbath, in preparation for doing what had to be done on Sunday morning. This becomes the focus of the next segment of words: “in order that having come.” More than them walking to the tomb as the meaning of “having come,” it was a day prepared for “having come.” Therefore, the word “hina” is written to connect that which had been bought in preparation follows an order or schedule, such that a day of work had arrived.

The final segment of words places focus on anointing. The Greek word “aleipsōsin” states the conditions planned in preparation, which were to be apply olive oil scented with fragrances to the face of Jesus. It is here that one finds the translation that has “Jesus” listed is incorrect, as that name has been applied to the Greek word “auton,” which simply means “him.” The intuiting of Jesus, a name that means “Yahweh Saves,” says two things. First, a corpse no longer has a name. Second, the plan to anoint one who had already been the Anointed One of Yahweh means the conditional (“might anoint [the dead]”) says the women had given up hope that Jesus could not die, having been given eternal life, therefore impossible to ever be dead.

Verse 2 then states, “And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb.” This verse also begins with the word “kai,” although not capitalized. This says the timing is important to understand. The two word “lian prōi” translate as “very early,” but the importance of “kai” says “lian” must be read as “exceedingly” or “extremely,” where the “earliness” means the second 6:00 AM ticked off. Any earlier and it would have still been technically the Sabbath.

When Mark wrote “the first day of the week,” this is the same terminology used by John. This being stated in verse 2 says the elevated meaning found in verse 1 is correct, as that stated the timing of Jesus resurrection of death, more than identifying it was now the day after the Sabbath, as the first day of the week [Sunday]. This also says it was immediately upon that new day having arrived.

There are two segments of words, set off by comma marks, that make the NRSV translation a paraphrase. The literal translation into English show those segments as stating: “they come to the tomb , having arisen the sun.” The order of those segments is important to grasp. First, “they come to the tomb” is stated in the present inductive, not in the aorist past, meaning the women left before the sun actually rose. That says sunrise had not yet occurred at 6:00 AM. However,the aorist active participle of “anateilantos” [“having arisen”] says sunrise occurred after they left to go to the tomb.

Verse 3 then has Peter recall a conversation, one which he personally was not present to hear. By Mark writing, “They had been saying to one another, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?” this says Peter could have heard the women voice their concerns “among themselves, as one present overhearing them talk. This past tense use of “were saying” could even have been early in the morning, when the women voiced that concern before leaving to the cemetery. In that case, Peter sat nearby and heard them purposefully talk so he could hear them, as a way of trying to motivate him to volunteer to go with them and do that work. In that case, Peter knew he had let the women go alone, without offering to go along and possibly help them.

That verse is introduced by the word “kai,” such that the importance becomes this element of them talking among themselves. As women knowing they were not strong enough to roll away a heavy tomb stone, they also knew it was not their place to do a man’s work. Therefore, the importance of this becomes a confession by Peter that he knew about this conversation beforehand, rather than after the fact, as hearsay.

Verse 4 then says, “ When they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had already been rolled back.” Here, again, is a verse begun by the use of “kai,” showing importance needs to be seen in “having looked up they see that” [from “elegon theōrousin hoti”], such that the point of their prior discussion was then found to have been needless worry. This makes “having looked up” be akin to having a premonition or imaginary vision of them reaching the tomb and seeing a stone in need of being rolled away. From this, going back to the “bought spices” or “purchased perfumes,” these women had not been to the tomb to watch the interment, as it happened so late in the day Friday, while they were shopping. Peter most likely had watch that interment [as secretly as a casual bystander could] and knew there would be guards there to help the women. Thus, he did not offer to go and possibly help, when he knew his help would not be needed and he did not want to be arrested. The vision the women has conjured from fear of going without a man disappeared when they saw the tomb already opened.

When Mark is shown to have written, “the stone, which was very large,” the separation by comma marks says the stone for the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea was “extremely large,” using the same extremity as was found in the earliness of the hour prior. This says the imaginations of the women led them to “see” which tomb was his [an act of “perception” beyond personal knowledge from past experience] and that tomb was opened, no longer sealed by a stone greater than they had expected.

When the translation states in verse 5, “As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man, dressed in a white robe, sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed,” this ignores the presence of another capitalized first word that is “Kai.” This places great importance in understanding “having entered into the tomb” [from “eiselthousai eis to mnēmeion”]. This is where linking John’s story to Marks is important, as John makes it easier to intuit that women and children did not have any rights to enter into tombs. That was only allowed to adult males. Therefore, the great importance comes from not thinking three women casually walked into an open tomb, previously where a dead body had been placed, as it has greater power coming from understanding someone [not the women] was evident as “having entered into the tomb,” because it was opened.

From grasping the importance of that statement, rather than thinking women would go into a tomb not owned by either of them, without asking permission first, makes sense that the next segment of words tells of them seeing “a young man,” not inside the tomb, but outside, “sitting on the right.” This then gives the impression that “a young man” was thought to be “an attendant” [the meaning of “neaniskon”], who was employed by the garden cemetery. By stating he was “sitting on the right,” this implies the stone had been rolled away, to the left. A “sitting” position [from “kathēmenon”] can even be a statement of “dwelling” or “residence,” implying the “attendant” was under a canopy, or tabernacle.

The next segment of words, separated by comma marks, says this “attendant” was “clothed in a robe white.” Here, the symbolism of “white” needs to be seen as a statement of “purity.” The Greek word “leukēn” can mean, “bright, brilliant,” implying dazzling white. When this is combined with the prior statement of “on the right,” where the word “dexiois” equally can translate as “the right hand,” this becomes descriptive of Jesus’s soul, which has ascended to the Father and sitting at the right hand of Yahweh. Seeing this, the word “sitting” can now be read as “enthroned.” This makes the reading from John [as explained in my commentary about that] be supported as to when Mary Magdalene was told by Jesus [who she thought was the gardener] being told, “Not me appearance.”

In the NRSV translation that adds, “and they were amazed,” this segment of words is begun by the word “kai,” signifying importance must be seen in what was witnessed. The “kai” leads to one word in Greek, which is “exethambēthēsan,” which makes the important statement: “they were greatly amazed.” Here, again, there is a superlative used [embedded in the usage applied normally to the root word “ekthambeó”], which elevates this means the women suddenly felt as if somehow in the presence of God, such that their “amazement” was actually “great fear.”

In Luke’s version of this event, two angels were said to have been seen, such that he wrote: “In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground.” While not written here in Mark that they bowed down, one can expect the women felt such a strong presence before them [unnatural and quite holy] that they would have prostrated themselves out of fear.

This state of being is then confirmed when Mark is shown to have written in verse 6, “But he said to them, “Do not be alarmed; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised; he is not here. Look, there is the place they laid him.” Keeping in mind that no words have been exchanged between the women and the “attendant” or “young man,” it is not clear that the one in a robe bright knew the hearts and minds of the women. From that source of divine knowledge was spoken a series of segments that are missing important signs that keep the reader of the NRSV from taking hold of.

To best grasp this, I will not do as before and break down the segments of words, complete with the correct punctuation, and literally translate the Greek into English. What was said goes like this:

“Not be terrorized” .

“Jesus you seek” ,

“the Nazarene” ,

“this one having been crucified” .

“he is risen” !

“not being here” !

“behold the place where they laid him” .

Because John wrote of Jesus speaking to Mary Magdalene, one must see this “young man” as the spirit [or soul] of Jesus, as an apparition. Rather than being a physical body, as would later appear in the upper room, the appearance of a young man makes the soul of Jesus take on the appearance of Adam, the Son of God, made by His hand. Therefore, just as John wrote that Mary thought Jesus was the gardener [knowing it was Jesus, but not the man], that same entity has just spoken.

In the first segment, the capitalized Greek word “Mē” is written, importantly stating “Not.” This then leads to the word “ekthambeisthe,” which was similarly stated as how the women felt fear and fell down. The power of “Not” is then less about being a spoken word, but a presence that spoke to the women, such that the fear they had felt from seeing holiness before them suddenly ceased being. Because these two words end simply with a period mark, there is no sense of command that should be read into words spoken, but one should see that just as suddenly as the women felt weak and meaningless, they stopped and felt secure enough to stand up or kneel before this presence in white.

The next three segments are broken into important mind-reading steps, such that all three women were thinking the same things, all of which were known by the soul of Jesus, married with the Holy Spirit and therefore one with the Father. In the segments that says, “Jesus you seek” [from “Iēsoun zēteite”], here is found the capitalization of the name “Jesus.” Returning to the previous section where I explained several names presented in verse 1, the meaning here now bears the same translation presentation. Thus, first stated is “Yahweh Will Save you seek.” That becomes the knowledge of Yahweh reading their hearts and minds, saying they sought salvation through Jesus.

When next is said, “the Nazarene” [from “ton Nazarēnon”], the capitalization of “Nazarene” brings out the name meaning [of a place, Abarim Publications] “One Of The Scattering.” While this statement can go quite deep in explanation [which I will sidestep for now], the point of this should be seen as knowledge that Jesus was born of Mary [there before this “young man”] in Bethlehem, not Nazareth. The use of “Nazarene” then speaks of Jesus as human, while also become spiritually elevated as one of Yahweh’s spiritual seeds sown on earth, as the hand of God spreading holy seeds upon Israel.

The next segment then knows the three women stayed vigilantly at the cross upon which Jesus of Nazareth was crucified and taken down dead. The reason the women had left so early in the morning to get to the cemetery was because they witnessed that death and wanted to care for the corpse. They wanted to pour olive oil with sweet fragrances only last time upon his face and say prayers of lament for him.

Then, the next segment begins a new line of though, following a period mark. It ends with an exclamation point. The word exclaimed is “ēgerthē,” which is the third person aorist passive indicative form of the verb “egeírō,” which is translated as “he is aroused, awakened, risen.” The third person is assumed to be “he,” but because the soul of Jesus is then the one speaking, and because the first person singular is not used, a better translation would be “it is risen.” The “it” would be the soul, and the use of “awakened” or “aroused” attests to Jesus saying about Lazarus (on the other side of the Jordan), “Lazarus is only sleeping,” Lazarus likewise was in need of “raising, arousing, awakening” from the sleep that is death. A body never has life without a soul, thus a body is always asleep; but, a soul never dies, as it is always awake, but in need of a body if not saved from death.

To fully understand the impact of “it is risen,” Jesus was not standing physically before the women. The brilliance of his “robe” means he was observed in a transmissional state of being, just as Peter, James and John saw Jesus “transfigured” along with Moses and Elijah. The soul of Jesus spoke to the women, saying “I am risen” to where I am seated at the right hand of God, but you can see me as an apparition now. Later, you will have my body before you as you wished, when you came early in the morning to here.

This is then confirmed in the next segment of words that state, “not being here,” ended with an exclamation point. The “being” of all living creatures is the soul in the flesh. Just as Jesus would ascend in the flesh on the forty-ninth day [day before Pentecost], and just as Elijah ascended in the flesh before Elisha, the “being” [from “estin,” a form of “eimi”] that was recognized as Jesus of Nazareth was not available at that time.

Thus, verse 6 concludes with the soul of Jesus telling the women, “behold the place where they laid him.” That becomes an invitation to peer into the tomb and see for themselves it was empty [except some linen wrappings and coverings], which acts to inform the reader that none had entered the tomb to look around.

Verse 7 then has the soul of Jesus tell them, “But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you.” In this, the exception [“but”] says seeing nothing in the tomb means nothing, because the body of Jesus has left the plane of the earth. This them speaks symbolically to the women [and Peter and John if there by then], saying, “enter your own tombs of self-ego death, so you too can “go” the same place as went Jesus. It says Jesus will “go” to “tell his disciples” after you “go.”

After a comma mark about telling the disciples, one finds another usage of “kai,” which shows the importance of specifically naming Peter and the place Galilee. In addition is the capitalization of “Proagei,” which means “It leads forward.” Again, the presence of capitalized names makes it important to see the root meaning of the name imposed into what was stated.

“Peter” – “Rock” or “Stone”

“Galilee” – “Rolling”

Simply from seeing the two names bring importance to “Stone” and “Rolling,” where the women had just arrived to find a massive stone rolled away, the instruction can now be read as: “this Stone that It leads before you towards these Rolling.” Amazingly, this statement reflects back on Jesus knowing all about the unwillingness of Peter to come to the tomb, having nothing pertinent to do with talking about Galilee [the region where the disciples lived]. The capitalization of “Proagei” becomes an important statement about “It,” as the third person present indicative, meaning the Holy Spirit. That becomes the “Leader” that will become the same power “Rolling” away the “Stone” covering their tombs, after they submit them to Yahweh and become Jesus reborn.

The last two segments of verse 7 place focus on “there you will see him, just as he told you.” The use of “there” seems to mean “Galilee,” but when the name meaning spiritually says “Rolling,” “there” then becomes a place in the future, when the Holy Spirit will allow one’s eyes to open and “see” the truth as Jesus had seen. That place in the future will then be one prepared in the spiritual realm, as a room within the Father’s house. It will mean when all the things taught by Jesus will be understood perfectly and a soul will have come to know Yahweh personally.

Finally, verse 8 states, “So they went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.” Here, rather than “So,” this last verse begins with another capitalized “Kai,” signaling it to be most important to grasp properly. This word leads to one word, “exelthousai,” which has been used similarly twice before, meaning “having gone out” or “having come out.” This importance is spiritually realized to be the whole experience of a glowing white presence speaking to them telepathically, as if it knew them personally. That becomes a n impact statement about Jesus having come out of the tomb to greet his relatives and loved ones, not looking like him and making them all fear God, while having their hearts warmed at the same time.

The next segment of word says, “having fled from the tomb.” This has the dual meaning [minimally] of saying they all ran away from the cemetery, returning to where they stayed quickly, while also saying deep within their souls they all knew they had escaped the fear of death, which is symbolized by the tomb.

The next segment says that before this moment they “had seized for them trembling,” meaning they feared death tremendously. That past sense of fear had been removed. Thus, the next word is set out by the use of “kai” internally in this segment of words. The “kai” states the importance of them having “amazement,” where the deeper meaning of “ekstasis” [the root for ecstatic] says they were overcome by a “trance-like state of being.” The fears they once let lead them had become disconnected, which was in itself bewildering.

The last two segments then say, “kai to no one nothing was said ; they had reverence for.” This says none of them had been told to go tell the disciples what they had seen, as they had seen nothing – the absence of what they expected to see. What the soul of Jesus had told them prior was to speak as the disciples of Jesus had been taught to speak. There was nothing they could say that Jesus had not already said, preparing them all for this time coming. Thus, they said nothing to nobody because they revered the experience and had faith everything would be better soon.

As a short Gospel reading selection for Easter Sunday, it should be seen how much can unfold from only eight verses. The depth of understanding that comes from this selection is tremendous, while on the surface it seems other Gospel selections say more. The use of names in this selection, just like in that from John, becomes powerful; but few will ever see that or point it out so others can see it. Few will stand firm and say the three Marys saw Jesus. Many will be looking for something to happen in Galilee. This all become capable of being discerned, when one knows a divine system of language is in play, but most people are blinded by the syntax of English and paraphrases dilute the truth, so no one is fluent in the language of God.

As the first Sunday in the Easter season, when it is most important to see the mandatory readings from Acts are telling Christians it is not enough to meekly believe, but one must be prepared for ministry and the works of faith, few have teachers leading the seekers to that goal. At one time the Church knew this was important, setting up a system that is inspired by Yahweh; but over time that knowledge became lost. It is time to rekindle that Spirit and be prepared by the Word of Jesus Christ to return Christianity to what it is meant to be.

John, Language, Teaching

John 20:1-18 – Jesus appears as the gardener

January 20, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene came to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the tomb. So she ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.” Then Peter and the other disciple set out and went toward the tomb. The two were running together, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. He bent down to look in and saw the linen wrappings lying there, but he did not go in. Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen wrappings lying there, and the cloth that had been on Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen wrappings but rolled up in a place by itself. Then the other disciple, who reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed; for as yet they did not understand the scripture, that he must rise from the dead. Then the disciples returned to their homes.

But Mary stood weeping outside the tomb. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb; and she saw two angels in white, sitting where the body of Jesus had been lying, one at the head and the other at the feet. They said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping?” She said to them, “They have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid him.” When she had said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not know that it was Jesus. Jesus said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you looking for?” Supposing him to be the gardener, she said to him, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.” Jesus said to her, “Mary!” She turned and said to him in Hebrew, “Rabbouni!” (which means Teacher). Jesus said to her, “Do not hold on to me, because I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” Mary Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, “I have seen the Lord”; and she told them that he had said these things to her.

——————–

This is one of the two Gospel selection possible to be read aloud on Easter Sunday, Year B principal service, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. While the Track 1 and Track 2 options that become vogue during the Ordinary season after Pentecost, one might presume that choosing the mandatory Acts 10 reading as the choice over the Old Testament reading from Isaiah 25 would lean one towards a Gospel reading from Mark. This reading from John seems like it would be chosen if the mandatory Acts selection were to override the Epistle reading from 1 Corinthians 15. Whichever the case [knowing Episcopalians never have the time to excessively read Scripture, preach about its meaning briefly, and then allow a full-pledged discussion that would lead anyone towards faith in Yahweh], something on the schedule will not be read and something will. When one realizes this reading from John is an option in every year of the Episcopal lectionary cycle [A, B, and C], it has a chance to be read every year. The option of Mark 15, however, is now or never. The days when someone Episcopalian asked, “Want to study more from the Bible?” and anybody said, “Yes” are long gone.

The appearance of this reading from John gives the impression it tells two stories, one of Peter and another disciple and another of Mary Magdalene. In reality it tells of three parts, where the first part is only verse 1. That first verse is John’s assessment of the eight verses that are read in Mark 16:1-8 [the alternate Gospel choice]. Matthew and Luke also wrote about this event, with both adding details that adds to the depth of Jesus being found risen. Still, the scope of Mark, Matthew and Luke does not go beyond John 20:1-10. This makes the part of John’s story about Mary Magdalene seeing Jesus unique and above and beyond what the others tell.

In the NRSV translation, verse 1 begins by stating, “Early on the first day of the week.” While this is heard and quickly understood as being Sunday, there is unseen significance in John writing this. The Jews were limited in how far they could travel outside the city on the Sabbath. The end of John 19 tells of Jesus being prepared for burial and then placed in the bomb of Joseph Arimathea, with that taking place on “the day of preparation,” which means Friday, the day before the Sabbath. This means Jesus was placed in the tomb before 6:00 PM, when the Sabbath technically began, so everyone could go to a place to observe the Sabbath. There they would be restricted as to how far they could walk, until 6:00 AM on Sunday, meaning thirty-six hours have passed since Jesus was placed in that tomb.

In actuality, the literal translation of the Greek John wrote says, “This next one of the sabbath.” In that, the word “Tē” is capitalized, which means more than that being the first word of a new chapter. Capitalization shows importance, such that divine meaning shines on those words capitalized. The word written is the feminine dative article, which normally states “the.” However, as “This” (an acceptable alternate translation), the capitalization says John is writing divinely, so “This” alerts the reader the Word of Yahweh according to John is continuing here. That is then followed by the word “de,” which is often not translated, but means “next, on top of this, or moreover.” Therefore, the first two words are importantly announcing the next divine occurrence in the story of Jesus.

The word “mia” means “one.” In Hebrew, “the first day” is written “yom echad.” That really only says “day one.” By John writing “mia” it has been assumed that “day” was implied. While that assumption can be correct, it is not the only way to read the number “one,” following the importance of “This” which follows as “next” in the story of Jesus. The number “one” becomes a new “one” of importance, which follows an older “one” of importance.

To then find the Greek word “tōn” written, which is the genitive plural form of the article “the,” this becomes translated as “of the.” As a case stating possession, “one” is “of” that which then follows. Still, rather than use the generality of “the,” it is again worthwhile to translate “tōn” as “of this.” This leads one to see “one” as the “next This of” value.

This is where the word “sabbatōn” is written, which translates as “sabbath.” Because the Greek is not capitalized, the assumption is “seventh” refers to the number of days in a “week,” so the translators see John stating “on the first day of the week.” Again, while that assumption can be seen as correct, it again becomes too limiting, especially when this series of words began with a capitalize “This,” signaling the reader to see what “This” is. What this word means, in the lower-case spelling, is a new sabbath [seventh day, a day made holy by God] is being determined from this event. Therefore, John wrote divinely, “This next one of the sabbath,” meaning Sunday will become the new Sabbath, because of the events about to unfold.

The NRSV translation then shows written, “while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene came to the tomb.” This is a paraphrase of what was actually written. The Greek literally states, “Mary the Magdalene comes early , dark still it being , to the tomb”. By paraphrasing this, it appears that John’s sole focus was on one woman, “Mary Magdalene.” This is translated from the Greek written: “Maria hē Magdalēnē.” In that, two capitalized words [names] are written, with capitalization a signal of divine importance, such that two statements of divine importance are states as “Mary” and “Magdalene.” When the Greek “ἡ” is seen as the feminine normative article [as “the”], it too can be translated as saying “this.” By realizing that, the capitalization of “Maria” is stating the woman’s name “Mary” is importantly stated, without any further clarification as to which or how many going by the name “Mary” are now the focus of John. When that possibility of multiple people being named, all being “Mary,” John is not excluding Mary the mother of Jesus, nor Mary Salome. It includes Mary Magdalene, simply as “Maria,” because she too was a “Mary.” It is then from that name that John attached the feminine normative article “ἡ,” which then separated from three women name Mary, as “this Magdalene.”

The word “comes” [from “erchetai”] is stated in the third person singular present, meaning John’s focus is now only on the one Mary, who was differentiated from the others of the same name as “Magdalene.” That names means “Of The Tower,” which should now draw closer attention, as a capitalized name of divine meaning [as it should every time it is written]. In this, the name should not be seen simply as some weakly understood name of a place from where Mary came, as the names of places demand knowing the root meaning of that naming. Thus, John is singling out Mary Magdalene because she reflected a “tower” among the followers of Jesus.

The symbolism of a tower is confinement, in the sense “Magdalene” needs to be seen as a divine statement of one [in this case, feminine] who has submitted self-ego unto a higher power, but feels trapped by that commitment. Instead of the name being an indication of one filled with the Holy Spirit and having become a wife to Yahweh, it reflects one who has been submitted [sacrificed by others] to a commitment in marriage, for holy purposes, but not wholly of one’s own choice. For those who have pondered the idea that there was a relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, seeing this name of distinction in this light makes it easy to see such a relationship would have been arranged and Mary was not completely fulfilled by her submission to Jesus, or to an Essene religious belief system, because she was placed in a “tower” of responsibility [at a young age], never allowed the complete freedom to know life as a woman.

It is then from this grasp of the name “Magdalene” that John wrote she “comes early.” This is where the Greek word “prōi,” rather than as the first word shown in the paraphrase. The Greek implies a timeframe that is “early in the morning” or “at dawn.” Again, while this clearly leads one to assume John was referring to “early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark,” that single understanding misses the importance of two names being presented. A deeper meaning surfaces, from seeing “Magdalene” as not only relative to one Mary, but to all three named Mary. They were similarly placed in “towers” of commitment at a young age [see the story of Gabriel and Mary at sixteen], where that “early in life” commitment was what led them to go prepare the body of Jesus for moving to the family tomb [see the story of Lazarus].

Following a comma mark, separating the word stating “early in the morning,” John wrote “dark still it being” [“skotias eti ousēs”]. Set apart by comma marks, those three words can be seen as standing alone in meaning, “spiritual darkness even now exists,” where John was making a statement about those in the “tower” of religious devotion still being unfulfilled. This can be better seen when one realizes “at dawn” [the meaning of “prōi”] is when light of the sun has reached the horizon. While “darkness” means the sun has not fully risen, the Jewish clock begins the “morning hour” at 6:00 AM. This timing is relative to sunrise, as well as denoting when the Sabbath officially ended and the first day began. Thus, women would be less likely to walk in darkness, and more as soon as sunrise made a trip of commitment safe in morning light.

When John then wrote the next segment of words that say, “to the tomb” [“eis to mnēmeion”], here the dual meaning says women named Mary went to the tomb where Jesus’ body had been laid the prior Friday, while also being a statement about the commitment made by the three women servants. They were prepared to go to their tombs in the darkness they were surround by, in the “Tower.”

It is at this point, following a comma mark, that John wrote the word “kai,” which signals the reader to pay close attention to the following segment of words. Here, John wrote [literally translated]: “she sees the stone having been removed from the tomb.” Once again, there can be found dual meaning coming from these words, which the use of “kai” says to look for. More than simply seeing ahead to the garden where the tomb is, and more than seeing the round stone used to seal the tomb has been rolled away, the deeper meaning speaks spiritually. As such, the sight become spiritual perception, which is the future of Mary [each of the three] perceived to lead to her [their] death[s] is because Jesus was the “cornerstone” thought to be the escape from the “Tower.” Instead, the darkness of captivity in a mortal body committed to serve Yahweh blindly is thinking Jesus’ death ends that idea.

The happy ending to this first verse of John is then by “seeing the stone” of Jesus “having been removed from the tomb.” That becomes an important prophecy [the use of “kai”] that foretells all has not been lost, as thought. Simply by seeing the tomb’s doorway opened becomes the promise that all is not lost. While the three Marys did not know this, this says their hearts began beating faster.

Verse 2 then tells, “So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!” At this point after realizing John did not exclude anyone named “Mary” from having the same vision of the tomb of Joseph Arimathea being opened, the immediate reaction would not be someone robbed the tomb, and certainly not that Jesus had risen like promised, but that the tomb was indeed a loaner. The women had left early to get there to prepare the body for moving. Seeing it opened would have immediately made the women thin, “Oh my! The people coming to remove Jesus’ body have already beat us here and taken the body!” It is from that panic that the two older women would have said to the younger Mary, “Run and get help!”

It is also worth thinking about where the women had walked from and Mary was now running back to. It is not written where anyone stayed, beyond the known upper room in the Essene Quarter of Jerusalem. It is unlikely that the upper room would become a place of residence for all of Jesus’ followers, as everyone had their families in or near Jerusalem for the Passover feast and the festival of the Unleavened Bread, which began on Friday and ended the day before, on the Sabbath [when Jesus was actually risen, after 72 hours of death]. I have a theory about this place.

Because Joseph of Arimathea was a secret disciple of Jesus, secret because he [like Nicodemus] was a member of the Sanhedrin, he had a place of residence just outside the wall of Jerusalem, not far from where the garden was that he had a tomb newly hewn. Not only did Joseph allow the body of Jesus be placed in his tomb, but Joseph allowed the family of Jesus to stay at his place, knowing that would make it easier on the family to move Jesus’ body to Bethany on Sunday [the first day of the week]. This would also be where Peter stayed, which would deem him a cousin of Jesus, therefore family.

When John wrote, “the other disciple, the one Jesus loved,” the translation of “the other disciple” [from “ton allon mathētēn”] is misleading. The person being identified is John himself, not naming himself directly, because at that time John was not an adult male. He was a child. He was family, based on his writing, “the one who Jesus loved,” just as was Mary Magdalene. This means the better translation of those three words is as, “this different pupil.” The one Jesus loved was taught by Jesus as his son, meaning Mary was his mother. This arrangement means Jesus was married to Mary, thus the symbolism of “Magdalene” meaning “Of The Tower.”

One should see how John had been at the execution of his father and stayed to watch the whole event with his mother and grandmother [among other women and some uncles]. Peter went and hid, along with the other disciples, making his denials more meaningful, when seen as a relative who denied being one of Jesus’ followers. John wrote about those denials, because Peter stayed with his nephew, who needed to see what was happening to his father. In Mark’s Gospel [the author of Peter’s story], John was identified on the night of Jesus’ arrest as “A young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment, was following Jesus. When they seized him, he fled naked, leaving his garment behind.” (Mark 14:51-52) Rather than “a young man” the text says, “a certain youth,” which was young John.

This says that Peter had taken up the responsibility of being the father figure of John, staying with the family at that time of need, knowing it was safe at the home of Joseph. This means that Mary Magdalene ran as a woman in her late twenties or early thirties, as well as a woman of that age could run in dress-like clothing. She first told “Simon Peter” and then she told her son John, telling both “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!”

This was heard by both Peter and John as a call to immediately respond, which they did. John then wrote, “So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in.” (John 20:3-5) Here, it becomes clear that John is more agile than Peter and able to run faster, taking shortcuts that an adult male could not take. Still, after beating Peter to the tomb and finding it open, like his mother had said, he waited for Peter. That is a clear sign that John was a child and not privileged to make adult decisions. Even after John said Peter entered the tomb, John did not enter until authorized by Peter. Peter, as an adult, wanted to make sure nothing foul had been done to the body of Jesus, which would have been traumatizing for his son to see his father’s body in that way.

When John wrote, “Simon Peter came along behind him and went straight into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, as well as the cloth that had been wrapped around Jesus’ head. The cloth was still lying in its place, separate from the linen,” (John 20:6-7) this speaks of the shroud placed around the body of Jesus the previous Friday evening [of day].

In John’s nineteenth chapter, he wrote that Joseph of Arimathea “was accompanied by Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds.” While nothing is written that says the whole amount of embalming ointments and fragrant wood lotions were used; but one would think the face covering and shroud would have reeked of dead body mixed with sweet perfumes. The rolled up face cloth and the shroud would have had to have a scent to them, but nothing is written about that detail.

I believe that so much was taken by Nicodemus because the Temple elite feared some zealot [they called the Essenes that a lot] would come and try to steal the body of Jesus and say he rose from death, but then ran away. Matthew wrote of the guards placed around the tomb to make sure that did not happen. Thus, one can assume that Nicodemus carried with him so much strong dead body perfumes, not so much to anoint Jesus’ body with sweet smells, but to get some of that identifying scent on any would-be body thief. Still, because John did not write about a strong odor [nor anyone else], it becomes safe to assume that God [His angels] made sure there was no smell of death or perfume present.

In verse 10 the NRSV shows, “Then the disciples went back to where they were staying.” There is more to this than is shown. The literal Greek states, “Returned therefore back with themselves these disciples.” While this can be read as John simply saying, “Peter and John returned to where they were staying,” that misses the importance of the capitalization of “Apēlthon,” which means, “Returned, Arrived, or Followed,” where the divine elevation says Jesus not being found in his tomb, with the linens folded and rolled means “Jesus has risen.” He is “therefore back with these disciples,” just like old times between “themselves.”

It is at this point that the duality of verse 10 means both, in the sense that Mary Magdalene has returned to the tomb. Peter goes back to find the other disciples and tell them what he found. John, seeing his mother is there, stays with her, especially since she is crying and peering into the tomb. Just like a child not being able to make decisions left for men to make, neither could Mary Magdalene simply walk inside a tomb she did not own. By John staying, he could write about what took place next as a firsthand eyewitness. Had he returned with Peter, he would be telling something Mary told to him alone [a sign of a mother speaking to a son]. Here also, one is able to see how the other Mary women had never left. They had remained, most likely in prayer, arising to join Mary Magdalene when she returned and after Peter had left. This makes Luke’s account [mother Mary’s story] of “two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them.” This is no different than John writing that “saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus’ body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot.” (Luke 24:4)

While the other Mary women would have seen the same “two angels,” it makes sense that the other two Marys left after being told, “Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: ‘The Son of Man must be delivered over to the hands of sinners, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.” (Luke 24:5-7) It would have been the dawning that Jesus said he would rise after three days that sent those two off to tell the others what they remembered. That would have left Mary Magdalene and John alone at the empty tomb.

Still distraught because she does not know where the body of her husband is, even if he has risen, this is when a figure comes to Mary and asks her why she is still crying. Here, John wrote, “Thinking he was the gardener, she said, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him.” This needs to be heard with ears that understand she too heard Jesus say he would die and be raised after three days, but Jesus never said what state of life raised that would be. She probably thought Jesus was barely alive, in need of medical attention, having seen all the damages done to his body the past week. To see someone obviously not in need of medical attention made Mary see Jesus as someone else.

When John wrote, “Thinking he was the gardener,” he began that series of words with the single capitalized word “Ekeinē,” which says, “She.” As the feminine normative singular of “That one,” the proper substitute is “She.” Following the question asked, “Whom do you seek?” the divine elevation as the female companion of Jesus, “She” being “That one” who should be seeking her husband be the “Wife.” The importance of that one word statement [between a question mark and a comma mark] becomes why “She” began “thinking [Jesus] is the gardener.” This becomes a connection between Jesus and Mary as that same connection between Adam and Eve, where Adam was the gardener of Eden. In this case, “thinking” [from “dokousa”] becomes a spiritual flashback, of Freudian proportions.

John then wrote, “Jesus said to her, “Mary.”’ In that, “Mariam” is written, unlike the “Maria” of verse 1. For an unrecognized figure to speak the name of Mary, perhaps in a close personal ‘pet name’ way, it was the voice that Mary recognized. It might have even been the cemetery gardener in whom the soul of Jesus had entered and spoke, or it might have been an apparition [like the two angels or men dressed in gleaming white] that was Adam. Either way, the voice of Jesus was heard speaking lovingly to Mary, as there was no shouting her name, as if a call for her attention.

When Mary recognized her name spoken by Jesus, she called him “Rabbouni,” which John clarified meant “Teacher.” Both words are capitalized, giving them both divine essence. Both “Rabbouni” and “Didaskale” mean the same as “Master” or “Teacher,” while “Rabbouni” can mean “Rabbi,” as a clerical title. This response can mean that Mary was also a “disciple” or “pupil” of Jesus, but the divine meaning says the mind of Mary was flashing back to her soul’s time in Eden, where Adam loving called he “woman” or “wife” and she always responded, “My Master.” That means Mary responded as the wife of Jesus. Still, the highest meaning of that says the soul of Mary was remembering the Son of God, from whose DNA ribs she had been made, making the body of Jesus be her “Master” copy.

This understanding then leads one to read John write, “Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” Here, the Greek importantly states, “Me mou haptou,” where the capitalization of “Me” places divine relevance of “Not.” To follow that with “me,” which is a statement of “being,” Jesus is importantly telling Mary that he is “Not Adam,” thus he is “Not” her biological twin standing before her, as that “Master.” Neither is the one standing before Mary Jesus, as the voice is “Not me” in that body. This makes the use of “haptou” go beyond a command not to touch, such that the word means “perceive.” This means Jesus appeared as something akin to a hologram or a ghost, which could only be perceived, bit not touched.

John actually wrote that Jesus told Mary, “not yet for I have ascended to the Father,” which says the body of Jesus is “not yet” back,” with his spiritual appearance being “I have ascended to the Father.” There is nothing that Mary could do to keep Jesus from doing what God would have Jesus do, so there is nothing about physical touching Jesus that would keep him from ascending to the Father [see Thomas sticking his fingers in the wounds of Jesus to grasp that point]. It had no sexual connotations, as if Mary wanted to kiss and hug someone who sounded like Jesus, but looked like a gardener. The translation of “touch” is better left alone, going with “to grasp with the senses, apprehend, perceive.” (Wiktionary)

In this set of instructions given to Mary, where the capitalized “Patera” [“Father”] is found written three times [repetition is important] and “Theon” [“God”] is written twice, says Mary was the perfect wife for Jesus, as her soul was that of Eve [not her actual name, if she had an actual name]. Thus, the uses of Father and God apply to the Father of both Adam and Eve, who were both born as immortals, having to sin to become mortal and be sent to teach the world about Yahweh – “God.”

In that set of instruction is the use of “brothers,” which should not be read as the sons of Mother Mary, sons of Joseph. Here, the use of “adelphous” means all of those disciples who would become Apostles. In that transformation, they too would become Sons of the Father, whose God would be their God too. For that to happen, they would all need to be rebirths of Jesus, all as Yahweh’s Anointed Ones, so as Sons Yahweh would be their Father and as Jesus they would all become “brothers of me” [“adelphous mou”].

With all that understood as taking place in the cemetery where Joseph of Arimathea had a tomb, John wrote, “Mary Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, “I have seen the Lord”; and she told them that he had said these things to her.” In that, Mary spoke the capitalized words “Heōraka” and “Kyrion.” By seeing capitalization brings about a divine meaning, higher than normal spoken language conveys, she said, “I have perceived this Master.” She did not say she saw Jesus, as his body was still missing. Therefore Mary uttered a prophecy of what would happen on Pentecost, saying “I have perceived Jesus as the Lord over all of us here.” Just as Eve saw Adam as her Master copy, such that she was in Adam and Adam was in her, the same future awaited the disciples, where Jesus would be in them and they would be in Jesus.

As a Gospel selection for Easter Sunday, the depth of this interpretation shows why there should be no restriction of one or two Gospel rendition of the first Easter Sunday, but a desire by all who are true Christians to make it clear to all seeking to be come true Christians how Yahweh speaks through His prophets … like Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John et al. Rather than cut out one reading, to accommodate a mandatory Acts reading, true Christians should have the desire to take all the readings into their homes and pray to God for inspiration to see the truth and more firmly have true faith.

Isaiah, Language, Teaching

Isaiah 25:6-9 – Eternal life means death being swallowed up forever

January 20, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

On this mountain the Lord of hosts will make for all peoples

a feast of rich food, a feast of well-aged wines,

of rich food filled with marrow, of well-aged wines strained clear.

And he will destroy on this mountain

the shroud that is cast over all peoples,

the sheet that is spread over all nations;

he will swallow up death forever.

Then the Lord God will wipe away the tears from all faces,

and the disgrace of his people he will take away from all the earth,

for the Lord has spoken.

It will be said on that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, so that he might save us.

This is the Lord for whom we have waited;

let us be glad and rejoice in his salvation.

——————–

Beginning with Easter Sunday and lasting throughout the season of Easter (including Pentecost Sunday), the standard reading choices change. Instead of a prescribed Old Testament reading, followed by a Psalm and then Epistle reading, the choices are deemed: First Lesson, Psalm, and New Testament. In this special set-up for the Easter Season, mandatory readings from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles is the reason. One reading from Acts will be selected each Sunday, which can either replace the Old Testament reading or it can replace the Epistle reading. Whichever position the reading from Acts takes, the other will either be from the Old Testament or an Epistle. This change should be seen as a statement each Sunday during the period representative of the risen Lord Jesus preparing his disciples for the times to come, when being transformed from a death of the old self into the new representation of God’s Christ becomes a time to act as Yahweh commands one to act.

In the event that the reading from Acts is not chosen to be the First Lesson, this reading selection from Isaiah 25 will be the Old Testament choice to be read aloud on Easter Sunday, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. It will then precede the singing of verses from Psalm 118, which includes the verse, “I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the Lord.” That would then lead to the reading from Acts, where Peter told Cornelius, “[The risen Jesus] commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one ordained by God as judge of the living and the dead.” That then leads to a Gospel reading from Mark, which tells of the women of Jesus going to his tomb and finding the tomb opened and “a young man, dressed in a white robe, sitting on the right side.”

[Note: The season of Easter also introduces Track 1 and Track 2 choices for the Gospel reading. While such options are primarily for the Ordinary season after Pentecost – when acts of apostles become the norm of divine ministry – the same assumption can be gathered here. The reading selection from Mark is listed second, which implies it should be read along with the second option for the First Lesson, which is the Isaiah reading. If the Acts reading is chosen, then the Epistle from 1 Corinthians would be read, followed by a similar reading of Jesus found risen in John’s Gospel.]

In these four verses from Isaiah’ twenty-fifth chapter, four times are found the word “Lord” translated. Each of those times the word “Yahweh” is written. Twice the capitalized word “God” is found, with the first actually being “ă·ḏō·nāy” (“adonay”) and the second “’ĕ·lō·hê·nū” (“elohim”), which are general statements of “lord” and “gods.” Because Hebrew actually has no capital letters in its alphabet, it is translations that use capitalizations to personify and elevate a word to divine status. This can be seen as an acceptable practice for the name of God being equivaled to Yahweh. However, the practice of changing “Yahweh” to “Lord,” and the changing of the plural word “elohim” to the singular, as “God,” is misleading and wrong. It becomes too easy for lost sheep calling themselves “Christians” to read “Lord” and think, “This is a prophecy of Jesus,” without ever coming to know that Yahweh was indeed the Lord of Jesus.

With that understood, verse 6 begins by stating, “On this mountain the Lord of hosts will make for all peoples.” Here, the word “mountain” and its repeat in verse 7, can be read as that of Mount Moriah, upon which the Temple of Jerusalem [Solomon’s Temple] was built. The literal translation of the Hebrew written says, “and will make Yahweh of hosts for all people mountain this a feast of choice pieces”. While Jerusalem rests upon seven hills (called mounts), the greater meaning comes from seeing Isaiah being led by Yahweh, as a “mountain” of God’s strength in the flesh, such that Isaiah is only one of a “host” [from “tsaba” meaning “army”] of such “mountains” spread to “all peoples.”

The translations that have Isaiah singing, “a feast of rich food, a feast of well-aged wines, of rich food filled with marrow, of well-aged wines strained clear,” gives the impression that Yahweh will reward His servants with fine dining and drinking. Instead, “a feast of rich food” is relative to those people made into mountains of God. They will become the “fat” [from “shemen,” translated as “rich food” or “choice pieces”] that will be served to the world, as that coming from them having sacrificed their selves [souls] to become God’s gift of the Passover feast.

This makes a “feast of well-aged wines” become those who bring with them the “blood of Christ,” which means the “well-aged wine” that is the Holy Spirit, poured out by Yahweh, into the vessels that are His Sons [not restricted to only male human beings]. It makes “the rich food filled with marrow” be the explanations of truth that comes from the bones of Scripture, sweet truth hidden deep within. It makes the “well-aged wines strained clear” be the removal of all misconstructions and errors of reasoning [also stemming from bad translations], so the Holy Spirit can be consumed by those led to one of Yahweh’s saints.

By seeing this element of a prophecy that promises the coming of a time when Christianity would mean many people will be filled with Yahweh’s Holy Spirit and sent to all parts of the world to let other seekers know the truth and also be saved, verse 7 is then translated to say, “And he will destroy on this mountain the shroud that is cast over all peoples, the sheet that is spread over all nations.” While that translation clearly paints a picture of destroying that which blocked so many from being told the truth of Scripture, there is deeper truth that is exposed from closer examination of the Hebrew written.

The repeating of “mountain,” which has to be seen as both Jerusalem [the collective known as Judaism today] and the individual whose soul has been saved. As an individual, the “mountain” that connects both collective and individual is Yahweh. Thus, that means “he will destroy on this mountain” [where “ū·ḇil·la‘,” from “bala,” says “he will engulf,” or “swallow up”] both means the end of Judaism [a collective mountain] and the beginning of Christianity [an individual mountain], so only those who allow the “mountain” to be Yahweh survives that flood of Spirit that will be poured out.

This makes “the shroud that is cast over all peoples, the sheet that is spread over all nations” becomes the restrictive way the Jews forbid Gentiles from knowing their God, while also the expansive way Christianity would become the comforter all nations could welcome. Still, the word translated as “shroud” is actually written “pə·nê-hal·lō·wṭ” [from “panim lot”], meaning “face-covering; and, the word translated as “the sheet” is actually written “wə·ham·mas·sê·ḵāh” [from “maccekah”], which is more appropriately read as “a veil,” but can also mean a poured metal mask or “molten image.”

When the translation of “shroud” is used, it becomes a statement of a “face-covering” placed over a body at death, in preparation for burial. This is called a “sudarium.” It is placed under the “tachrichim” or “kittel,” which is symbolic of the canopy used in wedding ceremonies. As a statement of death,” following the “destruction,” the implication is Judaism will cease to have life, but individually born again as Jesus Christ will figuratively die – of self-ego and self-will – so their bodies of flesh have surrendered their souls to Yahweh – in marriage to His Holy Spirit. This is a most important aspect of this prophecy sung by Isaiah that needs to be realized.

Here, again, we find an Old Testament reading that includes the word “paneh,” which means “face.” This, as I have written often prior, becomes relative to the first Commandment, which actually says, “You shall were the face of no other gods before me,” such that the true meaning of a typical memorization of “You shall have no other gods before me” is one must wear the face of Yahweh, in order to become His wife. As I stated before, about the Ten Commandments, those are the agreements of marriage [wedding vows] to which that all potential wives of Yahweh must agree. Judaism wore the face of itself, as a god before Yahweh, breaking that covenant of marriage – therefore death comes to its “mountain.” Individuals who die of self-ego surrender their individual faces, in submission to Yahweh, wearing His holy face.

Your soul must wear this face at Judgment Day or be rejected … once again.

Verse 8 then confirms this imagery of death [made through self-sacrifice] by singing, “he will swallow up death forever. Then the Lord God will wipe away the tears from all faces, and the disgrace of his people he will take away from all the earth, for the Lord has spoken.” Here, again, is found the word “faces” [“panim” is the plural of “paneh”], following the combination os “adonay Yahweh.” In reality, that which will be “wiped away” is “adonay,” which is the “lord” of self, the breath of life given by Yahweh at birth – the “soul.” When the word “adonay” is followed by “Yahweh,” that becomes a statement that the soul has been wiped away from rule over its body of flesh, allowing “Yahweh” that mastery as “lord.” It must be assumed that “Yahweh” alone is Lord of all, thus it is unnecessary to use two words to describe that supremacy. Therefore, having “wiped away self-ego, Yahweh” takes over, so all “tears” of sinful living are dried up, when “Yahweh’s face” is worn by His wives.

The translation of “disgrace” is for the Hebrew word “cherpah,” which bears that intent, as a “reproach.” The same word can also be translated to imply “scorn, contempt, and taunting,” where there is a “rebuke” of those “people” whose “faces” once were [or still were] resisting marriage to Yahweh. This means those who marry God’s Holy Spirit will see their own evils and feel “shame” [another viable translation of “cherpah”], sacrificing their old faces in order to take on the face of Yahweh. As for those who will continue to wear faces that cast “shame” and “contempt” on Yahweh, indirectly through “taunts” against those transformed through figurative deaths, they will be a “disgrace” to Yahweh. Death to them means the condemnation of a mortal life in the flesh, where they commit eternal life suicide. That is the most “disgraceful way to be taken away from the earth.”

Where it is easy to seen how Isaiah threw in some add-ons, such as “for Yahweh has spoken,” that segment of words ends with the Hebrew letter “peh” [or “פ”], which is a mark that denotes the end of a “petuhah,” or a paragraph of statements. I believe that mark intends the readers of Hebrew [who read from left to right] to see that mark as a signal something very truthful has been said [or will be said]. As such, the truth of “Yahweh has spoken” is less about a booming voice coming from heaven commanding Isaiah to make sure everyone heard what he commanded, and more about those who have spoken as Yahweh, like was Isaiah. It will be those who speak in the name of Yahweh that will have died of self and been reborn wearing the face of Yahweh, speaking for Him as His wives.

With that mark seen as ending a paragraph, verse 9 must then be seen as beginning a new line of thought. The translation there says, “It will be said on that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, so that he might save us. This is the Lord for whom we have waited; let us be glad and rejoice in his salvation. This needs to be seen as beginning with a focus set “on that day,” when a wife of Yahweh has begun to speak for Him. Here, the importance is less about when that transformation will take place, as all wives of Yahweh begin new lives that wear His face at many times [all times]. Thus, the element of “day” must be understood as more important as the Word being spoken shines the “light” of truth, so those in darkness can suddenly see.

To grasp that concept firmly, the word translated as, “Lo,” is really written “hin·nêh” or “behold!” This makes a statement that Yahweh speaking will be “seen” by human beings who will be His wives, His spokespeople. When that sight is seen, what is witnessed is “this is our God,” where the reality is the written word “’ĕ·lō·hê·nū,” as His “elohim.” It says beholding Yahweh speaking through a human body of flesh means the “soul” [an eternal “el”] ofthat flesh has married to Yahweh, so that soul becomes one of Yahweh’s little-g “gods.” A soul alone speaks from the brain, but one of Yahweh’s “gods” speaks from the marriage of a soul to God’s Holy Spirit.

When Isaiah is then translated to say, “we have waited for him, so that he might save us. This is the Lord for whom we have waited,” This actually says [from a literal translation of the Hebrew], “this we have waited for him to save us , this Yahweh we have waited for him.” The naming of Yahweh makes it better known that the souls of the people who will be transformed into those who speak for God are those souls who were bridesmaids with lamps filled with oil. It was their keeping the light of truth shining, through prayer to Yahweh to become their husband [again, no human gender should be read into this, as I am talking neuter gender souls, not bodies of flesh], it is they who will have waited for that most holy matrimony. That becomes a statement of faith, based on self-sacrifice and the death of self-ego. It is then that marriage that becomes “saving.

In the final words of this selection, which are translated to say, “let us be glad and rejoice in his salvation,” that repeats the theme of waiting to be saved. Here, both of the word that have been translated as “be glad and rejoice” can be seen to mean a repetition of “rejoicing.” That repetition then reflects the utmost form of gladness that can come upon a body of flesh, making it sing and praise without end. Salvation means the soul has been promised something much greater than a plot of land on earth to call one’s own. It is the soul celebrating a release from the prison that is mortal death in a body of flesh. The rejoicing is a figurative death of self-ego means no physical death yet to come can ever be feared, because that physical death becomes the release of a soul trapped in a human cage, free to fly away and be forever with Yahweh in heaven.

As a reading choice for Easter Sunday, when Jesus is found risen from death, it is important to see oneself as having the same potential for resurrection, as seen in these words Yahweh spoke through His prophet Isaiah. The problem Christianity faces from seeing these words of Yahweh’s prophet is as prophetic of Jesus, and no one else. That become a repeat of the problem the Judeans faced, when Isaiah prophesied, because they had turned away from the God of their ancestor’s marriage, bolding wearing the face of believers in Moses and the Law. Christians [as seen through the wide variety of denominations bearing the name “Christ”] do the same bowing down before Lord Jesus, wearing the face of idolators, none married to Yahweh, none wearing His face, having submitted their own. Jesus is the model for all souls who seek salvation. To have a soul be saved, that soul must be resurrected as the Anointed One [the Christ], who acts and speaks just like Jesus did.

When this reading is read aloud, meaning it has trumped the Epistle reading from 1 Corinthians as the one chosen to present to seekers, it should be explained as the Acts of the Apostles having been prophesied by Isaiah. A good shepherd will choose this reading because it can clearly make points about becoming a wife of Yahweh. A good shepherd will then be one whose self-ego has long been lowered in submission to Yahweh, so Yahweh will speak through him or her, so others can be saved. The way a priest must be judged is on how many hear the truth of light and follow in the path of Jesus, themselves having had their souls become the wives of God.

1 Corinthians, Language, Teaching

1 Corinthians 15:19-26 – All die in Man [Adam] so all will be made alive in divine Anointment by Yahweh as Jesus reborn

January 20, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

[19] If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.

[20] But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have died. [21] For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human being; [22] for as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ. [23] But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. [24] Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power. [25] For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. [26] The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

——————–

This is the optional “New Testament” reading selection to be read aloud on Easter Day (primary service), should the mandatory Acts reading (Acts 10:34-43) take the place of the “First Lesson.” If that is the case, then the Acts reading will include how Peter told Cornelius, “They [the Jews of Jerusalem & Romans] put him [Jesus] to death by hanging him on a tree; but God raised him on the third day and allowed him to appear, not to all the people but to us who were chosen by God as witnesses.” That will be followed by a singing of part of Psalm 118, where David wrote, “Open for me the gates of righteousness; I will enter them; I will offer thanks to Yahweh. “This is the gate of Yahweh; he who is righteous may enter.” The Gospel reading to accompany all others will tell of the arrival at the tomb, early on Sunday, as told by either John (possible all Easter Days, all three Years) or Luke (only possible on Year C Easter Day). John wrote, “Supposing him to be the gardener, she said to him, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.” Jesus said to her, “Mary!”’ Luke wrote, “Peter got up and ran to the tomb; stooping and looking in, he saw the linen cloths by themselves; then he went home, amazed at what had happened.”

Think about it for a moment. Wasn’t Adam living in a Garden called Eden? Wasn’t he then a gardener?

Verses nineteen and twenty were just recently read aloud – on the sixth Sunday after the Epiphany. The fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth Sundays after the Epiphany, in Year C (some years never having so many Sundays after the Epiphany), all come from Paul’s fifteenth chapter of his epistle to the true Christians of Corinth. In that chapter Paul deeply addressed the issue of resurrection; but in doing so, Paul only twice mentioned the name Jesus. He wrote the name Adam three times, while writing “Christ” fifteen times (in fifty-eight verses). It is most important to realize Paul did not witness Jesus risen from a tomb in Jerusalem. His epiphany occurred on the road to Damascus; at which time Saul began to have the soul of Jesus resurrected within his soul, so he understood the truth of this resurrection others experienced (as told in the four Gospels). All knew (thus could write truthfully about) what “resurrection of the dead” truly meant.

Here, it is vital to realize the Greek word “christo” means “anointed one,” where the lack of capitalization means this is a human form of “anointment,” such as oil or water poured or smeared on a forehead of head. A lower-case “anointing” would likewise be a baptism by water, where one’s head is submerged in physical water. Such an “anointing” is significant in symbolic ways; and, that symbolism helps point a soul in a body of flesh towards Yahweh and Jesus. Still, to then capitalize this word (as Paul did), the meaning takes on a divine elevation in meaning, where the “Christ” is one’s soul being divinely “Anointed.” Such an “Anointed” state of being can only come from Yahweh (not a priest who serves Him). Instead of physical water, the “Anointing” is done by Yahweh’s Spirit (which makes one become “Holy” afterwards).

That which is also vital to understand is Paul not using the word “Christo” as a replacement word for “Jesus,” as if ‘Jesus Christ’ were one entity, incapable of being more. That is two divinely elevated words, each with its own divinely elevated meaning. Paul did not write “Christ” as a reference to Jesus, as he knew that specific word stated an “Anointment” by Yahweh; and, Yahweh can “Anoint” however many souls He sees fit to make a “Christ.” Paul was a “Christ,” who only met Jesus spiritually, after his death, resurrection and ascension had all taken place. Paul knew both the blessing of being “Anointed” by Yahweh and Paul knew the soul of Jesus personally, having been reborn in that name. While both “Christ” and “Jesus” do go hand-in-hand, one (the “Anointing”) most certainly comes before the other (the resurrection of “Jesus” within one’s soul), in the same way that marriage comes before parenthood.

Verse nineteen is shown separate from verses twenty through twenty-six for a reason. It is the last verse of eight verses (twelve through nineteen), where Paul wrote the “if” word six times. The “if” word is used to show the conditional, where something is only true “if” something else leads to that truth. It says one is dependent on the other. The pseudo-heading for those verses is “The Resurrection of the Dead” (both BibleHub Interlinear and NRSV). Verses twenty through thirty-four are called “The Order of Resurrection” (BibleHub Interlinear only). Thus, this selected reading – on Easter Day – states the “if” the meaning of “Christ” is seen by anyone as only being possible to be Jesus died, then got up and walked around again (ala Lazarus), so that view of resurrection is all one expects, then those of that mindset are to be “pitied.”

The exception stated in verse twenty (from a big “But” turning around the “if”) is seeing that which has “died” as not being Jesus, “But now” seeing the “first fruit” as that dead (picked from the limb green), so the “Christ” can raise them from that “death.” This means Jesus died in the flesh, so his soul could then be available to transform disciples into Apostles or Saints. For that transformation to take place, the disciples had to become sacrifices unto Yahweh, just as Jesus of Nazareth was. This makes Jesus be the seed that died (as a seed), so it could grow into a tree or vine that produces fruit. The “first fruits” are those who have been filled with the soul of the Jesus tree-vine (the ‘sap’ of Yahweh’s “Christ”), who are each filled within by the same seeds of Jesus reproduced.

In verse twenty-one, twice is repeated the word “anthrōpou.” That is the Genitive case form of “anthrópos,” which translates as “of man,” or generalized as “of humanity” (as “mankind, human race”). The NRSV does not show this possessive state, which is wrong. When Paul wrote, “seeing that indeed on account of of mankind death” (the first half of this verse), the thing that is “of mankind” that both eliminates “death” and results in “death” is the presence of a soul. A soul is eternal life that enters dead matter, simulating life to that death; but when that soul leaves a body of flesh, that body of flesh returns to being in a “death” state of existence. Without a soul a body of flesh is only a corpse. Thus, in the second half of verse twenty-one, where Paul wrote: “kai on account of of mankind raising up of dead” (with “resurrection” substituted as “raising up”).

This says the a body of flesh is dead, only given the appearance of life by the presence of a soul. This then means that a soul alone will eternally be recycled into dead matter, unless it has been “raised up” to a higher state of being. A soul reaches that higher state of being through the “resurrection” of the soul of Jesus within that soul born into dead matter. The only way “resurrection” can occur is when a normal soul becomes “doubly fruitful” (the meaning of the name “Ephraim”), with the “resurrection” within it by the Son of Yahweh. That is when one ceases being a son “of mankind” and becomes a Son of Yahweh – a “Yahweh elohim” … a.k.a. “Israel.” The name “Jesus” is taken on, as a soul “Yahweh Has Saved.”

In verse twenty-two, where Paul wrote a capitalized “Adam” (“Ἀδὰμ”), that reference says the hand of Yahweh formed that body of flesh (from clay and dust), putting a most holy soul within that creation (Genesis 2 calls this a “Yahweh elohim,” where “elohim” is the term used 32 times in Genesis 1, translated each time as “God,” when the term implies an “angel” that Yahweh placed into flesh). Even with such a most holy soul within Adam … he died in the flesh. Sure, Adam lived nine hundred thirty years; but he still died. That is the point of Paul. The “resurrection” is not about living nine hundred thirty years on earth. It is about being “Anointed” by Yahweh with the Spirit (divine marriage of a soul back to Yahweh); and, that leads to the resurrection of Jesus (divine pregnancy) within a divinely married soul, leading to eternal life (Salvation).

This sequence of Spiritual events is then stated in verse twenty-three. The children’s song aptly applies here: “First comes love, then comes marriage; and, then comes Jesus in the baby carriage.” This is how BibleHub Interlinear placed the heading that says: “The Order of Resurrection.” The “first fruits” are those souls that marry Yahweh and receive His Spirit to surround their souls (in their flesh). This is the “Anointment” that makes one be deemed a “Christ” by Yahweh. That first step is the Baptism of the Spirit of Yahweh, which washes away all past sins and spiritual debts. That does not happen simply because one prays to God and asks to be saved. One must show one’s love of Yahweh (LEARN TO USE THAT NAME!), by putting more than an hour a week-month-year-or-lifetime into one’s desire to know the foundation of one’s religion – SCRIPTURE. Love means showing Yahweh you want Him to Save you; and Yahweh Saves mean you must give rebirth to His Son (the meaning of the name one takes on divinely). That order is the same in all Apostles-Saints. Your flesh (be it male or be it female) will be the new flesh in which Jesus continues his ministry for Yahweh. Jesus then returns in your flesh.

The halo of a Saint is this figure shining through one’s body, with its soul.

In verse twenty-four is Paul defining the “end times.” It is not at the end of the world. It is “this end” of one’s self-will, self-worth, and selfish state of being (a sinner, which is a soul controlled by one’s flesh). It is an individual’s end time (the capitalization of “Each,” in verse twenty-three). Jesus comes at the “end” of one’s resistance to salvation. Jesus comes after one loves Yahweh, one marries Yahweh, and one is reborn as Yahweh’s Son.

Verse twenty-four then states the conditions of this return of Jesus. The “kingdom of God” is entered through divine marriage, where one’s soul receives the Spirit of Baptism. The womb into which the soul of Jesus (the soul of Adam – Yahweh elohim) will be placed must be virginal, just like in young, innocent Mary. No filthy harlot’s soul will ever conceive holiness. It must be washed clean of all past trespasses and transgressions. Once cleaned by the Spirit, Yahweh (one’s Husband) then penetrates one’s soul and divinely places the soul of His Son. This makes Yahweh become not only one’s Holy Husband, but also one’s Father, because into one’s soul will be resurrected His Son. That resurrection means one’s soul had “annulled” all past relationships with demons, even relinquishing one’s soul having control over its own body of flesh. “All power and authority” over one’s soul-flesh becomes that of the soul of Jesus, which makes his soul the “Lord” over oneself. The presence of Jesus (with Yahweh’s Spirit cleansing one as His “Christ”) means one’s soul-flesh has become totally possessed by the divine.

Verse twenty-five then say all past addictions (all demons claiming rights to one’s soul) will be under divine “Subjection.” All demons will leave. The once weak soul will give way (submission) to Yahweh and Jesus (Father and Son). The once controlling body of flesh will place all past demonic relationships under its feet, stomping them into submission. All bad habits will be kicked.

Verse twenty-five then simply says: Everything of the world that once led a soul to “death” have themselves been “put to death.” Sin no longer has any power over the righteous. The only reason Satan sends demons to enslave a soul and flesh is to lead that soul away from Yahweh, taking it down a road of mortal “death.” Because “death” is the assured “end” of a breath of life placed into dead matter, what was of the worldw ill return to the world; but what was of Yahweh will then return to Yahweh, Saved through one’s soul seeking Yahweh and His Son for Salvation.

This reading selection from Paul is selected for the purpose of it being read (if chosen) on Easter Day. That day is the foremost day when talk of “resurrection” is done. Paul’s words were led by the Spirit and by the hand of Jesus risen within his body of flesh (Paul’s Lord), to tell that “resurrection” is not of Jesus in the flesh. The “resurrection” only has meaning when the soul of Jesus has “resurrected” within one’s soul. There is an order that must be met for this to happen. When one thinks about it, the body of Jesus was never witnessed on Easter Day. The body of Jesus was taken away by angels, leaving the “appearance” (from Acts 10:40) of himself – which was within the followers in the upper room. They felt his wounds – saw his wounds – in themselves (not in the physical body of Jesus). The events of that Easter Day were Spiritual. They were of the soul of Jesus being prepared for their wombs, after they “received the Spirit” of divine marriage to Yahweh, being wombs cleans for his resurrection with in their souls (Pentecost Sunday).

John, Language, Luke, Mark, Matthew, Teaching

Easter Sunday Gospel Choices – Our Lord is Risen Indeed

January 20, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

Matthew 28:1-10 (This is the early service reading)

John 20:1-18 (This is an option for the principal service reading)

Mark 16:1-8 (This is an option for the principal service reading)

Luke 24:13-49 (This is the evening service reading)

——————————————————————————–

These are the readings that come from the four Gospels, all telling of the Sunday event Christians recognize as “Easter.” The same readings revolve over the three year cycle of the Episcopal Lectionary, Years A, B, and C. The order presented here is for Year B, 2018. These variations on the same theme [Luke’s reading is tailored for an evening service, focusing on that Sunday’s afternoon, rather than the morning’s discovery] will next be read aloud in a church by a priest on Easter Sunday, April 1, 2018. Certainly, all are important as they tell of the miracle of Jesus’ Resurrection from death, as witnessed by those close to Jesus of Nazareth. That return to life fulfilled the promise Jesus had made, which also fulfilled the prophecies of the Old Testament.

In two of these readings (Luke and John), the resurrection of Jesus is referred to as “the first day of the week.” In the other two, the day is identified as “after the sabbath” (Matthew) or “when the Sabbath was over” (Mark), with Matthew adding that it was “the first day of the week.” None of them identified that day as “Sunday,” as the Hebrew equivalent is “yom rishon” (“first day”).

Here is a blank calendar, typically used in English-speaking countries. One can see how Sunday has been affixed into the position that reflects it as the first day of the week, making Saturday the seventh day (the Sabbath):

While Americans commonly call the combination of Saturday and Sunday a “weekend,” such that Monday feels like the first day of the week, that feeling likewise projects upon Sunday as the end of a week. One can get a feel that Sunday is the seventh day, thus the Christian sabbath day. However, please note that concept is pagan, as it goes against how God told Moses to order the days, which corresponds with the seven days of Creation.

God never ordered anyone, other than the Israelites, to establish a calendar that denotes a Sabbath day as holy. Thus, if anyone wants to make a “week” longer than seven days, or start a “week” on any day one chooses, while calling a day by any name other than a number, that is one’s freedom … as a pagan. No one is commanded to have a calendar for each year, nor have any special dates marked for remembrance. Still, it seems other civilized peoples (other than the Israelites) realized marking time was important.

They say Stonehenge is a pagan calendar that marked the movements of celestial bodies, such that “Sun day” is related to that orb of life-giving light, with “Moon day” the same recognition on another day [Monday]. Saturday is devoted to recognition for Saturn, whose pagan characteristics are like those of the Old Testament Yahweh. Because there are seven astronomical orbs of lights (luminaries and planets), each was given a day of recognition, thus a seven-day week evolved. Still, with that known, non-pagans (including Christians) will always recognize the seventh day as holy (the Sabbath); and Sunday, likewise, will always be the first day of the week.

By grasping that Jesus was realized risen on the first day of the week, one can realize the New Creation of God’s Covenant with human beings springing to life at that time. The first day of the week means rest is over and there is new work that needs to be done. God’s Covenant with Moses, which does nothing to change His Covenants with Noah and/or Abraham, is not an “Old Testament,” as if “old” translates as “outdated” and “undone.” Instead, the New Covenant is the expansion from the First Testament, as a New Amendment. The new requires more than birthright, as Gentiles are now permitted to play a role in God’s plan (Thanks be to God, from us Gentiles of America) for all mankind to serve God. That new amendment to serve God comes through Jesus Christ, who was first known as the Christ on a Sunday … the first day of the week.

In that vein of thought, serving God through Jesus Christ is demonstrated to be more than simply believing Jesus rose after being dead for three days. In John’s account, Mary Magdalene stood at the open tomb weeping, when the risen Jesus asked her why she was crying. Mary is said not to recognize the man she loved dearly, “supposing him to be the gardener.” That needs to be reflected upon.

If you have ever driven to a cemetery to pay your respects to a deceased loved one, you will notice there is a small staff that manages the grounds, cutting the grass, placing artificial flowers at gravestones, and making sure weeds and leaves are cleared away. One such groundskeeper could be termed a “gardener.” John wrote the word “kēpouros,” which translates as “gardener or garden-keeper,” which by itself implies this tomb site was lush and green; but a tomb carved into rock is not typically surrounded by such flourishing plant life. Supposing the intent of Mary, as told to John (who had already left the scene with Peter), was more than a simple mention of a man thought to be the groundskeeper. One then needs to see that “Freudian slip,” associated with that failure to see Jesus as Jesus, as a purposeful statement of Jesus appearing as someone else … someone Jesus is like.

Pop Quiz question: Who is the most famous gardener in all the Holy Bible? You have one minute to think about your answer.

Time’s up. The answer is Adam. [You knew that!]

That reference is then a statement that Jesus had the same soul as the one God breathed into his Son; but the physical Jesus did not look like the physical Adam, from who’s physical DNA Jesus was descended, many times modified over the ages.[1] That means that Jesus’ claim to be the Son of Man (where the Hebrew word “adam” means “man”) was based on him repeatedly saying, my soul has reincarnated several times since it fell to Earth in the form of Adam, the Son of God. Adam lived in the Garden of Eden, and because of his skills for tending to natural things, Adam was told to till the earth after his fall from Heaven (hint: there are more weeds on earth, than in Heaven).

So, regardless of the double entendre, where Mary literally though Jesus was a groundskeeper, John wrote “gardener” from being in possession of the Mind of Christ, writing the Word of God. As a “gardener,” Jesus was seen in the form of the first Son of God. That means there are no mistakes and nothing written anywhere in Scripture that cannot become more that it first appears, as “kēpouros” [“gardener”] expands to become further explanation towards understanding the holiness of John’s text.

Of course, Jesus appearing as a gardener was not the only time he appeared in some other form. The optional reading for an evening Easter service comes from Luke, where those particular verses are typically called “The Road to Emmaus.” There, Luke wrote, “Jesus himself came near [to two of the disciples] and went with them, but their eyes were kept from recognizing him.”

The two disciples were not of the eleven principal disciples of Jesus, but followers of Jesus. The Greek written by Luke actually does not refer to “disciples,” but to “two of them.” When one is later named as being Cleopas, who is believed to have been the brother of Joseph, the husband of Mary, the human “father” of Jesus, this would make Cleopas the uncle of Jesus. Because John referred to “Mary of Clopas,” as one of the three Mary’s who stood at the cross of Jesus, this is believed to make her the wife (possibly daughter) of Cleopas. This would then identify the “two of them” as being relatives who knew Jesus very well, “but their eyes were kept from recognizing him.”

A couple of things need to be grasped about the seven miles to Emmaus (sixty furlongs). First, that was too far to walk on a Sabbath, due to the restrictions on how far one can walk on the day of rest. Cleopas and Mary had been in Jerusalem for the final prayer service of the eight-day Passover festival [a morning prayer, which on that particular ending day was done on a Sabbath morning], meaning they probably stayed in the upstairs room that had been secured for Jesus and his disciples until Sunday morning. While ordinary years would have allowed them to travel back and forth from home, during the week-long event, the arrest, trial, torture and execution of Jesus, followed by his temporary burial in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, would have kept them in Jerusalem all of the eight days. Now, with the Passover over, as well as the Sabbath, it was time for them to go home; but as they walked, they were “and talking with each other about all these things that had happened.”

Second, the road to Emmaus was the same road that cut through Jerusalem, with the eastern direction called the Jericho road, with Emmaus being due west.

Cleopas and Mary would not have been the only ones walking this road, as many pilgrims from the west would have traveled the same road. The Roman road would have ended at the Mediterranean Sea, with a road leading to Joppa being a branch off that road headed more northerly. Joppa would have been a place for European pilgrims to find sea passage back home. Still, foreign travelers in Judea for the Passover would have planned to stay until Shavuot [Festival of Weeks, beginning at Pentecost], so the further away from Jerusalem pilgrims walked, the easier it would have been to find rooms for a two-month stay. Thus, walking and talking with strangers would have been common, if not preferred, simply to find safety in numbers.

Jesus, appearing as some pilgrim headed home after the Passover, came upon Cleopas and Mary as they were discussing the past week and how it played out for their nephew. Jesus acted like he did not know who they were talking about, which led them to explain more. However, that led Jesus to tell his family members, “Oh, how foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have declared! Was it not necessary that the Messiah should suffer these things and then enter into his glory?”

Jesus knew he had foretold all that would happen, exactly as it went down, but he was speaking to deaf ears, blind eyes and closed minds. Cleopas and Mary had been there and heard those prophecies, but (like all the other disciples and followers of Jesus) they were slow to take his words to heart, the place in devoted humans where God resides. Thus, no one believed the truth of Jesus’ words, because they preferred to ignore the truth and believe what they wanted to believe (a common flaw in the faithful to this day).

We then read that after Jesus called his relatives “foolish,” “then, beginning with Moses and all the prophets, [Jesus] interpreted to them the things about himself in all the scriptures.” Seven miles they walked as Jesus talked the truth. All the while, the hearts of Cleopas and Mary were burning within them, as Jesus was “opening the scriptures” to them.

When Luke wrote the word “diēnoigen” (translated as “he was opening”), the root word means: Properly: “opening the ears and the eyes, such as to restore hearing and sight. Tropically: “to open the sense of the Scriptures, explain them; to open the mind of one, i. e. cause him to understand a thing; and to open one’s soul, i. e. to rouse in one the faculty of understanding or the desire of learning.”[2] (Thayer’s Greek Lexicon) Therefore, Jesus (as a stranger to his aunt and uncle) spoke to them as one filled with the Holy Spirit and the gift of interpreting prophecy. ALL who possess that holy talent speak in the name of Jesus Christ, whether they look like “picture book Jesus” or not.

When Cleopas and Mary came to the place where their home was off the main road, they did not want to leave this stranger who had opened their eyes and hearts so widely. From desire to know more, they invited unrecognizable Jesus to stay at their place overnight. We then read, “When he was at the table with them, he took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them. Then their eyes were opened, and they recognized him.”

They recognized Jesus because Cleopas and Mary had been present at the Passover Seder meal ten evenings prior, when Jesus presided over the ritual dinner. They had watched Jesus do the exact same thing then, as he had just done at their dining table. They had not seen the power of those words then; but with their hearts alive with fire and passion for the the truth of God’s Word, they vividly flashed back to that Passover Seder message forgotten.

This is where bread has to be seen as symbolic of the written Scriptures, which Jesus had just enlightened Cleopas and Mary about: Moses and all the prophets wrote the texts that all Jews were fed from. That bread is unleavened, in the sense that Scripture is written in basic ingredients. Those words do not give rise, as leavened, until consumed and swollen to full meaning by the “yeast” of the Holy Spirit. Thus, that bread is blessed by God, as Holy Words, and those Holy Words are broken into books, chapters, verses and individual words – ALL of which have divine meaning the blind eye cannot see.

The man Cleopas and Mary had just walked seven miles with had just made them vividly recall that Passover Seder with Jesus, who was then known to be the Christ. Before, he was just Mary’s special son, Jesus, a charismatic with a penchant for preaching and a knack for working miracles. However, for the first time Jesus had opened the minds of his close relatives to Spiritual knowledge, which came by his breaking of the bread of Scripture and presenting it to them to digest.

Luke then wrote, “he vanished from their sight,” where the Greek word “aphantos” means, “disappearing, invisible, hidden.” This was not the first time that Jesus had eluded people, as John wrote about Jesus escaping the hands of his haters in his seventh and tenth chapters. This ability to become invisible or to disappear or to become hidden beyond view is a power from the divine.

This disappearance can be explained as a hallucination shared by Cleopas and Mary, where they actually did walk with a strange pilgrim, but the Holy Spirit made it appear that stranger was talking to them. The hallucination could have then come into their home, due to their heightened belief, while the actual strange pilgrim kept walking on the road to the west. Jesus disappeared simply because he was not in that Emmaus home as a strange pilgrim. Jesus was there in Spirit, one that was invited by Cleopas and Mary to stay with them. That presence symbolizes how all whose hearts burn to serve God must welcome God into their hearts.

It is this hallucinatory state that makes this account on the road to Emmaus become parallel to Mary Magdalene speaking with a gardener. Mary never saw the gardener as Jesus in the flesh. She heard his words and recognized it was Jesus, in the same way that Cleopas and Mary did. The hallucinatory state reflects how each disciple of Jesus must seek him first. Then, when Jesus appears in unrecognizable form to answer our call, a true Christian will recognize the presence of Jesus Christ, by understanding the messenger sent in his name.

Then, Luke tells of Cleopas and Mary hurrying back to Jerusalem and the upstairs room. It was still light outside, but technically night time, close to 8:00 PM by the time they were back in the upstairs room. Thomas, who had been out procuring dinner for the disciples and their companions when Jesus first appeared among them, was back then (he brought back some fish for them to broil). One could imagine the door was locked, due to the fear of the Temple being proud of murdering innocent Jews; but suddenly there was Jesus again standing among them.

Then, as the time earlier, Jesus appeared in a recognizable form, complete with body wounds from having been flogged, crucified and speared. One would imagine Jesus was fully dressed, just as the gardener and the travelling pilgrim would have been, even though the burial preparation would not have clothed Jesus’ body in anything more than shroud, face linen, and prayer shawl (provided by family). This means Jesus wore heavenly clothing, despite appearing earthly natural. One would imagine Jesus opened his robe for Thomas to feel his spear wound.

Before anyone starts to think that Jesus was a hologram or beamed to earth by God, look at how Jesus said he was not a ghost.

Jesus was real, in the flesh, the same flesh that had been prepared for burial the past Friday. He asked for food, which he ate before them so they could see how real he was. He was real when he stood before Mary Magdalene. He was real when he walked with Cleopas and Mary; and he was real standing among his followers in the upstairs room in Jerusalem. However, the most important element of that reality is discerned from Jesus saying (according to Luke), “Thus it is written, that the Messiah is to suffer and to rise from the dead on the third day, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins is to be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. And see, I am sending upon you what my Father promised; so stay here in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”

The reality of Jesus was the fulfillment of the prophecies that foretold his coming, death, and resurrection. The imaginary of prophecy had become real. While Jesus told the pairs of eyes standing with him at that time, “You are witnesses of these things” … “You are witnesses to this realization of divine prophecy” … Jesus would not be able to produce any new human witnesses to him in the flesh … a real Jesus … after he would Ascend to Heaven. Therefore, when Jesus then said, “See, I am sending upon you what my Father promised” … the Holy Spirit … Jesus meant the Father promised a Messiah that would last an eternity (see Micah 5:2). Therefore, Jesus would last a lot longer than 33 years, as he has not ever left, through the reality of the Holy Spirit. That was why Jesus then instructed his followers to stay in Jerusalem “until they had been clothed with power from on high.”

Now, while I allow that last statement of Jesus sink in a little, let me point out that Jesus appearing to his followers in the upstairs room took place in the evening on technical Sunday; but because the Hebrew calendar recognizes that to be the evening of the next day, Jesus gave that command on a Monday. Monday would represent the ninth day in the Counting of the Omer. That means Jesus stayed with his followers and taught them for forty days – from Tuesday, the tenth day of that counting, until the Sabbath, the forty-ninth day.

This means Jesus Ascended on the Sabbath, but returned via the Holy Spirit on Pentecost, the fiftieth day of that count … another Sunday. This means the disciples spoke as Jesus had spoken, because the Holy Spirit clothed those followers with the power of Jesus Christ, from on high, on that day.

The missing day – Monday – is referred to in John’s Gospel, which was a dream rather than reality. The dream of John had the disciples fishing unsuccessfully on the Sea of Galilee, when Jesus had just told them all to stay in Jerusalem. The dream is confirmed to be that when one realizes that Capernaum was over 100 miles from Jerusalem (ref.), and it would have taken about five days to walk that far.

The symbolism of John’s dream can then be applied to the disciples’ state of mind, which was they were in shock. They had just watched Jesus be tried, tortured, crucified, buried, and then stand before them eating broiled fish, pointing out his still fresh wounds. They had shook with fear that the Temple Jews would look to kill them next, with Lazarus already on their preferred hit list. All that happened on Sunday had then left them dazed and confused. Monday was then a day to take a deep breath and calm down, as basic training for receiving the Holy Spirit would begin the following day.

Still, with all of the readings that are representative of the proof that Jesus resurrected … proof that no Christian living today can swear to, no one can prove to another that resurrection. No one today can say, “I have seen the risen Lord stand before me in a real human body.” All the witnesses of real Jesus have passed from this world; and that is the deepest meaning of Easter Sunday. Jesus has risen in unrecognizable forms, through the Holy Spirit.

While we all are still eight Sundays from celebrating Christian Pentecost (a wholly symbolic recognition of the Holy Spirit), Jesus suddenly appeared and disappeared on the first day of the week to foretell his coming within true Christians. A true Christian can only be defined as one who has been clothed within as Jesus, with all the power the Christ Mind bestows, from on high.

A true Christian, like Jesus, dies of self and is risen as Jesus Christ. A true Christian is dead to self-serving, as being Jesus Christ demands serving God, through going to help others in Spiritual need. Disciples of Jesus tremble in fear at the ghost of Jesus expecting them to leave the safety and security of a locked door to an upstairs room; but a true Christian hears Jesus say, “Why are you frightened, and why do doubts arise in your hearts?” Jesus reborn within one means “Peace if with me,” and when one can say that, then Jesus is walking the earth once again in unrecognizable form.

The Lord is risen indeed, when the Lord is alive in a true Christian. That is why Easter is much more than one man coming back to life after death. If that were the case, then Lazarus rising from death was an equally important event … one that no church recognizes on the level of Easter.

“Lazarus come out!” must speak to you. You must become Lazarus in order to become Jesus Christ reborn.

While one can say, “Jesus was the magician who was so special he commanded Lazarus to “Come out!” then who was it who commanded Jesus to do the same? The answer is not the power of the Son of Man but the power of God. God gave life back to Lazarus and God gave life back to Jesus. Therefore, Easter stands as the miracle of Moses crossing the Israelites through the Red Sea on dry ground, because God is the one with the power to part physical from spiritual, wet from dry, captivity from freedom … to separate mortal death from life everlasting.

Not much is written about Lazarus after he rose from death. John wrote that he and Jesus had a dinner in their honor on the evening of technical Sunday, prior to Jesus entering Jerusalem on a donkey colt for his final Passover festival. The Eastern Orthodox Church believes that Lazarus fled Judea to Cyprus, where “he was appointed by Paul and Barnabas as the first bishop of Kition (present-day Larnaka).” (Wikipedia)

The Western Church believes in the lore of the small town Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer [Saints-Mary-of-the-Sea], on the Mediterranean coast of France. There Lazarus arrived, along with three Mary’s (Mary Magdalene, Mary Salome, and Mary of Cleopas).

Wax figures depicting the event in a museum of Provence history.

Lazarus is said to have gone to Marseilles [nearby to the east], where he converted many local pagans to Christianity, being called the Bishop of Marseilles. (Wikipedia, same as above) Supposedly, Lazarus lived for thirty years after he was raised from the dead, never smiling because of having seen the misery of souls in Hades, while he was dead.

Lazarus and Jesus can be seen as a duality, with one human and one divine. Lazarus rose and continued living as a divinely changed man. Jesus rose, taught his disciples for forty days, Ascended, then returned as the divinity that led Lazarus to become like Jesus. Likewise, Jesus returned to be the divinity of Peter and the other ten lead disciples, plus all those companions who witnessed Jesus standing risen among them (Lazarus probably was one also there). Jesus was reborn in 3,000 pilgrims to whom the Apostles opened the Scriptures (in foreign tongues). This makes Easter become a duality with Pentecost, where Easter is human devotion and Pentecost is divine practice (faith and works).

Jesus is the model by which ALL Christians are formed. Humans must conform to that model to receive the Holy Spirit and become divine. Divinity comes by the love of God [burning hearts married to the LORD] and the birth of Christ in one’s mind. Moses built the model upon which Israel [and Judah] was formed, building human forms of devotion to the One God. Jesus was the duality to Moses, who built the model upon which the devoted received new life from the One God. Thus, one must be devoted to the One God first [the First Covenant] before one can evolve into a human that truly serves the LORD through Christ [the New Covenant].

Easter is the dawning [the Sunrise] of that necessary change.

One has to stop fearing one’s own death of self and give one’s heart and soul over to God’s Will. Easter is then the rebirth of one’s devotion, where one does not pray to an unseen, unfelt, and unknown God, but instead one feels burning in one’s heart, with love of the power of God, which one has seen and heard through opened Scriptures. Easter is then the desire to learn more, from the knowledge of God that comes from the presence of Jesus Christ teaching one the hidden truth that God’s Word holds. Easter is then the absorption of God’s knowledge for the purpose of spilling that knowledge out unto others of devotion [Pentecost Day].

This is how Easter is more than Jesus rising from death. Jesus has to be risen within all Christians for Jesus Christ to be alive in this world today. It is through true Christians that Jesus walks the road of life still, explaining the Scriptures to those who are saddened because they think Jesus is dead and there will not be another Jesus until the end of the world. Jesus is alive today though his gardeners, those who plant the seeds of insight into those who love Jesus, but previously had only wanted to dress, perfume, and decorate his body of death [hold the cross of crucifixion high, rather than the + of life in the Trinity: Father, You, Holy Spirit].

Easter is thus like Spring, when the death of Winter is replaced by the Rebirth the ever-living Vine, budding so that new fruit will come.

——————————————————————————

[1] In case anyone doubts this, I recommend reading Luke’s chapter 3. The last verse state:, “The son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God” (Luke 3:38).

[2] Some might note – IF one’s heart is burning – that I write these “articles” in the same sense of “opening the Scriptures” for understanding, as well as to remove the plugs and blinders that have impeded one’s own ability to discern these things.

Isaiah, Language, Teaching

Isaiah 25:6-9 – Destroying self to become a mountain for Yahweh

January 9, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

On this mountain the Lord of hosts will make for all peoples

a feast of rich food, a feast of well-aged wines,

of rich food filled with marrow, of well-aged wines strained clear.

And he will destroy on this mountain

the shroud that is cast over all peoples,

the sheet that is spread over all nations;

he will swallow up death forever.

Then the Lord God will wipe away the tears from all faces,

and the disgrace of his people he will take away from all the earth,

for the Lord has spoken.

It will be said on that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, so that he might save us.

This is the Lord for whom we have waited;

let us be glad and rejoice in his salvation.

——————–

In the event that the reading from Acts is not chosen to be the First Lesson, this reading selection from Isaiah 25 will be the Old Testament choice to be read aloud on Easter Sunday [primary service], according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. It will then precede the singing of verses from Psalm 118, which includes the verse, “I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the Lord.” That would then lead to the reading from Acts, where Peter told Cornelius, “[The risen Jesus] commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one ordained by God as judge of the living and the dead.” That then leads to a Gospel reading from Mark, which tells of the women of Jesus going to his tomb and finding the tomb opened and “a young man, dressed in a white robe, sitting on the right side.”

[Note: The season of Easter introduces Track 1 and Track 2 choices for the Gospel reading. While such options are primarily for the Ordinary season after Pentecost – when acts of apostles become the norm of divine ministry – the same assumption can be gathered here. The reading selection from Mark is listed second, which implies it should be read along with the second option for the First Lesson, which is the Isaiah reading. If the Acts reading is chosen over this reading from Isaiah 25, then the Epistle from 1 Corinthians would be read, followed by a similar reading of Jesus found risen in John’s Gospel. Isaiah 25:6-9 will be read on Proper 23-A and 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 will be read on Epiphany 5C, so whatever choice is made on Easter B will not exclude a reading from explanation another time. Mark 16:1-8 can only be read on the Easter Vigil service, Year B, or the primary Easter Sunday service the same year, whereas John 20:1-18 is an option in all three years for Easter Sunday. That makes the choice of Mark more important on this Easter Sunday, Year B.]

In these four verses from Isaiah’ twenty-fifth chapter, four times are found the word “Lord” translated. Each of those times the word “Yahweh” is written. Twice the capitalized word “God” is found, with the first actually being “ă·ḏō·nāy” (“adonay”) and the second being “’ĕ·lō·hê·nū” (“elohim”), which are general statements of “lord” and “gods.” Because Hebrew actually has no capital letters in its alphabet, it is translations using capitalizations that personify and elevate a word to divine status, as inferences made by the translator. This can be seen as an acceptable practice for the name of God being equivaled to Yahweh. However, the practice of changing “Yahweh” to “Lord,” and the changing of the plural word “elohim” to the singular, as “God,” is misleading and wrong. It becomes too easy for lost sheep, those calling themselves “Christians,” to read “Lord” and think, “This is a prophecy of Jesus,” without ever coming to know that Yahweh was indeed the Lord of Jesus.

By seeing this element of a prophecy that promises the coming of a time when Christianity would mean many people will be filled with Yahweh’s Holy Spirit and be sent to all parts of the world to let other seekers know the truth and also be saved, verse 7 is then translated to say, “And he will destroy on this mountain the shroud that is cast over all peoples, the sheet that is spread over all nations.” While that translation clearly paints a picture of destroying that which blocked so many from being told the truth of Scripture, there is deeper truth that is exposed from closer examination of the Hebrew written.

Does that billowing smoke look a lot like God reaching down, helping the Romans in destruction?

The repeating of “mountain” has to be seen as both Jerusalem [the collective known as Judaism today] and the individual, whose soul has been saved. The “mountain” that connects both collective and individual is Yahweh. Thus, that means “he will destroy on this mountain” [where “ū·ḇil·la‘,” from “bala,” says “he will engulf,” or “swallow up”] both means the end of Judaism [a collective mountain swallowed up] and the beginning of Christianity [an individual mountain engulfed], so only those who allow the “mountain” to be Yahweh survives that flood of Spirit that will be poured out.

This makes “the shroud that is cast over all peoples, the sheet that is spread over all nations” become the restrictive way the Jews forbid Gentiles from knowing their God, while also representative of the expansive way Christianity would become the comforter all nations. Still, the word translated as “shroud” is actually written “pə·nê- hal·lō·wṭ” [from “panim lot”], meaning “face-coverings;” and, the word translated as “the sheet” is actually written “wə·ham·mas·sê·ḵāh” [from “maccekah”], more appropriately read as “a veil.” That last word can also mean a poured metal mask or “molten image,” which acts as a breakage of the covenant not to have any graven images or idols.

When the translation of “shroud” is used, it becomes a statement of a “face-covering” placed over a body’s face at death, in preparation for burial. The “sheet” is then the linen cloth placed over the whole body. The face cloth is called a “sudarium.” It is placed under the “tachrichim” or “kittel,” which is the linen covering the whole. This overall covering is
then said to be symbolic of the canopy used in wedding ceremonies. [Wikipedia] As a statement of death,” following the “destruction,” the implication is Judaism will cease to have life, but individually born again as Jesus Christ will figuratively die – of self-ego and self-will – so their bodies of flesh will have surrendered their souls to Yahweh – in marriage to His Holy Spirit. This is a most important aspect of this prophecy sung by Isaiah that needs to be realized.

Here, again, we find an Old Testament reading that includes the word “paneh,” which means “face.” This, as I have written often prior, becomes relative to the first Commandment, which actually says, “You shall wear the face of no other gods before me,” such that the true meaning of a typical memorization – “You shall have no other gods before me” – is one must wear the face of Yahweh, in order to become His wife. As I stated before, about the Ten Commandments, those are the agreements of marriage [wedding vows] to which all potential wives of Yahweh must agree. Judaism wore the face of itself, as a god before Yahweh, breaking that covenant of marriage – therefore death comes to its “mountain.” Individuals who die of self-ego then surrender their individual faces, in submission to Yahweh, wearing His holy face after marriage.

Verse 8 then confirms this imagery of death [made through self-sacrifice] by singing, “he will swallow up death forever. Then the Lord God will wipe away the tears from all faces, and the disgrace of his people he will take away from all the earth, for the Lord has spoken.” Here, again, is found the word “faces” [“panim” is the plural of “paneh”], following the combination of “adonay Yahweh.” In reality, that which will be “wiped away” is “adonay,” which is the “lord” of self, the breath of life given by Yahweh at birth – the “soul.” When the word “adonay” is followed by “Yahweh,” that becomes a statement that the soul has been wiped away from rule over its body of flesh, allowing “Yahweh” that mastery as “lord.” It must be assumed that “Yahweh” alone is Lord of all, thus it is unnecessary to use two words to describe that supremacy. Therefore, having “wiped away self-ego, Yahweh” takes over, so all “tears” of sinful living are dried up, when “Yahweh’s face” is worn by His wives.

The translation of “disgrace” is for the Hebrew word “cherpah,” which bears that intent, as a “reproach.” The same word can also be translated to imply “scorn, contempt, and taunting,” where there is a “rebuke” of those “people” whose “faces” once were [or still were] resisting marriage to Yahweh. The “rebuke” is of sinful ways, either recognized by one’s soul through self-denial or self-guilt. This means those who marry God’s Holy Spirit will see their own evils and feel “shame” [another viable translation of “cherpah”], sacrificing their old faces in order to take on the face of Yahweh. As for those who will continue to wear faces that cast “shame” and “contempt” on Yahweh, indirectly through “taunts” against those transformed through figurative deaths, they will be a “disgrace” to Yahweh. Death to them means the condemnation of a mortal life in the flesh, where they commit eternal life suicide. That is the most “disgraceful way to be taken away from the earth.”

With that mark seen as ending a paragraph, verse 9 must then be seen as beginning a new line of thought. The translation there says, “It will be said on that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, so that he might save us. This is the Lord for whom we have waited; let us be glad and rejoice in his salvation.” This needs to be seen as beginning with a focus set “on that day,” when a wife of Yahweh has begun to speak for Him. Here, the importance is less about when that transformation will take place, as all wives of Yahweh begin new lives that wear His face at many times [all times]. Thus, the element of “day” must be understood as more important when seen as the Word being spoken, so it shines the “light” of truth so those in darkness can suddenly see.

To grasp that concept firmly, the word translated as “Lo” is really written “hin·nêh” or “behold!” This makes a statement that Yahweh speaking will be “seen” by human beings who will be His wives, His spokespeople. When that sight is seen, what is witnessed is “this is our God,” where the reality is the written word “’ĕ·lō·hê·nū,” as His “elohim.” It says beholding Yahweh speaking through a human body of flesh means the “soul” [an eternal “el”] of that flesh has married to Yahweh, so that soul becomes one of Yahweh’s little-g “gods.” A soul alone speaks from the brain, but one of Yahweh’s “gods” speaks from the marriage of a soul to God’s Holy Spirit.

In the final words of this selection, which are translated to say, “let us be glad and rejoice in his salvation,” that repeats the theme of waiting to be saved. Here, both of the words that have been translated as “be glad and rejoice” can be seen to mean a repetition of “rejoicing.” That repetition then reflects the utmost form of gladness that can come upon a body of flesh, making it sing and praise God without end. Salvation means the soul has been promised something much greater than a plot of land on earth to call one’s own. It is the soul celebrating a release from the prison that is mortal death in a body of flesh. The rejoicing is a figurative death of self-ego realizing no physical death yet to come to its flesh can ever be feared, because that physical death becomes the release of a soul trapped in a human cage, free to fly away and be forever with Yahweh in heaven.

As a reading choice for Easter Sunday, when Jesus is found risen from death, it is important to see oneself as having the same potential for resurrection, as seen in these words Yahweh spoke through His prophet Isaiah. The problem Christianity faces today all come from seeing these words of Yahweh’s prophet as being prophetic of Jesus, and no one else. That become a repeat of the problem the Judeans faced when Isaiah prophesied, because they had turned away from the God of their ancestor’s marriage, boldly wearing the face of believers in Moses and the Law. Christians [as seen through the wide variety of denominations bearing the name “Christ”] do the same bowing down before Lord Jesus, wearing the face of idolaters, none married to Yahweh, none wearing His face. Few Christians today having submitted their own faces of self-ego to Yahweh. The refuse to see how Jesus is the model for all souls who seek salvation. To have a soul be saved, that soul must be resurrected as the Anointed One [the Christ], who acts and speaks just like Jesus did.

When this reading is read aloud, meaning it has trumped the Epistle reading from 1 Corinthians as the one chosen to present to seekers, it should be explained as the Acts of the Apostles having been prophesied by Isaiah. A good shepherd will choose this reading because it can clearly make points about becoming a wife of Yahweh. A good shepherd will then be one whose self-ego has long been lowered in submission to Yahweh, so Yahweh will speak through him or her, so others can be saved. The way a priest must be judged is on how many hear the truth of light they project, so others will see for themselves how to follow in the path of Jesus. A true priest of Yahweh will speak the Word so others will themselves submit their souls become the wives of God.

Acts, Language, Teaching

Acts 10:34-43 – Learning how to hear “in tongues”

January 8, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

Peter began to speak to Cornelius and the other Gentiles: “I truly understand that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him. You know the message he sent to the people of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ–he is Lord of all. That message spread throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John announced: how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power; how he went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him. We are witnesses to all that he did both in Judea and in Jerusalem. They put him to death by hanging him on a tree; but God raised him on the third day and allowed him to appear, not to all the people but to us who were chosen by God as witnesses, and who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one ordained by God as judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”

——————–

This is the mandatory selection from the Acts of the Apostles that will be read aloud on Easter Sunday, Year B principal service, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. It will either be the First Lesson, removing Isaiah 25:6-9 from the schedule, or it will be the New Testament reading, eliminating 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 from the schedule. In any case, this reading will be accompanied by a reading from Psalm 118, which sings, “The Lord is my strength and my song, and he has become my salvation.” Depending on the selection process, this reading will precede a Gospel reading (either from John 20:1-18 or Mark 16, 1-8), which speaks of Jesus being found not in his tomb by women who came early on the first day of the week with spices.

Acts chapter 10 tells of a divine vision Peter had, where God showed him Gentiles were no longer forbidden from belief in Yahweh. This led to Peter being called to meet with a Roman Centurion, named Cornelius, who was a Gentile. The first thirty-three verses tell this story, none of which are ever scheduled to be read aloud in Episcopalian churches. This reading becomes the soliloquy of Peter speaking to the Gentiles at Cornelius’ home, telling of his association with Jesus, who was killed but resurrected. This translation reads as if Peter was bragging about having personally witnessed all the power of glory of Jesus, “in Judea and in Jerusalem.”

There is a concept in Christianity known as “witnessing.” From the website for a Roman Catholic Diocese is this definition of a Christian “witness”:

“As followers of the Lord Jesus, we are called to serve as “witnesses” to our faith. To be a witness to Christ is to demonstrate by our words, actions and attitude the sacred mystery that we have “seen”, heard and believe in our hearts about the Lord who has forgiven us of our sins and offered us eternal life. In contrast to the world, Christian witness is to be offered 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.” [Diocese of Bridgeport (CT.)]

In this reading selection, Peter is quoted as saying “witnesses” twice. While there are other places in the Epistles where Christians point to references such as this being a characteristic all Christians must display, some pointing to these specific verses in support of that concept, the “definition” above makes it clear that “witnessing” is not about seeing Jesus, but about experiencing Yahweh personally. That makes “witnessing” be as relevant today as it was when Peter spoke with Cornelius. It also makes it clear that “witnessing” is not a power of brain, because a brain only thinks about certain things [consciously] when queued to thought. That “24 hours a day, 365 days a year” part of the definition above says “witnessing” is more subconscious than conscious, as it is impossible to stop. That becomes a statement that the soul has married to Yahweh and the body acts in righteous ways, without any need to use forethought.

In this soliloquy, it is the translation into English that misleads those who hear them read aloud or read these words silently alone. Even those fluent in Greek cannot see the whole truth of this conversation. This is because these words of Peter, like those of Paul, John, James, and all prophets who wrote divinely, were spoken in a divine language. Divine language requires divine assistance to understand, therefore translate properly.

This can be seen stated in Acts 2, on Pentecost morning, when all the Apostles began “speaking in tongues.” Rather than them beginning to make unintelligible noises [as some ‘Pentecostal’ churches promote], they all began to explain the lesson of the prophet Joel. Not only did they speak that in Hebrew, but in all the foreign languages, for the benefit of foreign pilgrims. What the Apostles spoke was a depth of understanding that came from being able to understand Joel wrote in the divine language of Yahweh. The Apostles suddenly began to understand Scripture and suddenly began to explains Scripture in new ways it had never been explained before [thus the thought that they must be drunk on new wine].

That receipt of God’s Holy Spirit within Peter and the others [including three thousand who heard the word and also became saved souls] meant he began [like all the others] to speak in divine ways that normal translation misses. From then on Peter spoke in ways that demanded someone explain the Word he spoke in new ways. This is a concept held by ‘Pentecostal’ religions, where someone “speaking in tongues” requires someone to translate what has been spoken “in tongues.” However, rather that one being forced to make up meanings for gibberish spoken, a Saint is required to understand what an Apostle wrote.

This can be seen where the translation above [NRSV] begins with Peter saying, “I truly understand that God shows no partiality.” In reality, Luke [the believed writer of Acts] wrote: “Ep’ alētheias katalambanomai hoti ouk estin prosōpolēmptēs ho Theos,” which literally translates to state: “Above truth I comprehend because not being one who shows face this God.” This shows the words of Peter were spoken in divine language, which is impossible to state in other language translations correctly, unless the translator is led by the same Holy Spirit and enabled to understand divine language of Yahweh [speak in tongues].

From what is written, the capitalization of “Ep’” [an abbreviation of “Epi”] means a divinely elevated translation must be seen. Rather than simply being read as the preposition “of,” it becomes “Above,” where the capitalization makes that direction be heavenly. This is then the source of “truth,” such that Peter was not bragging about “truly understanding,” but his divine [“Above”] source of “truth” being how he then had an ability to “comprehend,” relative to that which he did not understand before.

He then said that limit is placed “not” on “one who shows [his or her own] face” [from “prosōpolēmptēs” means “one who is an accepter of a face”], meaning Peter was once known as Simon, which was a flawed human face. As Peter [meaning {Rock”], he became “one who shows a face” that is God’s.” This means that instead of Peter seeming to say, “God loves everyone,” Peter said a Saint stops being himself or herself and puts on the face of Yahweh, so the truth will be revealed [otherwise the full truth remains hidden].

This has to be seen as what Peter was saying to Cornelius, who was Roman. As someone from Rome, it makes sense that Peter would say, “in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.” That means Peter was speaking the Word, as Yahweh speaking through him, saying, “The same sacrifice of self, to wear the face of God, applies in all places.” In no way did Peter imply that he spoke with the authority to determine who was a Saint, because Peter was just one servant of Yahweh.

The translation then has Peter say to Cornelius and the other Gentiles, “You know the message he sent to the people of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ–he is Lord of all.” That translation implies that the Romans were present in Jerusalem when Jesus was executed, but then leaps to an expectation that they knew all about the truth of who Jesus was. While the Scripture gives some impression that Roman guards and leaders made remarks when weird things happened when Jesus was crucified, Peter’s initial rejection to meeting with Gentiles [not read today] says he would not have known anything about what “they” [as “You”] knew. He did not care to know what Gentiles knew. This becomes cleared up with a better translation of what is written here.

Luke wrote that Peter said, “ton logon honapesteilen tois huiois Israēl , euangelizomenos , eirēnēn dia Iēsou Christou — houtos estin pantōn Kyrios.” This literally translates to state: “this word which he sent with them sons Israel , proclaiming the good message , wholeness through Jesus Anointed One — this being in all Master.”

As can be seen, what Peter said [only understood by divine assistance] is greatly different than some simple history of Jesus, which [at that time] was not that widely known. The power comes from hearing Peter tell Cornelius, “before now this state of righteousness that is acceptable to Yahweh has only been received in those sons of Israelite descent , we are the sons who proclaim the truth of God’s messages through prophets , we give wholeness to the written word that have only partially been grasped and this ability come through us having been reborn as Jesus so we too have become the Christ — this state of being we all possess means Yahweh is the Lord over our souls.”

When Peter then is shown to have said to Cornelius, “That message spread throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John announced,” this is where the importance of “You” is written. This series of words begins with the capitalized Greek word “Hymeis,” which becomes Peter recognizing Cornelius and the other Gentiles were likewise given a taste of the Holy Spirit, leading them to summon Peter as one truly filled. Thus, the following word, “oidate” says they were able to “appreciate” the message [as “declarations” or the spread of talk] of righteousness that had spread throughout the lands there controlled by Romans.

Included in what the Romans had heard, from having open ears to the common talk, was: “how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power; how he went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.”

In that, the central focus becomes written: “echrisenauton ho Theos Pneumati Hagiō.” This says, “this anointment of him this God Spirit Holy.” This places more importance on Jesus being a man made special by God [where “anointed” reflects the “Christ”], through [as John had said: someone would come not baptizing with water, but by …] the Important divine Spirit of Yahweh, married to the soul of Jesus. That focus says that the union of Spirit made Jesus Holy, as God incarnate in human flesh. This then leads to the word “kai,” which announces importance to come, where that importance is then stated “power.” The “power” of Jesus was all due to God’s Holy Spirit” being upon Jesus.

It was that empowerment of the Holy Spirit that allowed Jesus to do good and healing all, while also being the one who ordered his disciples into internship, doing the same. The power was not limited to Jesus, because the power came from Yahweh … from “Above.” The power was to counter the “oppression of the devil,” where “diabolou” is better understood as a soul that has been trapped in the lures of the world [not heaven].

While that is a concept that most Christians today will freely profess faith in: Jesus being anointed by God and given His Holy Spirit; the point of Peter saying that was Peter too [and all other Apostles – Saints] was anointed in the same manner. Peter was not telling Cornelius and his Gentile soldiers who wanted to receive Yahweh’s Holy Spirit and become righteous, with saved souls, “Man, you should have been there. You could have touched Jesus and got some of that on you.” Instead, Peter explained why he told them about how special Jesus was, by saying “We are witnesses to all that he did both in Judea and in Jerusalem.”

Here is the first of the two uses of “witnesses” [“martyres,” from which “martyrs” comes]. The word translates as “eye-witnesses,” which can only attest to “witnessing” God anoint with Spirit Holy when the same state of being has come upon Peter and others like him, all like Jesus reborn. No one can speak the “truth” [verse 34] and say, “We were there watching Jesus be made Holy.” Thus, the reason why “martyres” has become the English word “martyr” [meaning “a person who is killed because of their religious or other beliefs”] is because Peter [and all likewise filled with Yahweh’s Holy Spirit] had died of self-ego and self-will, sacrificing one’s soul-flesh to God, so they could become Sons of man [not a human gender distinction].

To make this point, Peter is then shown to have told Cornelius, “They put him to death by hanging him on a tree; but God raised him on the third day and allowed him to appear.” This talk of death and resurrection is then Peter explaining that he, just like Jesus of Nazareth, had to sacrifice his soul to Yahweh, so he could be reborn as His Son, also in a body of flesh that was human.

In this, Peter called the instrument of death “a tree” [from the Greek “xylou”], which is different than the “stauros” or “upright stake” Jesus told his disciples they had to raise, in order to follow him. The difference says an upright stake means righteousness, where an instrument of death is made of dead matter – a tree killed and honed.

When Peter said “God raised him on the third day,” the slower way to receive divine meaning from that is to see the value of the number “three” alone. This says Jesus was raised “upon the third,” which means death is equated to the number two. Two becomes the body and the soul united, which can also be stated as a son [souls have only masculine gender] with God’s breath of life. To then become “on the third” [from “en tē tritē”] means to have then received the “third” element that brings a “raised” state of being, becoming righteous and eternally saved. That “third” addition is the Holy Spirit [or the “Spirit” that makes one “Holy” or “Sacred” – a Saint]. With that elevation to divine status, all becomes the light of “day,” as darkness has forevermore been overcome.

When Peter said that Jesus was resurrected and allowed to appear, the surface meaning is he came to the disciples, so they knew he was raised. However, the deeper, divine meaning is after Jesus ascended, after which he was then allowed to appear in the bodies of his disciples. That transformation was possible because they too had died and the third state of being had been received. It was then the Apostles saw the same light of day as Jesus reborn. The surface meaning becomes little more than a tidbit of ‘inside skinny’ told by Peter to Cornelius, making it be rather meaningless to him; but, as a statement about Peter coming to Cornelius as the resurrection of Jesus within his flesh, Jesus was then appearing before Cornelius [looking like Peter]. That becomes powerful, when read with divine assistance.

Then, Peter is shown to say to Cornelius, “not to all the people but to us who were chosen by God as witnesses.” That says what I just presented. Jesus did not simply appear to everyone in the world, nor to all Jews, nor to just disciples trembling with fear because Jesus had died. The resurrection of Jesus was only to appear in those who submitted their souls to Yahweh, who had then become reborn as His Christ, Sons of man, Jesus newly appearing. Again, the use of “witnesses” says Peter was speaking from personally knowing the presence of the Holy Spirit and the life of righteousness known by Jesus from birth.

Next, the NRSV translation has Peter telling Cornelius, “[it was us] who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead.” That once again sounds like Peter telling Cornelius he got to do some things nobody else can ever do, after Jesus left the world. Instead, those “chosen by God” have to be seen as given the divine blessing that says, “to us who did eat with” [from “hemin hoitines synephagomen”], where there is no mention of Jesus. The disciples who became Apostles dined on holy texts and singing psalms of prayer and lament, all while praying to Yahweh to lead them.

The holy texts became the spiritual food upon which they fed, which suddenly made deeper sense, once filled with God’s Holy Spirit. Thus, it was that outpouring of divine understanding that became [following the use of “kai”] importantly: “drink with him after this rising him out from dead.” That says they became the blood of Yahweh’s Christ, which allowed them all to become “him” [Jesus], them “rising” to that state of being “after drinking with Yahweh.” It was then their own deaths of self that made room in their soul-body duality for the third Holy Spirit.

The translation then has Peter telling Cornelius and his soldiers, “He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one ordained by God as judge of the living and the dead.” Here, a confused Christian today hears the third person pronoun “he” and immediately thinks that Jesus appeared in the upper room and began telling the disciples what they needed to do, after they ate some fish and drank some leftover Passover wine together. That is wrong to think, because “he” is Yahweh, the one whose Word they consumed and who Holy Spirit filled their bloodstreams.

Just as Yahweh commanded Jesus of Nazareth [born of a woman in Bethlehem] to “preach to the people and to testify” that Yahweh was his Father, being the Son of man, it was Yahweh’s Holy Spirit that told Peter and his fellow Saints to do the same. Once they had become Jesus reborn, they would then testify to that fact, having become that themselves. All of this is “ordained by God,” who is the “Judge” [where the capitalized word “Kritēs” is written].

Here, the Greek written by Luke needs to be more closely inspected. From realizing Peter was speaking of the power of God to ordain and certainly “Judge” [not “judge”], the words written become: “zōntōn kai nekrōn.” The presence of “kai” between those words surrounding it means Yahweh is the “Judge of the living” [from “Theou Kritēs zōntōn“]. Without going beyond that point, that says Judgment by Yahweh is based only on those souls who have gained eternal life, therefore “of living.” That judgment comes when one is ordained as a righteous soul married to the Holy Spirit, becoming the rebirth of Jesus in the flesh. Judgement Day for that soul is one “living” eternally, before physical “death” comes upon one’s flesh [and it will come].

That certainty is then emphasized by the word “kai,” such that “death” requires no judgment from Yahweh. Simply by being born mortal, one’s flesh will die, meaning a soul not saved [true Judgment] will return to another body of flesh [a baby born], bound to repeat that cycle of death endless [or when one becomes ordained by Yahweh as “living”]. The use of “kai” makes it important to realize that “death” becomes one’s own soul bringing that judgment upon itself.

This reading then ends with Peter telling Cornelius and Gentile soldiers, “All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.” While it is true that Jesus is the model for all who are ordained by Yahweh to lead righteous lives and preach the good message of Salvation [the meaning of “Jesus” is “Yahweh Saves”], all the prophets wrote of Yahweh. It is belief of Yahweh, as God Almighty [not Jesus], that brings true “forgiveness of sins.” Jesus is the model of one who has never sinned, so once God has made a soul’s past sins be erased, then one becomes the resurrection of Jesus. The “name” Jesus is then that of Yahweh, such that being “in the name of Jesus Christ” means having married Yahweh and taken His name in marriage, Anointed with the Holy Spirit so all past sins are forgiven, allowing for one’s flesh to become the new home of Jesus resurrected.

As a mandatory reading selection for Easter Sunday, the first of eight mandatory readings from the Acts of the Apostles, the importance of this reading comes from not seeing it as Peter telling Cornelius all about how well he knew Jesus of Nazareth and followed him all around. Seeing that weak meaning means Cornelius would end up being just like a modern Christian, doing little more than saying he believed Peter, never actually becoming Jesus reborn. We have to read this selection as if we are Cornelius and Peter is himself the resurrection of Jesus [as an Anointed One] telling us how to save our souls from death.

During the Easter Season [which ends on Pentecost Sunday] the symbolism is fifty days [seven Sundays and then one more makes fifty]. This makes Easter synonymous with the Jewish Counting of the Omer. An omer is a dry measure, which are amounts of green fruits – the First Fruits of the year – that would be placed in the Temple of Jerusalem before the Passover feast. A daily count would be made, beginning on the second day of the festival of the Unleavened Bread [16 Nisan], so on the Fiftieth Day [Pentecost] those fruits would be deemed ready to eat. The ripening element of Easter [which is hidden from Christian eyes] is the time a disciple is prepared to become an Apostle. Thus, readings from the Acts of the Apostles [and not some book called the Acts of Jesus – aka the Gospels] is the need for a seeker of truth to find the need to surrender his or her soul to Yahweh and become ordained to enter ministry AS JESUS REBORN. One must be a true “witness” by having died of self-ego, putting on the face of Yahweh, so one personally knows what being Jesus means.

This is why this reading selection was purposely chosen to be mandatory, because it is written in divine language that one needs to be trained how to read it, so the truth shines through. This reading should be seen as leading to the unwritten book that proclaimed The Acts of Cornelius and his Gentile companions who became true Christians, because they heard, believed, and were transformed by the Acts of Apostle Peter. There should be seen a need for someone to write the book of the Acts of [You – Fill in the name].

1 Corinthians, Language, Teaching

1 Corinthians 15:1-11 – The resurrection of Saul into Paul

January 8, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

I would remind you, brothers and sisters, of the good news that I proclaimed to you, which you in turn received, in which also you stand, through which also you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message that I proclaimed to you–unless you have come to believe in vain.

For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me has not been in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them–though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. Whether then it was I or they, so we proclaim and so you have come to believe.

——————–

This will be the New Testament reading selection, if the mandatory reading from Acts 10 takes the place of the Old Testament choice from Isaiah 25. If so, it will be read aloud on Easter Sunday, Year B principal service, according to the lectionary schedule of the Episcopal Church. If chosen, it will follow the Acts 10 reading, which states, “We are witnesses to all that [Jesus] did both in Judea and in Jerusalem.” That will be followed by verses read from Psalm 118, which sings, “The right hand of the Lord has triumphed! the right hand of the Lord is exalted! the right hand of the Lord has triumphed!” Following this should be a reading from John’s Gospel, which says, “go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.” [A similar account from Mark’s Gospel is an alternate Gospel choice.]

In this letter of Paul to the true Christians in Corinth, it is important to see the comparison to the Acts 10 reading. There, the verses have been chosen so we only hear what Peter said to Cornelius, his household and some of his soldiers, who were all seeking to become Christians. Cornelius was a devout man who prayed and offered alms, so God sent an angel to him, telling him to go with his followers to Joppa and seek a Jew named Simon, called Peter. That soliloquy becomes a reflection of all of the Epistles found in the New Testament, where one writer has been filled with God’s Holy Spirit [from marriage of a soul to God], has become Jesus reborn in the flesh, as another Anointed One of Yahweh [the Christ], who thereby speaks to many seeking to be Christians. It is from this realization that one must examine all of Paul’s letters, so that truth clearly stands out.

Immediately upon inspection, we find this NRSV translation is playing to the hearts and minds of those who tend to be the most active in the churches of Christianity today, which are primarily women. In the translation, which properly separates the segments of words “I would remind you” from “of the good news that I proclaimed to you” with comma marks, the error is finding between those marks the words “brothers and sisters.” That is not written.

In reality, this beginning to verse 1 states this in Greek: “Gnōrizō de hymin , adelphoi , to euangelion ho euēngelisamēn hymin ,” There is only one word written in that space between comma marks; and, that word translates to “brothers.”

This must be seen as a purposeful statement from Yahweh, sent through the pen of Paul and not Paul being caught up in the male-domination of ancient times. Yahweh is all-knowing, enough to know a time would come when false Christians would pander to human sexuality; still, He did not have Paul write the Greek word for “sisters.” In some places in his letters, Paul referred to women by name, which says the Christians he wrote to included both human sexes; and, one can assume that early Christianity likewise had a strong number of women present, as it does today. This means if is important for a reader to closely look at what is written, because a translator might be taking liberties that will lead one away from the truth of Scripture.

It is most important to understand the concept of marriage of a soul to Yahweh. Yahweh, as the Father, just as the word “God” is masculine, whereas “goddess” is feminine. Since Christianity does not worship any “goddesses” [or “gods”], the realm of the Spiritual – of Yahweh – is masculine. As such, all human beings who marry Yahweh become His wives, where this is not a statement about souls being feminine in gender [a distinction found only in the flesh]. To see that best, one must realize that everything of the material world is dead, while everything in Yahweh’s Spiritual realm is living. A soul comes from the masculine, as an extension of Yahweh, so it brings the breath of life [a masculine trait] into dead matter [a feminine trait]. The freedom a soul is given at birth then makes it lose it masculinity, becoming neuter gender in a body of flesh. Because the flesh is feminine, as matter, it has been penetrated by Yahweh [the Father] and a neuter soul gives animation to dead matter [the feminine].

When this basic concept is understood, a wife of Yahweh becomes a neuter soul in a feminine body of flesh [nothing relative to sexual organs can be intuited in that scenario], which has submitted its control over that dead matter to Yahweh. In that marriage, when God’s send to the soul His Holy Spirit [a masculine soul addition], that soul is no longer neuter, having been made masculine. In that marriage of Yahweh and soul [a return to the Father, while still in the death of flesh], the soul ceases being feminine, having become Spiritually the Son of the Father, while still in a human body [of man]. Once that transformation has occurred Spiritually, the body of flesh that was feminine [dead matter controlling a neuter soul] becomes righteous and totally serves the will of the Father. Therefore, the wife has become an Anointed One of the Father, as a Son of man, which brings about the name of Yahweh – Jesus – which means “Yahweh Saves.” A soul has been saved by returning to Yahweh, before the death of the flesh it inhabits.

To me, this is a simple concept. We all see Jesus as a male, who called himself the Son of man. It becomes simply that acceptance that is then projected onto every human being [those “this of man” – “tou anthrōpou”], meaning all who become the Christ, chosen by Yahweh to be married to His Holy Spirit, are also made His Son, as Jesus reborn. Thus, all true Christians becomes “brothers” in that common relationship with the Father, regardless of the gender of their dead matter surrounding their transformed souls.

Simply by understanding this most solid cornerstone of truth that IS CHRISTIANITY – where all members, male and female, are Jesus Christ resurrected in dead matter – all are “brothers,” because “sisters” becomes a statement of refusal to become masculine by the Spirit. It reduces the truth of Christianity to the same level of failed devotion to Yahweh that was Judaism and all other religions in the world.

Another error of translation is overlooking the capitalization of the word “Gnōrizō,” which is the first person indicative and the first person subjunctive usage of “gnosis,” meaning “known.” This means the capitalization shows the importance of a statement of fact [the indicative mood] and a statement of the future and/or present hypothetical [the subjunctive mood], where the importance becomes a divine statement being made by Paul. His chapter then begins by stating, “I make known” or “I could make known.” That duality from the same word then speaks directly to the “brothers” in Christ, as those who were Jesus reborn in Corinth [males and females] that Yahweh is speaking in this letter [indicative]. At the same time, the same word is speaking to all [then and now] who need to hear the voice of Yahweh speaking through Paul’s words, so they will receive the knowledge that leads one [all sexes] to become “brothers” [subjunctive]. The translation as “I would remind” is then misleading, in the subjunctive mood only, lacking any way of being seen as a statement of vital importance [from capitalization].

From that word comes the little Greek word “de,” which the NRSV sees as unimportant, thus not translated. The word bears the importance of a statement that says “now” [a present tense declaration], while also reflecting “next, on top of this, or moreover.” (Strong’s Usage) As this is the beginning of Paul’s fifteenth chapter in a letter sent to the Christians of Corinth, these first two words say Yahweh has been speaking through Paul in everything written prior, so “now” here is another lesson that God is stating “to you,” where “you” is then clarified [after a comma mark] as “brothers” [in Christ].

Following the comma that sets off “brothers” is Paul writing, “of the good news that I proclaimed to you.” This means he wrote the word “euangelion,” which is generally known as “the Gospel,” which means “the good news.” This, like reading Paul write “adelphoi” and then believing that means “brothers and sisters,” becomes a severely misleading element of today’s Christianity. The truth relative to the meaning of “good news” has been completely lost.

When Paul wrote, as the voice of Yahweh speaking to true Christians in Corinth, “of the good news that I proclaimed to you,” that “good news” was not Paul going from town to town saying, “Jesus is the Messiah. Our Messiah has come … and gone … but he rose again … then ascended … but it is all a sign of good news to believe!” That is how many Christians think, when they hear someone say “spread the Gospel.”

Realizing there was no New Testament yet published when Paul wrote, and realizing none of the four “Gospels” were known by anyone, like they are known today, the “good news” Paul spread was akin to him saying, “Remember when this prophet you have memorized said this?” Or, “Remember how David wrote this in his Psalm?” Paul was addressing the questions the Jews [and then Gentiles] had about a prophesied Savior; and, Yahweh was answering those questions in ways that no one had ever heard explained before.

Those answers were the “good news” and it was so good that those hearing it became saved Spiritually. When Paul arrived in Corinth and began answering the questions Jews [and Gentiles] had about Scripture, which had never been convincingly explained to them before, his answers [spoken by the Holy Spirit] transformed them. It was to the new Christians in Corinth just as three thousand [or so] heard Peter and the others doing the same explanations of Joel, telling that “good news.” The truth of explanations of Scripture opened hearts and minds, allowing the Holy Spirit in.

Seeing that, Paul then wrote, “which you in turn received.” That means they heard the truth be spoken and accepted it as the truth they had been seeking to find. It also says they then “received” the Holy Spirit, which made them Christians, just like those three thousand pilgrims on Pentecost.

Confirmation of that “receipt” of the Holy Spirit is why Paul then wrote, “in which also you stand, through which also you are being saved.” The Greek word “hestēkate” is translated as “you stand,” but this means they “stood firm” in faith of the truth, which makes this a parallel of Jesus telling his followers they had to raise their stakes. To “stand firm” is to become a solidly planted stake in the earth, upon which the good vine grows good fruit. Being “saved” means having married their souls to Yahweh, becoming His wives.

Paul then wrote something like a disclaimer, which becomes the prior possibility of the subjunctive mood having been written, stating, “if you hold firmly to the message that I proclaimed to you–unless you have come to believe in vain.” That says true Christians “take possession of the message” [the meaning of “katechete”], where “take possession” means the sacrifice of self-ego, so one’s soul can be divinely possessed by the Holy Spirit. Those who truly married Yahweh will be in that transformed state of being; but, those faking it will “have come to believe in vain.” There, the Greek word “eikē” [“vain”] says they exist with “no value,” which is the same state of being one had before [since birth]: a soul ruled by its flesh.

In the translation that follows, where the NRSV shows Paul writing, “For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received,” the literal English translation says, “I delivered,” where the capitalization of “Paredōka” becomes a statement that the self-ego of Paul was not the “I” [first person singular] speaking. Instead, Paul spoke by being led by the Mind of Christ, as the messenger of God. That delivery was “for” the need “of you,” who questioned the meaning of divine texts never explained. Paul then delivered the answers to the “what,” most importantly [the unseen use of “kai”] that which Paul “received” from Yahweh. There, again, the first person singular says Paul, a seeker like those in Corinth, sacrificed his “I’ to “receive” the Holy Spirit and be in possession of the Mind of Christ.

This has to be grasped, because the normal Christian brain today reads [or hears], “that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures” and thinks “Christ” means Jesus. It does not. It cannot, because one who has been “Anointed” by Yahweh has been awarded eternal life, which cannot die. Jesus was the “foremost Christ,” who died in the flesh and was resurrected, but Paul could not attest to that as fact.

Paul could attest to himself having “died,” so he could become the “Christ.” Thus, because Paul had become the “Christ” [his name change from Saul to Paul], he “died” of self-will and his sins [Jesus asking Saul, “Why do you persecute me?] were erased. It was the Torah, Psalms and Prophets, whose writing tell everyone who sacrifices self to Yahweh will be saved, through becoming the “Christ” [Greek for one “Anointed” by Yahweh].

The known story of the time of the feast of the Unleavened Bread, when Jesus died, was buried, and after three days raised becomes a distraction to modern Christians, because they only know that was what happened to Jesus. Paul spoke as Jesus reborn, so he could see his old self [Saul] “was buried,” never again to be the flesh that ruled over his soul. In Saul’s case, he specifically was blind “for three days,” before his sight returned and he saw the light of Christ, changing his name to Paul. He had been raised after three days. Paul’s story was the same as Jesus’ retold, which means all the true Christians in Corinth had similar stories of themselves: died, buried, raised. The number “three” becomes the addition of the Holy Spirit to their body and soul, as the Trinity: Father, Son, Holy Spirit.

When the NRSV translation then says, “that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve,” it must be remembered that Saul was not a friend of Simon Peter or any of the disciples of Jesus. Because Judas Iscariot had been a traitor that was not present in the upper room, what Paul wrote is then relative to Pentecost, not Easter. It was after the seven weeks “Counting the Omer” had passed, when Simon, called Peter [aka “Cephas” or “Rock”] had the Holy Spirit come to him, so he “appeared” as Jesus reborn. The same happened to “the twelve,” because by Pentecost Sunday they had elected another follower of Jesus to take the place of Judas Iscariot.

When Paul then wrote [led by the Holy Spirit], “Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time,” the number “five hundred” does not jive with the nearly three thousand who heard Peter and were transformed. The meaning of “he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time” [no “sisters” written] says that the spread from twelve to three thousand then [from “epeita” being a statement of “afterwards”] led to the transformation of “five hundred more resurrections of Jesus” [males and females included]. It says all were transformed at the same time [from “ephapax” meaning “once, once for all; at once”]. The use of “at one time” also means this transformation was a permanent bonding of a soul with Yahweh, never to be undone.

The numbering of “five hundred brothers at once” becomes clarified, when Paul then added, “most of whom are still alive, though some have died.” This then has less to do with only “five hundred” becoming reproductions of Jesus Christ, but more to do with the other twenty-five hundred on Pentecost. Paul was saying “most of them were still alive in the Christ Mind,” which means they took a little more time to truly transform into Jesus reborn and earn their souls eternal life. Three thousand [there about] were touched by the Holy Spirit, with five hundred of those touched becoming full, permanent resurrections of Jesus as the Christ, instantly. Some, however, reverted back to being Jews, who came under heavy rejection by the Jews [men like Saul persecuting them], so they stopped receiving the Holy Spirit. In doing so, they returned to a death sentence, which is the judgment all mortal creatures are born to find, without receipt of Yahweh in marriage to their souls. Still, most would eventually make the full transformation.

From this God-led knowledge of what happened before Paul’s soul was saved by Yahweh, he then knew that James was later transformed. This is worthy of being understood that the Saints married to Yahweh’s Holy Spirit were able to transform disbelievers, such as was James, the brother of Jesus [the son of Mary and Joseph]. The name “James” is related to “Jacob,” such that the name means “Supplanter” or “He Who Closely Follows.” This name remaining the same [after conversion from Jew to Christian] says James was sent by Yahweh to be the brother of Jesus, who would later be reborn in the name of Jesus, supplanting him in the line of Mary and Joseph. James would become a ‘twin’ of Jesus, figuratively. Just as Jacob took the birthright of Isaac from his brother Esau, James would assume the role as leader of the Jews [versus Gentiles], as Jesus had been. Those two brothers were wary of one another, just like James rejected Jesus as the Son of man.

With this mention of James, before the mention of Paul [as the last saved], in between is “then to all the apostles.” This use of “apostolois” cannot be seen as “the twelve,” who were saved well before [not “afterwards”]. It then says all who are married to Yahweh, who will become reborn as Jesus Christ, will be “messengers” of the clarifications of truth, as to the meanings of Scripture.

When Paul is then shown to write, “Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me,” here that little word “de” is omitted from translation, which means “next, on top of, moreover.” As such, the statement of “last” [from “eschaton,” a word connected to “eschatology”] says another phase comes last. This use, at the beginning of a new verse [not capitalized] becomes a statement of the “endlessness” of salvation. It says salvation will “last until the end of time” and it will be the “next” step that comes “to all” souls saved.

The meaning of “as to one untimely born” simply says when this transformation takes place, no one will know. One cannot set a fixed date beforehand, as to when one’s soul will be saved. No checklist of good things to do can be marked off, like being married to Yahweh brings a set number of merit badged that have to be earned, in order to become deemed an Eagle Scout. Still, the same word “last” means when that birth of salvation does arrive, then there will be no time limit as to when it ends. It is “last” because it is “untimely born.”

For Paul to say, “he appeared also to me” means his birth of salvation was totally unexpected, seemingly coming from nowhere. Saul was traveling to persecute Christian Jews, when he saw a light flash and heard a voice asking him why he did what he did. Saul had not planned the transformation that would come over him.

It is this aspect Paul having been “untimely born” that led him to write, “For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.” In reality, that is a poor translation. What is written makes this become crystal clear, as the Greek text states: “Egō gar eimi ho elachistos tōn apostolōn.” Literally that says, “I for exist the least of the apostles,” which must be looked at closer.

The capitalized first word is “Egō,” which is the first person pronoun “I,” but the capitalization makes it become the importance of “Self,” which is a “Soul” that is led by its body of flesh. It is why the English usage of “ego” is synonymous with “self-importance” [thanks to Freud and Jung]. This is then followed by the word ”eimi,” which is a statement saying, “I am” or “I exist.” This means the focus of Paul’s words were not on himself, or his own “ego,” but importantly a statement about all “Ego” that declares “I am.”

That becomes a declaration of how little “Ego” means, compared to salvation by Yahweh. It says the “least” element that makes one a “messenger for Yahweh” is self-importance. That becomes a statement that the sacrifice of self, in marriage to Yahweh, is how one retains the permanence of salvation and does not turn away and re-embrace death, as a desire to become again a mortal prison for a soul.

That realization becomes why Paul said he was “unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.” The same lack of fitness applies to all who wear the face of Self and refuse to submit that “Ego” before Yahweh, refusing to wear His face as His wife.”

Here, the Greek begins as “hos ouk eimi,” where the word “eimi” is repeated, as “who not exist.” This becomes relative to the “Egō gar eimi,” where the negative state of “ego” [“not exist”] is then “fit to be called an apostle.” Rather than apply “not” to “fit” and change that to state “unfit,” Paul wrote “no ego” makes on “fit to be an apostle.” Therefore, Paul was certainly not making a claim that he [an apostle, a Saint] was unfit to serve God; only those clinging to self-worth fall into that category.

This is then why we read Paul writing, “But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me has not been in vain.” In all cases of apostlehood, it is the sacrifice of self-ego that bring about the “favor” [from “chariti” meaning, “grace, favor, gratitude, thanks”], because [following a comma mark] Paul said, “eimi ho eimi” – “I am that I am.” In case you have forgotten, YHWH [Yahweh] is derived from the Hebrew meaning the name of God is “I AM That I Am.” Therefore, the “grace of God” comes when oneself has submitted fully to Yahweh’s control.

From that remarkable understanding, one can see why Paul wrote, “his grace toward me has not been in vain.” Here, Paul is shown to be repeating the earlier use of “vain” [“eikē”], when in reality his word choice now is “kenē,” meaning “void.” The same use as “vain” is possible, but the point made is that sacrifice of oneself to Yahweh is not simply made by “empty” words. This relates to those [in the subjunctive mood] who say they want salvation, but then refuse to receive the Holy Spirit to get it, doing nothing that tells Yahweh one will sacrifice self-ego to be His wife and follow His Will completely.

This commitment is then why Paul wrote, “On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them–though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me.” The opposite of “kenē,” which can mean: “empty (in moral content), vain, ineffective, foolish, worthless, false, unreal, pretentious, hollow” (Strong’s Usage) means Paul fully sacrificed himself to do the work of the Father who adopted him. This is not Paul bragging about doing more works than “all” other apostles, but “all of them” who offered Yahweh “empty” promises of devotion, doing nothing, made Paul’s work a willingness to do difficult tasks. The work Paul did was not self-motivated [“it was not I”] because he had sacrificed his “egō” [“not I”]. With that sacrifice brought upon Paul God’s Holy Spirit, as “charis tou Theou hē syn emoi” – “the grace of God was with me” [“me” being a statement of being, in union with Yahweh].

In the final verse of this reading selection, we read Paul stating, “Whether then it was I or they, so we proclaim and so you have come to believe.” Here, the conditional is presented as “if” [“eiti” means “whether, and if”], which becomes relative to “me” [“emoi”] being with Yahweh, such that the “if” is the union that makes an apostle. Paul was an “I” with the Holy Spirit. Likewise, the same “if” refers to many unions with the Holy spirit, so marriages to Yahweh also makes other be just like Paul. Those many act as “they,” all who are in union with Yahweh, all true Christians. It will then become the true trait of a Christian, as those who will “preach” [from “kēryssomen” meaning “we proclaim, preach, herald”]. Everyone married to Yahweh will speak in His name, so other souls can also be saved.” Paul wrote that to the Corinthian Christians in the second person, as “episteusate,” which goes beyond belief, to mean “you have faith.”

As a reading selection possible on Easter Sunday, when Jesus proved the truth of his raising after three days, the point of that miracle of Yahweh says Jesus was raised so he could become Paul. As Paul reborn as Jesus, others were led to true faith, from hearing the truth of the Word explained to them so their hearts opened up to Yahweh and they had faith by becoming another Christ, Anointed Ones of the Father, Sons of man – Apostles and Saints. The Easter season is not about repeating the story of Jesus coming out of his tomb, because the readings of Easter are all about others dying of self and becoming Jesus reborn in new flesh. The Easter season is seven weeks of basic training, so new Pauls and new Peters are sent by Yahweh out into the world, ministering His Word to those who have questions in need of answers.

John, Language, Teaching

John 20:1-18 – An Easter Gospel like never been read before

January 8, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

——————–

This is one of the two Gospel selections possible to be read aloud on Easter Sunday, Year B principal service, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. While the Track 1 and Track 2 options that become vogue during the Ordinary season after Pentecost have not officially begun in Easter’s season, one might presume that choosing the mandatory Acts 10 reading as the choice over the Old Testament reading from Isaiah 25 would lean one towards a Gospel reading from Mark afterwards. This reading from John seems like it would be chosen if the mandatory Acts selection were to override the Epistle reading from 1 Corinthians 15. Whichever the case [knowing Episcopalians never have the time to excessively read Scripture, preach about its meaning briefly, and then allow a full-pledged discussion that would lead anyone towards faith in Yahweh], something on the schedule will not be read and something will.

When one realizes this reading from John is an option in every year of the Episcopal lectionary cycle [A, B, and C], it has a chance to be read every year. The option of Mark 15, however, is now or never. The days when someone Episcopalian asked, “Want to study more from the Bible?” and anybody said, “Yes” are long gone.

The appearance of this reading from John [two blocks above] gives the impression it tells two stories, one of Peter and another disciple and another of Mary Magdalene. In reality it tells of three parts, where the first part is only verse 1. That first verse is John’s assessment of the eight verses that are told in Mark 16:1-8 [the alternate Gospel choice]. Matthew and Luke also wrote about this event, with both adding details that add to the depth of Jesus being found risen. Still, the scope of Mark, Matthew and Luke does not go beyond John 20:1-10. This makes the part of John’s story about Mary Magdalene seeing Jesus unique and above and beyond what the others tell.

The end of John 19 tells of Jesus being prepared for burial and then placed in the tomb of Joseph Arimathea. That took place on “the day of preparation,” which means Friday, the day before the Sabbath. This means Jesus was placed in the tomb before 6:00 PM on Friday, when the Sabbath technically began, so everyone could go to a place to observe the Sabbath. That Sabbath was actually the last day of the festival of Unleavened Bread, but because all Jews were limited to going no further than .569 miles [two-thousand cubits] on the day of rest, they all hung around town. There they would be restricted as to how far they could walk, until 6:00 AM on Sunday, meaning thirty-six hours would have passed since Jesus was placed in that tomb.

That is then followed by the word “de,” which is often not translated, but means “next, on top of this, or moreover.” Therefore, the first two words are importantly announcing the next divine occurrence in the story of Jesus. “This” begins the “next” stage of the divine life of Jesus.

The word “mia” means “one.” In Hebrew, “the first day” is written “yom echad.” That really only says “day one.” By John writing “mia” it has been assumed that “day” was implied, since the word “yom” is absent. While that assumption can be correct, it is not the only way to read the number “one,” following the importance of “This” which follows as “next” in the story of Jesus. The number “one” becomes a new “one” of importance, which follows an older “one” of importance. Think of this as why Christians recognize the seventh day on the first day of the week.

This is where the word “sabbatōn” is written, which translates as “sabbath.” Because the Greek is not capitalized, the assumption is that “seventh” refers to the number of days in a “week,” so the translators see John stating “on the first day of the week.” Again, while that assumption can be seen as correct, it again becomes too limiting, especially when this series of words began with a capitalize “This,” signaling the reader to see what “This” is. What this word means, in the lower-case spelling, is a new sabbath [seventh day, a day made holy by God] is being determined from this event. Therefore, John wrote divinely, “This next one of the sabbath,” meaning Sunday will become the new Sabbath, because of the events about to unfold.

The central focus is incorrectly paraphrased by mistranslating the Greek written: “Maria hē Magdalēnē” as simply “Mary Magdalene.” We see her having a last name, just like we see Jesus Christ having a last name [he does not]. In that written, two capitalized words [names] are present, with capitalization a signal of divine importance, such that two statements of divine importance are states as “Mary” and “Magdalene.” When the Greek word “hē” [or “ἡ”] is seen as the feminine normative article [as “the”], it too can be translated as saying “this.”

By realizing that, the capitalization of “Maria” can then be seen as stating the woman’s name “Mary,” with the name being importantly stated. Without any further clarification, as to which or how many going by the name “Mary” there are, one word now becomes the focus of John. Any number of women named “Mary” is stated. When that possibility of multiple people being named is realized, all being individually a “Mary,” John is not excluding Mary the mother of Jesus, nor Mary Salome [who are named by Luke in this story]. It still includes Mary Magdalene, simply as “Maria,” because she too was a “Mary.”

It is then from that name that John attached the feminine normative article “hē” [“ἡ”], which then separates one from three women name Mary. The focus turns from three to “this Magdalene.” That mention becomes necessary because three women of the same name are present at the same time.

For those who have pondered the idea that there was a relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, seeing this name of distinction in this light makes it easy to see such a relationship. It would have been arranged; and, Mary can be seen as not completely fulfilled by her submission to Jesus, more than she willingly [at a young age] submitted to be placed in such a “tower.” This makes her sacrifice become relative to an Essene religious belief system, where the prince Jesus needed to be paired with a vestal virgin priestess. Because she was placed in a “tower” of responsibility so young, she never had been allowed the complete freedom to know life as a woman [not that ancient Judea or Galilee offered women much in such freedoms].

It is then from this grasp of the name “Magdalene” that John wrote she “comes early.” This is where the Greek word “prōi” appears, rather than as the first word shown in the paraphrase of verse 1. The Greek implies a timeframe that is “early in the morning” or “at dawn.” Again, while this clearly leads one to assume John was referring to “early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark,” that single understanding misses the importance of two names being presented.

A deeper meaning surfaces, from seeing “Magdalene” as not only relative to one Mary, but to all three named Mary. They were all similarly placed in “towers” of commitment at a young age [see the story of Gabriel and Mary at sixteen], where that “early in life” commitment was what led them to go prepare the body of Jesus for moving to the family tomb [see the story of Lazarus].

This can be better seen when one realizes “at dawn” [the meaning of “prōi”] is when light of the sun has reached the horizon. While “darkness” means the sun has not fully risen, the Jewish clock begins at the “morning hour” of 6:00 AM. This timing is relative to sunrise, as well as denoting when the Sabbath officially ended and the first day began. Thus, women would be less likely to walk in darkness, and more as soon as sunrise made a trip of commitment safe in morning light.

When John then wrote the next segment of words that say, “to the tomb” [“eis to mnēmeion”], here the dual meaning says women named Mary went to the tomb where Jesus’ body had been laid the prior Friday. Still, it is also making a statement about the commitment made by the three women servants. They were prepared to go to their own tombs in the darkness they were surround by, each in a “Tower,” in particular one rising from Jesus

More than simply seeing ahead to the garden where the tomb is, and more than seeing the round stone used to seal the tomb has been rolled away, the deeper meaning speaks spiritually. As such, the sight become spiritual perception, which is the future of Mary [each of the three] perceived to lead to her [their] death[s], because Jesus was the “cornerstone” thought to be the escape from the “Tower.” Instead, the darkness of captivity in a mortal body, committed to serve Yahweh blindly, the three women were thinking [“she perceives”] Jesus’ [“cornerstone”] death [“tomb”] ends that hope and promise.

The happy ending to this first verse of John is then by “seeing the stone” of Jesus “having been removed from the tomb.” That becomes an important prophecy [the use of “kai”] that foretells all has not been lost, as their minds had thought from Jesus’ death. Simply by seeing the tomb’s doorway opened becomes the promise that hope still exists. While the three Marys did not know this, this says their hearts began beating faster when they saw the tomb open.

The Magic Eye acts as the way Scripture is written. [This one has Easter eggs.]

I have purposefully delved deeper into this first verse of John’s reading because it is important to see how this one verse more closely aligns with that which Mark wrote [as well as Matthew and Luke]. One needs to realize that this story [told by all four Gospel writers] was written well after the event of Jesus being found not in the tomb. Neither story contradicts another. They all sew together as a perfect robe for a priest of Yahweh. And, with verse 1 now explained in that deep manner, I will now more quickly address the rest of the verses in this reading.

Verse 2 then tells, “So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!” At this point, after realizing John did not exclude anyone named “Mary” from having the same vision of the tomb of Joseph Arimathea being opened, the immediate reaction would not to think that someone robbed the tomb. It also certainly would not be that Jesus had risen like promised, maybe inside cleaning the tomb up, because it was a loaner. The women had left early to get there to prepare the body for moving to another tomb, one in Bethany. Seeing the tomb opened would have immediately made the women think, “Oh my! The people coming to remove Jesus’ body have already beat us here and taken the body!”

It is from that panic that the two older women would have said to the younger Mary, “Run and get help!”

It is also worth thinking about where the women had walked from, to which Mary was now running back. It is not written where anyone stayed, beyond the known upper room in the Essene Quarter of Jerusalem, for the final Passover Seder meal [the last supper]. It is unlikely that the upper room would become a place of residence for all of Jesus’ followers, as all Jesus’ disciples had their families with them, staying somewhere in or near Jerusalem for the Passover feast and the festival of the Unleavened Bread. That mandatory commitment to Yahweh had begun on Friday and just ended the day before, on the Sabbath [when Jesus was actually risen, after 72 hours of death]. Everyone would have made prior arrangement where to stay, but it would not have been in the same room.

I have a theory about this place, relative to where the three Marys had come from, to which Mary Magdalene then ran. Because Joseph of Arimathea was a secret disciple of Jesus, secret because he [like Nicodemus] was a member of the Sanhedrin, he had a place of residence just outside the walls of Jerusalem, not far from where the garden was that he had a tomb newly hewn. Not only did Joseph allow the body of Jesus be placed in his tomb, but Joseph allowed the family of Jesus to stay at his place, knowing that would make it easier on the family to move Jesus’ body to Bethany on Sunday [the first day of the week]. This would also be where Peter stayed, which would deem him a cousin of Jesus, therefore family.

One should see how John had been at the execution of his father and stayed to watch the whole event with his mother and grandmother [among other women and some uncles]. Peter went and hid, along with the other disciples, making his denials more meaningful, when seen as a relative who denied being one of Jesus’ followers. John wrote about those denials, because Peter stayed with his relative, who needed to see what was happening to his father. In Mark’s Gospel [the author of Peter’s story], John was identified on the night of Jesus’ arrest as “A young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment, was following Jesus. When they seized him, he fled naked, leaving his garment behind.” (Mark 14:51-52) Rather than be “a young man” the text better translates to say, “a certain youth,” which was young John.

This says that Peter had taken up the responsibility of being the father figure of John, staying with the family at that time of need, knowing it was safe to be at the home of Joseph. This means that Mary Magdalene ran as a woman in her late twenties or early thirties, as well as a woman of that age could run in dress-like clothing. She first told “Simon Peter” and then she told her son John, telling both “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!”

Here, it becomes clear that John is more agile than Peter and able to run faster, taking shortcuts that an adult male could not take. Still, after beating Peter to the tomb and finding it open, like his mother had said, he waited for Peter. That is a clear sign that John was a child and not privileged to make adult decisions. Even after John said Peter entered the tomb, John did not enter until authorized by Peter. Peter, as an adult, wanted to make sure nothing foul had been done to the body of Jesus, which would have been traumatizing for his son to see his father’s body in that way.

I believe that so much was taken by Nicodemus because the Temple elite feared some zealot [they called the Essenes that a lot] would come and try to steal the body of Jesus and say he rose from death, but then ran away. Matthew wrote of the guards placed around the tomb to make sure that did not happen. Thus, one can assume that Nicodemus carried with him so much strong ‘dead body’ perfumes, not so much to anoint Jesus’ body with sweet smells, but to get some of that identifying scent on any would-be body thief. Still, because John did not write about a strong odor [nor anyone else], it becomes safe to assume that God [His angels] made sure there was no smell of death or perfume present.

In verse 10 the NRSV shows, “Then the disciples went back to where they were staying.” There is more to this than is shown.

The literal Greek states, “Returned therefore back with themselves these disciples.” While this can be read as John simply saying, “Peter and John returned to where they were staying,” that misses the importance of the capitalization of “Apēlthon,” which means, “Returned, Arrived, or Followed.” The divine elevation says Jesus not being found in his tomb, with the linens folded and rolled, means “Jesus has risen.” He is “therefore back with these disciples,” just like old times between “themselves.”

It is at this point that the duality of verse 10 means both, in the sense that Mary Magdalene has returned to the tomb. Peter then goes back to find the other disciples and tell them what he found. John, seeing his mother is there, stays with her, especially since she is crying and peering into the tomb. Just like a child not being able to make decisions left for men to make, neither could Mary Magdalene simply walk inside a tomb she did not own. By John staying, he could write about what took place next as a firsthand eyewitness. Had he returned with Peter, he would be telling something Mary told to him alone [a sign of a mother speaking to a son].

Here also, one is able to see how the other Mary women had never left. They had remained, most likely in prayer, arising to join Mary Magdalene when she returned and after Peter had left. This makes Luke’s account [mother Mary’s story] of “two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them” [Luke 24:4] be no different than John writing that “saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus’ body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot.” (John 20:12)

When John wrote, “Thinking he was the gardener,” he began that series of words with the single capitalized word “Ekeinē,” which says, “She.” This word does not show in the NRSV translation, and it is stated separately, before what John said Mary thought of this person.

As the feminine normative singular of “That one,” the proper substitute is “She.” Following the question asked, “Whom do you seek?” the divine elevation as the female companion of Jesus, “She” being “That one” who should be seeking her husband be the “Wife.” The importance of that one word statement [between a question mark and a comma mark] becomes why “She” began “thinking [Jesus] is the gardener.” This becomes a connection between Jesus and Mary as that same connection between Adam and Eve, where Adam was the gardener of Eden. In this case, “thinking” [from “dokousa”] becomes a spiritual flashback, of Freudian proportions.

John then wrote, “Jesus said to her, “Mary.”’ In that, “Mariam” is written, unlike the “Maria” of verse 1. For an unrecognized figure to speak the name of Mary, perhaps in a close personal ‘pet name’ way, it was a voice that Mary recognized. It might have even been the cemetery gardener in whom the soul of Jesus had entered and spoke, or it might have been an apparition [like the two angels or men dressed in gleaming white]. Regardless of who or what appeared, the voice spoke as Adam to Eve. Either way, the voice of Jesus was heard speaking lovingly to Mary, as there was no shouting her name, as if a call for her attention.

When Mary recognized her name spoken by Jesus, she called him “Rabbouni,” which John clarified meant “Teacher.” Both words are capitalized, giving them both divine essence. Both “Rabbouni” and “Didaskale” mean the same as “Master” or “Teacher,” while “Rabbouni” can mean “Rabbi,” as a clerical title. This response can mean that Mary was also a “disciple” or “pupil” of Jesus, but the divine meaning says the mind of Mary was flashing back to her soul’s time in Eden, where Adam loving called her “woman” or “wife” and she always responded, “My Master.” That means Mary responded as the wife of Jesus, to Jesus’ soul speaking. Still, the highest meaning of that says the soul of Mary was remembering the Son of God, from whose DNA ribs she had been made, making the body of Jesus be her “Master” copy.

This understanding then leads one to read John write, “Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” Here, the Greek importantly states, “Me mou haptou,” where the capitalization of “Me” places divine relevance of “Not.” To follow that with “me,” which is a statement of “being,” Jesus is importantly telling Mary that he is “Not Adam,” thus he is “Not” her biological twin standing before her, as that “Master.” Nor is the one standing before Mary Jesus, as the voice is “Not me” in that body. This makes the use of “haptou” go beyond a command not to touch, such that the word means “perceive.” This means Jesus appeared as something akin to a hologram or a ghost, which could only be perceived, not touched.

John actually wrote that Jesus told Mary, “not yet for I have ascended to the Father,” which says the body of Jesus is “not yet” back,” with his spiritual appearance being “I have ascended to the Father.” There is nothing that Mary could do to keep Jesus from doing what God would have Jesus do, so there is nothing about physical touching Jesus that would have kept him from ascending to the Father [see Thomas sticking his fingers in the wounds of Jesus to grasp that point]. This statement also has no sexual connotations, as if Mary wanted to kiss and hug someone who sounded like Jesus, but looked like a gardener. The translation of “touch” is better left alone, going with “to grasp with the senses, apprehend, perceive.” (Wiktionary meaning for “haptou“)

In that set of instructions is found one use of “brothers,” which should not be read as the sons of Mother Mary, sons of Joseph. Here, the use of “adelphous” means all of those disciples who would become Apostles. In that transformation, they too would become Sons of the Father, whose God would be their God too [Adam’s and Eve’s, Jesus’ and Mary’s]. For that to happen, the disciples would all need to be rebirths of Jesus, all as Yahweh’s Anointed Ones, so as Sons of Yahweh [including the women], who would be their Father just as Jesus would be related. That relationship would be spiritual, rather than material, so all would change by receipt of the Holy Spirit and become “brothers of me” [“adelphous mou”].

By seeing capitalization brings about a divine meaning, higher than normal spoken language conveys, she said, “I have perceived this Master.” She did not say she saw Jesus, as his body was still missing. Therefore Mary uttered a prophecy of what would happen on Pentecost, saying “I have perceived Jesus as the Lord over all of us here.” Just as Eve saw Adam as her Master copy, such that she was in Adam and Adam was in her, the same future awaited the disciples, where Jesus would be in them and they would be in Jesus, as “brothers.” Like Jesus, the Father would be in the Apostles, as the Apostles would be in the Father.

Language, Mark, Teaching

Mark 16:1-8 – An Easter message that packs a wallop of meaning

January 8, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

——————–

This is the second option [Track 2?] for the Gospel selection to be read aloud on Easter Sunday, Year B principal service, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. In the season of Easter, beginning with Easter Sunday, the Church makes a certain reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles mandatory to be read, either taking the place of an Old Testament reading possibility [the First Lesson] or taking the place of the Epistle reading possibility [the New Testament slot]. In some way, by design or chance, this reading from Mark can be chosen over the first Gospel choice from John. The John 20:1-18 option is optional to choose in all three years of the lectionary cycle, whereas Year B primary service is the only shot Mark 16:1-8 has to be read aloud and thereby be explained in homily.

Knowing this is the second option for the Gospel and assuming it will be read if the mandatory Acts reading takes the place of the second lesson [the New Testament category], that would mean this reading from Mark will be preceded by a reading from Isaiah 25, where the prophet wrote, “Then the Lord God will wipe away the tears from all faces, and the disgrace of his people he will take away from all the earth.” That will be followed by a selection of verses from Psalm 118, which sings, “The Lord has punished me sorely, but he did not hand me over to death.” Lastly, the mandatory reading from Acts 10 will be read, which states, “They put him to death by hanging him on a tree; but God raised him on the third day and allowed him to appear.”

Before delving into what Mark wrote about the first Easter Sunday, it is important to realize the Gospel of John recounts this differently. There certainly are opponents of Christianity who will challenge any seeming inconsistencies as being weaknesses that make the foundation of Christian faith crumble, from stories that approach one event from different perspectives. Different perspectives do not mean contradiction. In this regard, I recommend a true seeker, even an opponent of Christianity, read my interpretation of John 20:1-18 [on this website’s blog], because I show how nothing John wrote is contrary to what Mark wrote. It should be realized that Mark wrote the accounts of Simon Peter, so John’s direct mention of Simon Peter entering the empty tomb does not mean that Mark has to also tell of Simon Peter doing that. Not telling of something is not evidence that another who told of something was incorrect.

It is now important that I attest to a divine syntax that I have been led to realize and become somewhat fluent in reading, over years of practice. This divine syntax is necessary to follow, if one wants to grasp the deeper meaning of what is written. By reading under a new set of rules of language [by “speaking in tongues”], hidden meaning rises from the surface meaning that is all allowed to be seen by normal syntax. In this regard, one has to admit the texts of the Holy Bible were written in either Hebrew or Greek, such that English translations [beginning with the King James Version and multiplying like rabbits ever since] have been memorized by Christians and made to seem as if the Biblical characters all spoke English – a language with syntactical rules that differs from the divine language all Scripture is written by [from the Godhead]. The source of all holy text is God [Yahweh] and must be realized as perfection, as written; therefore, any changes made to that perfection [to suit the needs of translators] weakens the truth that is divinely told.

The Greek word “kai” is ordinarily a simple conjunction that is translated as “and,” according to the normal rules of Greek and that language being translated into English. I have found that the divine rules of syntax tell me to see “kai” as a marker word [not “and”], one that does not need to be read in English. The word “kai” should just be noticed, so one realizes something important will follow that marker word. In this case, where “Kai” is capitalized, such that another rule of divine language says all words capitalized take on higher meaning, of spiritual essence. This verse beginning with “Kai” [improperly translated as “When”] says the first series of words [to the comma mark] is an important spiritual statement that needs to be seen in that light, above the simple surface meaning that says, “When the sabbath was over.”

A literal translation of the Greek stating “Kai diagenomenou tou sabbatou” says, “Kai having passed this seventh day.” Because the capitalized “Kai” is seen as a signal to look for higher meaning in those words, “having passed” becomes a divinely inspired statement of time elapsing. Because the last verse in Mark 15 told about the burial of Jesus [on a Friday], the spiritual meaning of “having passed” is less about the days of the week having gone by, but the timing of Jesus prophesying he would die and after three days be raised. Seeing that, “having passed” becomes a divine statement of when those three days were officially over. By adding to that meaning “this seventh day” [not capitalized, therefore not specifically stating the Sabbath], Mark is making a very important statement [“Kai”] that the timeframe of Jesus’ prophecy was up on the seventh day, which was the day after his burial on Friday [the sixth day]. It also [by counting backwards] makes an important statement that Jesus died at 3:00 PM on Wednesday [the fourth day].

From seeing that being the deeper intent of Mark writing those words, the rest of verse 1 states, “Mary Magdalene , and Mary the mother of James , and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint Jesus.” While that seems to be Peter telling the names of three women who went to the tomb to anoint Jesus, one has to slow down and realize in these segments of words are five capitalized ‘names,’ each of them having a root meaning that importantly [capitalization] needs to be understood. Those root meaning are as follows [all sourced from Abarim Publications]:

Mary – “Beloved”
Magdalene – “Of The Tower”
James – “Supplanter” [or “He Who Closely Follows”]
Salome – “Peace”
Jesus – “Yahweh Saves”

When these root name meanings are seen as divinely raised to the intent behind the names, the rest of verse 1 can be read as: “Beloved Of The Tower, and Beloved the mother of Supplanter, and Peace bought spices, so that they might go anoint Yahweh Saves.” In this being based on the translations into English and not the literal Greek text, we find with closer inspection that some words have not been translated and the places one find “and” written and where the word “kai” is adding a mark of importance.

Based on that awareness, that written literally translates into English as the following segments:

“this Beloved this Of The Tower” ,

“kai Beloved this the one of He Who Closely Follows” ,

“kai Peace” ,

“purchased perfumes” ,

“in order that having come” ,

“they might anoint [the dead] him” .

Because some tend to see Mary Magdalene as some woman Jesus knew, who was a female disciple, this makes it clear that she was related to Jesus [“Of The Tower”] through marriage, as the wife of Jesus. As the wife “Beloved,” she was first in the list of women responsible for preparing the dead body of her husband for transfer from a loaner tomb, to the ‘family plot’ [the one Lazarus had been buried in].

The second most important “Beloved” is the mother of James, the half-brother of Jesus. Still, the word “mother” is not written, but implied from an article – “hē.” That same word [a letter in Greek – “ἡ”] is written before the first “Maria” and before “Magdalēnē.” At neither place has a translator seen reason to imply the word “mother” needs to be added. The presence of the word “kai” before the second “Beloved” says this woman has greater spiritual importance than the wife, where “kai” becomes the indication of the mother, one who conceived Jesus without physical penetration or intercourse. This makes “James” become a statement of her having since become a mother who conceived through intercourse with Joseph, her husband; but that couple had more children than just James. Therefore, the meaning of the name says the “Beloved” mother of Jesus also was one “Who Closely Followed He,” making that name become representative of her divine Son of man.

After seeing that identification of Mother Mary, one finds another use of “kai,” which says “Peace” is another element that must be understood. The name of the woman Mary Salome is that of an aunt of Jesus, as the wife of a brother of Mary the mother of Jesus. Her husband is believed to have been Zebedee, making Salome be the mother of James and John of Zebedee, saying they were cousins of Jesus. By a third woman being announced as important to know on a spiritual level, “Peace” must be read as the strength that held all three women up, enabling them to do the work they were leaving to do. Mary Salome became that “Peace” with them. She was a presence of calm for two women who were most distraught over the death of a husband and son.

The following segment is separated by comma marks, saying “purchased perfumes” or “bought spices.” That has to be recognized as a statement of the past, as acts done in preparation for this day. Since there would have been no buying nor selling on the Sabbath, these three women had gone on the day of preparation [Friday] and “bought spices” for the purpose of preparing the body of Jesus for transfer, from one tomb to another. They would have done that separate from Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus taking seventy-five pounds of embalming perfumes with them to prepare Jesus’ body for burial. This segment means Jesus was representative of their Sabbath to recognize, based on prior preparations. Their “day of preparation” was for Sunday, the first day of the week, not the Sabbath.

Most likely, these women did little more than cry and pray on the Sabbath, in preparation for doing what had to be done on Sunday morning. This becomes the focus of the next segment of words: “in order that having come.” More than them walking to the tomb as the meaning of “having come,” it was a day prepared for “having come.” Therefore, the word “hina” is written to connect that which had been bought in preparation, so it follows an order or schedule, such that a day of work had arrived.

The intuiting of Jesus, a name that means “Yahweh Saves,” says two things. First, a corpse no longer has a name. A male corpse is “him.” Second, the plan to anoint one who had already been the Anointed One of Yahweh means the conditional (“might anoint [the dead]”) says the women had given up hope that Jesus could not die, having assumed he had been given eternal life, therefore impossible to ever be dead.

Verse 2 then states, “And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb.” This verse also begins with the word “kai,” although not capitalized. This says the timing is important to understand. The two words “lian prōi” translate as “very early,” but the importance of “kai” says “lian” must be read as “exceedingly” or “extremely,” where the “earliness” means the second 6:00 AM ticked off. Any earlier and it would have still been technically the Sabbath.

There are two segments of words, set off by comma marks, that make the NRSV translation a paraphrase. The literal translation into English shows those segments as stating: “they come to the tomb , having arisen the sun.” The order of those segments is important to grasp.

First, “they come to the tomb” is stated in the present inductive, not in the aorist past, meaning the women left before the sun actually rose. That says sunrise had not yet occurred at 6:00 AM. However, the aorist active participle of “anateilantos” [“having arisen”] says sunrise occurred after they left to go to the tomb. It was then, second, as they were walking that “having risen the sun.”

Verse 3 then has Peter recall a conversation, one which he personally should not have been present to hear. By Mark writing, “They had been saying to one another, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?” this implies the conversation happened at the cemetery. For Peter to tell this to Mark [his writer], it means less in hearsay, but when this is shown to be the past, it says Peter could have heard the women voice their concerns as they were preparing to leave. It makes “among themselves” reflect back to a memory of Peter, as one present overhearing them talk. This past tense use of “were saying” could have been early in the morning, when the women voiced that concern before leaving to the cemetery. In that case, Peter sat nearby and heard them purposefully talk so he could hear them, as a way of them trying to motivate him to volunteer to go with them and do that work [as trying to make him feel guilty]. In that case, Peter knew he had let the women go alone, without offering to go along and possibly help them.

This makes “having looked up” be akin to having a premonition or imaginary vision of them reaching the tomb and seeing a stone in need of being rolled away. From this, going back to the “bought spices” or “purchased perfumes,” these women had not been to the tomb to watch the interment, as it happened so late in the day Friday, while they were shopping. Peter most likely had watched that interment [as secretly as a casual bystander could] and knew there would be guards there to help the women. Thus, he did not offer to go and possibly help, when he knew his help would not be needed and he did not want to be arrested. The vision the women has conjured up [“having looked up”], from fear of going without a man, disappeared when they saw the tomb already opened.

When Mark is shown to have written, “the stone, which was very large,” the separation by comma marks says the stone for the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea was “extremely large,” using the same extremity as was found in the earliness of the hour prior. This says the imaginations of the women led them to “see” which tomb was his [an act of “perception” beyond personal knowledge from past experience] and to realize that tomb was opened, no longer sealed by a stone greater than they had expected.

This is where linking John’s story to Mark’s is important, as John makes it easier to intuit that women and children did not have any rights to enter into tombs. That was only allowed to adult males. Therefore, the great importance comes from not thinking three women casually walked into an open tomb, previously where a dead body had been placed. The presence of a capitalized “Kai” has greater power when seeing the meaning coming from understanding someone [not the women] was evident, as “having entered into the tomb” because it was opened. The divine importance says God was the one “having entered into the tomb,” to retrieve the soul of His Son, who also was another “having entered into the tomb.”

From grasping the importance of that statement, rather than thinking women would go into a tomb not owned by either of them, without asking permission first, makes sense that the next segment of words tells of them seeing “a young man,” not inside the tomb, but outside, “sitting on the right.” This then gives the impression that “a young man” was thought to be “an attendant” [the meaning of “neaniskon”], who was employed by the garden cemetery. By stating he was “sitting on the right,” this implies the stone had been rolled away to the left. A “sitting” position [from “kathēmenon”] can even be a statement of him being in a “dwelling” or “residence,” implying the “attendant” was under a canopy or tabernacle.

When this is combined with the prior statement of “on the right,” where the word “dexiois” equally can translate as “the right hand,” this becomes descriptive of Jesus’s soul, which has ascended to the Father and sitting at the right hand of Yahweh. Seeing this, the word “sitting” can now be read as “enthroned.” This makes the reading from John [as explained in my commentary about that] be supported here, as to when Mary Magdalene was told by Jesus [who she thought was the gardener], “Not me appearance.” Instead of a “young man” actually being outside the tomb, the women saw Jesus there, as an unrecognizable transfiguration.

In the NRSV translation that adds, “and they were amazed,” this segment of words is begun by the word “kai,” signifying importance must be seen in what was witnessed. The “kai” leads to one word in Greek, “exethambēthēsan,” which makes the important statement: “they were greatly amazed.” Here, again, there is a superlative used [embedded in the usage applied normally to the root word “ekthambeó”], which elevates this word so it means the women suddenly felt as if they somehow had come into the presence of God. As such, their “amazement” was actually “great fear.”

Keeping in mind that no words have been exchanged between the women and the “attendant” or “young man,” it is now clear that the one in a bright robe knew the hearts and minds of the women. From that source of divine knowledge was spoken a series of segments that are missing important signs that keep the reader of the NRSV from comprehending.

To best grasp this, I will now do as before and break down the segments of words, complete with the correct punctuation, and literally translate the Greek into English. What was said goes like this:

“Not be terrorized” .

“Jesus you seek” ,

“the Nazarene” ,

“this one having been crucified” .

“he is risen” !

“not being here” !

“behold the place where they laid him” .

Because John wrote of Jesus speaking to Mary Magdalene, one must see this “young man” as the spirit [or soul] of Jesus, as an apparition. Rather than being a physical body, as would later seem to appear in the upper room, the appearance of a young man makes the soul of Jesus take on the appearance of Adam, the Son of God, made by His hand. Therefore, just as John wrote that Mary thought Jesus was the gardener [John later knowing it was Jesus, but not the man], that same entity has just spoken to three women in Mark’s Gospel.

In the first segment, the capitalized Greek word “Mē” is written, importantly stating “Not.” This then leads to the word “ekthambeisthe,” which was similarly stated as how the women felt great fear and fell down. The power of “Not” is then less about being a spoken word, but a presence that spoke to the women, such that the fear they had felt from seeing holiness before them suddenly ceased oppressing them. Because these two words end simply with a period mark, there is no sense of command that should be read into words spoken; but one should see that just as suddenly as the women felt weak and meaningless, they stopped and felt secure enough to stand up or kneel before this presence in white.

The next three segments are broken into important mind-reading steps, such that all three women were thinking the same things, all of which were known by the soul of Jesus, because he was married with the Holy Spirit and therefore one with the Father. In the segment that says, “Jesus you seek” [from “Iēsoun zēteite”], here is found the capitalization of the name “Jesus.” Returning to the previous section where I explained several names presented in verse 1, the meaning here now bears the same translation presentation. Thus, first stated is “Yahweh Will Save you seek.” That becomes the knowledge of Yahweh reading their hearts and minds, saying He knew they sought salvation through Jesus.

When next is said “the Nazarene” [from “ton Nazarēnon”], the capitalization of “Nazarene” brings out the name meaning [of a place, Abarim Publications] “One Of The Scattering.” While this statement can go quite deep in explanation [which I will sidestep for now], the point of this should be seen as knowledge that Jesus was born of Mary [there before this “young man”] in Bethlehem, not Nazareth. The use of “Nazarene” then speaks of Jesus as human, while also becoming spiritually elevated, as one of Yahweh’s spiritual seeds sown on earth. Jesus was one of many in the line of Adam’s soul that the hand of God had spread, planting holy seeds upon Israel.

The next segment then knows the three women stayed vigilantly at the cross upon which Jesus of Nazareth was crucified and taken down dead. The reason the women had left so early in the morning to get to the cemetery was because they witnessed that death and wanted to care for the corpse. They wanted to pour olive oil with sweet fragrances one last time upon his face and say prayers of lament for him. As women named “Beloved,” they all wanted to show the respect of love for one they had lost.

The “it” would be the soul; and, the use of “awakened” or “aroused” attests to what Jesus had said about Lazarus (on the other side of the Jordan): “Lazarus is only sleeping.” Lazarus likewise was in need of “raising, arousing, awakening” from the sleep that is death. A body never has life without a soul, thus a body is always asleep; but, a soul never dies, as it is always awake, but in need of a body if not saved from death.

To fully understand the impact of “it is risen,” Jesus was not standing physically before the women. The brilliance of his “robe” means he was observed in a transdimensional state of being, just as Peter, James and John saw Jesus “transfigured” along with Moses and Elijah. The soul of Jesus spoke to the women, saying “I am risen,” meaning his soul was then where he could truthfully say something like, “I am seated at the right hand of God, but you can see me as an apparition now. Later, you will have my body before you as you expected when you came early in the morning to here.”

Verse 7 then has the soul of Jesus tell them, “But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you.” In this, the exception [“but”] says seeing nothing in the tomb means nothing, because the body of Jesus had left the plane of the earth. This then speaks symbolically to the women [and Peter and John if there by then], saying, “enter your own tombs of self-ego death, so you too can “go” to the same place as went Jesus. It says Jesus will “go” to “tell his disciples” after you “go.” In this translation, the use of the third person pronoun “he” becomes confusing and could use clarification.

Clarification comes after a comma mark about telling the disciples, where one finds another usage of “kai.” This shows the importance of specifically naming Peter and the place Galilee. In addition to those two capitalized names is found between them the capitalization of “Proagei,” which means “It leads forward.” Again, the presence of capitalized names makes it important to see the root meaning of the names imposed into what was stated.

“Peter” – “Stone”

“Galilee” – “Rolling”

Simply from seeing the two names brings out importance to “Stone” and “Rolling,” where the women had just arrived to find a massive stone rolled away. By realizing the possibility that names are leading readers away from the hidden meaning, the instruction can now be read as: “this Stone that It leads before you towards these Rolling.”

Amazingly, this statement reflects back on Jesus knowing all about the unwillingness of Peter to come to the tomb, having nothing pertinent to do with talking about Galilee [the region where the disciples lived]. The capitalization of “Proagei” becomes an important statement about “It,” as the third person present indicative, meaning the Holy Spirit. That becomes the “Leader” that will become the same power “Rolling” away the “Stone” covering their tombs, after they submit them to Yahweh and become Jesus reborn. That “Leader” becomes metaphor for the “Christ,” which comes along with the name “Jesus” [Yahweh Saves].

The last two segments of verse 7 place focus on “there you will see him , just as he told you.” The use of “there” seems to mean “Galilee,” but when the name meaning spiritually says “Rolling,” “there” then becomes a place in the future, when the Holy Spirit will allow one’s eyes to open and “see” the truth as Jesus had seen. That place in the future will then be one prepared in the spiritual realm, as a room within the Father’s house. It will mean when all the things taught by Jesus will be understood perfectly and a soul will have come to know Yahweh personally.

Finally, verse 8 states, “So they went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.” Here, rather than “So,” this last verse begins with another capitalized “Kai,” signaling it to be most important to grasp properly. This word leads to one word, “exelthousai,” which has been used similarly twice before, meaning “having gone out” or “having come out.” The importance stated is then spiritually realized to be the whole experience of a glowing white presence speaking to them telepathically, as if it knew them personally. That becomes an impact statement about Jesus having come out of the tomb to greet his relatives and loved ones, not looking like himself and making them all fear God, while having their hearts warmed at the same time.

The next segment of words say, “having fled from the tomb.” This has the dual meaning [minimally] of saying they all ran away from the cemetery, returning to where they stayed quickly, while also saying deep within their souls they all knew they had escaped the fear of death, which is symbolized by the tomb. The promise of salvation means escaping the repetition of a dead body of flesh entombing a recycled soul, life after life. That “fleeing from the tomb” means salvation from reincarnation.

The next segment says that before this moment they “had seized for them trembling,” meaning they feared death tremendously. That past sense of fear had been removed. Thus, the next word is set apart by the use of “kai” internally in this segment of words. The “kai” states the importance of them having “amazement,” where the deeper meaning of “ekstasis” [the root for ecstatic] says they were overcome by a “trance-like state of being.” The fears they once let lead them had become disconnected, which was in itself bewildering to them.

As a short Gospel reading selection for Easter Sunday, it should be seen how much can unfold from only eight verses. The depth of understanding that comes from this selection is tremendous, while on the surface it seems other Gospel selections say more. The use of names in this selection, just like in that from John, becomes powerful; but few will ever see that or point it out so others can see it. Few will stand firm and say the three Marys saw Jesus. Many will be looking for something to happen in Galilee. This all becomes capable from true discernment, when one knows a divine system of language is in play; but most people are blinded by the syntax of English and paraphrases that dilute the truth. Therefore, no one is fluent in the language of God, so no one tells anyone the whole story that is written.

As the first Sunday in the Easter season, when it is most important to see how the mandatory readings from Acts are telling Christians it is not enough to meekly believe, but one must be prepared for ministry and the works of faith, few have teachers leading the seekers to that goal. At one time the Church knew this was important, setting up a system that is inspired by Yahweh; but over time that knowledge became lost. It is time to rekindle that Spirit and be prepared by the Word of Jesus Christ to return Christianity to what it is meant to be.

Explaining the Readings

Tag Archives: Easter Sunday

Mark 16:1-8 – Jesus appears as an angel to tell the women family members to tell Peter to prepare to meet Jesus

John 20:1-18 – Jesus appears as the gardener

Isaiah 25:6-9 – Eternal life means death being swallowed up forever

1 Corinthians 15:19-26 – All die in Man [Adam] so all will be made alive in divine Anointment by Yahweh as Jesus reborn

Easter Sunday Gospel Choices – Our Lord is Risen Indeed

Isaiah 25:6-9 – Destroying self to become a mountain for Yahweh

Acts 10:34-43 – Learning how to hear “in tongues”

1 Corinthians 15:1-11 – The resurrection of Saul into Paul

John 20:1-18 – An Easter Gospel like never been read before

Mark 16:1-8 – An Easter message that packs a wallop of meaning

The Episcopal Lectionary Discerned