Matthew 12:40
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Scholar
- Posts: 368
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:37 pm
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 7 times
Matthew 12:40
Post #1Whenever the three days and three nights of Matthew 12:40 is brought up in a “discussion� with 6th day crucifixion folks, they frequently argue that it is a Jewish idiom for counting any part of a day as a whole day. I wonder if anyone has documentation that shows that the phrase “x� days and “x�nights was ever used in the first century or before when it absolutely didn’t include at least parts of the “x� days and at least parts of the “x� nights?
-
- Scholar
- Posts: 368
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:37 pm
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 7 times
Post #141
[Replying to post 138 by JehovahsWitness]
JehovahsWitness,
re: "Yes but my point is what if it wasn't a figure of speech at the time, what's to stop Jesus from initiating his own unique figure of speech?"
Nothing that I can think of. But that's an issue for a different topic.
JehovahsWitness,
re: "Yes but my point is what if it wasn't a figure of speech at the time, what's to stop Jesus from initiating his own unique figure of speech?"
Nothing that I can think of. But that's an issue for a different topic.
- JehovahsWitness
- Savant
- Posts: 21144
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
- Has thanked: 794 times
- Been thanked: 1129 times
- Contact:
Post #142
Not really, essentially the question is what did Jesus mean at Matthew 12:40? Well, he could have been using a figure of speech from his day, he could have been simply using a figure of speech that he dreamed up himself.rstrats wrote: [Replying to post 138 by JehovahsWitness]
JehovahsWitness,
re: "Yes but my point is what if it wasn't a figure of speech at the time, what's to stop Jesus from initiating his own unique figure of speech?"
Nothing that I can think of. But that's an issue for a different topic.
How can examining possible options be "off topic" when the topic is what did he mean?
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
-
- Scholar
- Posts: 368
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:37 pm
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 7 times
Post #143
[Replying to post 140 by JehovahsWitness]
JehovahsWitness,
re: "Not really, essentially the question is what did Jesus mean at Matthew 12:40?...How can examining possible options be 'off topic' when the topic is what did he mean?"
Because that is not the purpose of the topic. If someone implies that it was common to forecast or say that a daytime or a night time would be or was involved with an event when no part of a daytime or no part of a night time could have occurred they would have to know of other examples in order to legitimately make that implication of commonality. The operative word is "common" That is the one and only issue with which this topic in concerned
JehovahsWitness,
re: "Not really, essentially the question is what did Jesus mean at Matthew 12:40?...How can examining possible options be 'off topic' when the topic is what did he mean?"
Because that is not the purpose of the topic. If someone implies that it was common to forecast or say that a daytime or a night time would be or was involved with an event when no part of a daytime or no part of a night time could have occurred they would have to know of other examples in order to legitimately make that implication of commonality. The operative word is "common" That is the one and only issue with which this topic in concerned
- JehovahsWitness
- Savant
- Posts: 21144
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
- Has thanked: 794 times
- Been thanked: 1129 times
- Contact:
Post #144
rstrats wrote: [Replying to post 140 by JehovahsWitness]
JehovahsWitness,
re: "Not really, essentially the question is what did Jesus mean at Matthew 12:40?...How can examining possible options be 'off topic' when the topic is what did he mean?"
Because that is not the purpose of the topic. If someone implies that it was common to forecast or say that a daytime or a night time would be or was involved with an event when no part of a daytime or no part of a night time could have occurred they would have to know of other examples in order to legitimately make that implication of commonality. The operative word is "common" That is the one and only issue with which this topic in concerned
Fair enough if the underlying issue isn't to understand the meaning of the text.
It seems somewhat ironic to labour the point about supporting extra bibilcal sources when even a definitive answer one way or the other is ultimately irrelevant to the above aim.
Still.... enjoy!
JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
-
- Scholar
- Posts: 368
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:37 pm
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 7 times
Post #145
[Replying to post 142 by JehovahsWitness]
JehovahsWitness,
re: "It seems somewhat ironic to labour the point about supporting extra bibilcal sources..."
Biblical sources will be fine - in fact preferable.
JehovahsWitness,
re: "It seems somewhat ironic to labour the point about supporting extra bibilcal sources..."
Biblical sources will be fine - in fact preferable.
-
- Scholar
- Posts: 368
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:37 pm
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 7 times
Post #146
Number 3 of post 131 should be changed from (Of those, there are some who think that the "heart of the earth" is referring to the tomb) to (Of those, there are some who think that the 3 days and 3 nights count started when the Messiah was placed in the tomb or at the earliest to the moment when His spirit left His body).
-
- Guru
- Posts: 1871
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:07 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #150
The day does begin at sunset according to our Creator. The 2 Sabbaths of CHrist's passion week.rstrats wrote: I also need to add: "and who thinks the calendar day begins at sunset."
http://thewayofthemessiah.org/tsp.html
Interesting take and seems to fit perfectly.