Luke 20:38 - God is the God of the living not the dead

[Wootah]

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Revelations won in post #58]

No, Jesus said to the thief impaled beside him, "I tell you today, you will be with me in Paradise." There was no time limit set on that promise. It was not that very day. Jesus said he would resurrect people "on the last day," meaning during the Millennial Reign. (John 6:40,44) That is when the thief would be resurrected.

Read what you wrote ... today.

https://biblehub.com/text/luke/23-43.htm

Greek word is apparently semeron:

https://biblehub.com/greek/se_meron_4594.htm

Used in give us this day our daily bread apparently, also so many other uses that seem quite normal.

Read Deuteronomy 15:15, Deuteronomy 30:18, and Zechariah 9:12.

"...That is why I am commanding you to do this today." (Deut.15:15b) He was commanding them that day.

"I tell you today that you will certainly perish." (Deut. 30:18)

"Return to the stronghold, you prisoners with hope. Today I am telling you, 'I will repay you, O woman, a double portion.'" (Zech.9:12)


So, Christ using the same wording is not unlikely.

[Wootah]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #61]

How does that support you? All those verses support a normal interpretation of the word today.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Wootah in post #62]
I showed you how "today" is used in other verses that show that the speaker was saying "I tell you today." That is what Jesus was saying. "I say to you today---you will be with me in Paradise [in a couple thousand years]."

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to Wootah in post #62]

How does that support you? All those verses support a normal interpretation of the word today.

What is, and/or is not, a normal interpretation of the word "today"?

Does that not depend on its context?

[Wootah]

[Replying to Revelations won in post #58]

No, Jesus said to the thief impaled beside him, "I tell you today, you will be with me in Paradise." There was no time limit set on that promise. It was not that very day. Jesus said he would resurrect people "on the last day," meaning during the Millennial Reign. (John 6:40,44) That is when the thief would be resurrected.

Read what you wrote ... today.

https://biblehub.com/text/luke/23-43.htm

Greek word is apparently semeron:

https://biblehub.com/greek/se_meron_4594.htm

Used in give us this day our daily bread apparently, also so many other uses that seem quite normal.

Read Deuteronomy 15:15, Deuteronomy 30:18, and Zechariah 9:12.

"...That is why I am commanding you to do this today." (Deut.15:15b) He was commanding them that day.

"I tell you today that you will certainly perish." (Deut. 30:18)

"Return to the stronghold, you prisoners with hope. Today I am telling you, 'I will repay you, O woman, a double portion.'" (Zech.9:12)


So, Christ using the same wording is not unlikely.

"...That is why I am commanding you to do this today." (Deut.15:15b) He was commanding them that day. <- supports the standard meaning of today, he was commanding them on that day
"I tell you today that you will certainly perish." (Deut. 30:18) <- supports the standard meaning of today

None of that supports today = [in a couple thousand years].

[Wootah]

[Replying to Wootah in post #62]

How does that support you? All those verses support a normal interpretation of the word today.

What is, and/or is not, a normal interpretation of the word "today"?

Does that not depend on its context?

Today is the 24 hour current day when you read this.

It is not normal to call today = [in a couple thousand years].

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Wootah in post #66]

Christ was saying that "today," that is in this 24-hour day time period, I am telling you this_______. He was not saying that he would be in Paradise within that 24-hour time period with the thief.

[Wootah]

[Replying to Wootah in post #66]

Christ was saying that "today," that is in this 24-hour day time period, I am telling you this_______. He was not saying that he would be in Paradise within that 24-hour time period with the thief.

Yes because when I talk to my family I say, "Today we are having breakfast. Today we are going shopping. Today you are going to school." When I mean in 1000's of years. And they know that I mean no breakfast for you for 1000's of years.

You are reversing the literal emphasis to be the opposite of the emphasis.

[JehovahsWitness]

Onewithim has already produced biblical examples to illustrate the habit of affirming the day important declarations are being made as a way to add weight to the statement.

Read Deuteronomy 15:15, Deuteronomy 30:18, and Zechariah 9:12.

"...That is why I am commanding you to do this today." (Deut.15:15b) ...

"I tell you today that you will certainly perish." (Deut. 30:18)

"Return to the stronghold, you prisoners with hope. Today I am telling you, 'I will repay you, O woman, a double portion.'" (Zech.9:12)

This is something we do even today on official documents where the date of the declaration is significant



That it seems the person is "stating the obvious" does not negate this speech pattern any more than declaring that ones statement is true and that YOU are telling someone that thing ("truely I tell you").



CONCLUSION: Jesus was using a not unheard of pattern of speech used in ancient times to emphasis the day on which he was making an important declaration.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to Wootah in post #62]

How does that support you? All those verses support a normal interpretation of the word today.

What is, and/or is not, a normal interpretation of the word "today"?

Does that not depend on its context?

Today is the 24 hour current day when you read this.

It is not normal to call today = [in a couple thousand years].

Yes, today is the current 24 hours. No-one questions that. It is a well-known fact, not an interpretation.

However, when used in a past conversation for any reason, we are not free to assume its use has little or no purpose; or to take for granted it was used in a "normal" way .

Rather, we are obliged to consider the whole conversation that took place on that particular "today".

From this a more viable interpretation would, or should, emerge.

Are you "in" for this, or do you count yourself "out"?