The Gabriel Stone: what does it tell us?

[polonius]

There is a considerable debate among archeologists as to when the “Gabriel Stone� was written. If written before the time of Christ, could this be the basis of the Resurrection stories?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/3 ... 84953.html

Any opinions?

[TRANSPONDER]

No..hold the front page. The sign of Johnah IS in Luke

Luke 11. 29 As the crowds increased, Jesus said, “This is a wicked generation. It asks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah. 30 For as Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, so also will the Son of Man be to this generation. 31 The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with the people of this generation and condemn them, for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom; and now something greater than Solomon is here. 32 The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and now something greater than Jonah is here.

So while there is a problem for me here Matthew and Luke have the sign of Jonah, which Mark doesn't have. It is improbable that Luke cut the explanation, , rather, Matthew inserted it to tell the Christian readers what the sign of Jonah was - ref surrection after 3 days.


But that means that Matthew writing three days and three nights rather than on the third day (which is just about was) means that it's his own interpretation and has no weight in the Bible.

[Difflugia]

Because it is what the Bible says, with a bit of brainwork.

I'm assuming that this response wasn't meant for me and you hit the reply button on the wrong comment. If it was meant for me, I don't understand what you're trying to tell me.

[Difflugia]

Bible doesn't say Jesus died on Friday.

You are correct, the Bible doesn't directly say "Jesus died on Friday" just like it doesn't directly say "Jesus died on Wednesday".

It's worse than that. The Bible does say that Jesus died on Friday, but the apologists are arguing that "Friday" doesn't mean "Friday."

In fact, "Preparation" meaning "Friday" survives to modern Greek.

[Difflugia]

Firstly it would be good to understand, the Jewish days begins at 21:00, not 24:00. This means, the timing of the Passover went like this:

The reckoning of time in the gospels is in the Greek fashion, related as hours from sunrise. This is pretty clear from the parable of the vineyard in Matthew 20:

For the Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who was the master of a household, who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. When he had agreed with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard. He went out about the third hour, and saw others standing idle in the marketplace. He said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard, and whatever is right I will give you.’ So they went their way. Again he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour, and did likewise. About the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing idle. He said to them, ‘Why do you stand here all day idle?’

However we reckon exact times, counting begins "early in the morning."

First hour of the night disciples of Jesus ate the meal.

If you say so. The text just says that evening had arrived.

Sixth hour of the night (about 24:00), Pilates speech and judgment.

This makes no sense. I don't know where you're getting the "sixth hour of the night" business or how that translates to midnight, but according to the text, Pilate's speech happened sometime after daybreak. Mark 15:1 says that the Jewish coucil consulted first thing in the morning and then took Jesus to Pilate. Luke puts the consultation "as soon as it was day."

After that Jews who had not yet eaten the Passover meal had still about 6 hours to eat the Passover meal, without braking the rules for it.
3th hour of the day (about 8:00) crucifixion.
6th hour of the day, darkness came.
9th hour of the day, Jesus died.

So, it looks to me like you're adding almost a whole day in there somewhere between Mark 15:1 and 15:6. In the Synoptics, the Passover meal had already been eaten the evening before. In John, the Passover meal hadn't been eaten yet.

15th day was the Shabbat day of the feast of the unleavened bread. (Thursday)
Disciples did no work.

Nowhere is the Passover day called a Sabbath as such. John 19:31 says (or at least strongly implies) that the Passover and Sabbath coincide. Passover is on Saturday.

John doesn't change the story so that Passover meal would have been eaten the day following Jesus' crucifixion. John doesn't say Passover was on the Sabbath, John 19:31 says:
Then, since it was Preparation, that the bodies not remain on the cross on the sabbath, for great was the day of that sabbath, the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and they be taken away.

"Preparation" means Friday. Mark 15:42 explicitly says that παρασκευὴ ("Preparation") means the προσάββατον ("day before the Sabbath").

The sabbath on the next day was "great" because it was also the Passover. In all four gospels, Jesus was explicitly crucified and died on Friday. Matthew as we have it says it was the day before the day after Friday, but that's still just a weird way of saying Friday.

[Difflugia]

1) It says three days and nights in the grave.
2) It says there is the Shabbat day of the feast of the unleavened bread.

When those two facts are combined, it means Jesus died on Wednesday, if Bible is true entirely. Obviously you can cherry pick just the scriptures that fits to your beliefs, but that is the situation, if all scriptures are taken into account.

Matthew is the only one that says "three days and nights," but also says that Jesus died on the day before "the day after Friday."

John says the Passover was on the Sabbath after Jesus dies, but the Synoptics say that the disciples ate their Passover meal before Jesus was arrested. They're irreconcilable.

[Difflugia]

So far as I can see, Matthew added himself the bit about the sign of Jonah.

Mark 8 seems to be the version of this Matthew 12 passage

Mark 8.1 The Pharisees arrived and began arguing with Jesus. They tested him by demanding from him a sign from heaven. 12 He sighed deeply in his spirit and remarked, “Why do those living today[g] demand a sign? I tell all of you with certainty, no sign will be given to this generation.”

Nothing bout the sign of Jonah or three days. It looks like Matthew has added this on as a retrospective prophecy.

Matthew 12.38 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee.
39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: 40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

No..hold the front page. The sign of Johnah IS in Luke

Luke 11. 29 As the crowds increased, Jesus said, “This is a wicked generation. It asks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah. 30 For as Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, so also will the Son of Man be to this generation. 31 The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with the people of this generation and condemn them, for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom; and now something greater than Solomon is here. 32 The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and now something greater than Jonah is here.

So while there is a problem for me here Matthew and Luke have the sign of Jonah, which Mark doesn't have. It is improbable that Luke cut the explanation, , rather, Matthew inserted it to tell the Christian readers what the sign of Jonah was - ref surrection after 3 days.

But that means that Matthew writing three days and three nights rather than on the third day (which is just about was) means that it's his own interpretation and has no weight in the Bible.

Luke didn't "cut the explanation," but had a different one than Matthew. For Matthew, the "sign of Jonah" was the three days and three nights in the tomb as Jonah was in the fish. For Luke, it was Jesus himself appearing as Jonah appeared to the Ninevites. Luke 11:30 is parallel to Matthew 12:40.

It's not a big deal otherwise, but it changes your problem. If "sign of Jonah" is in a shared source text, either Matthew and Luke both added their own differing explanations or one of them changed it.

[TRANSPONDER]

That sounds convincing. While I ought to study the three passages together to suss out what has been added to, the sense is the sign of Johah is that he got the Ninevites to repent (which is an absurd claim) and the Queen of Sheba was supposedly impressed by Solomon but - like the Temple in David and the Shewbread, Jesus is greater. The Pauline Christian message is Jesus trumps Judaism and its' traditions.

I think you are right that Matthew was particularly interested in Jewish traditions and Jesus being like a new Moses. So IF the Talpiot graffiti clue is true, Jonah is a symbol of three day resurrection and that is the 'sign' he adds on.\

[1213]

...Matthew is the only one that says "three days and nights," but also says that Jesus died on the day before "the day after Friday."

Please show the scripture.

John says the Passover was on the Sabbath after Jesus dies

Please show the scripture.

[1213]

Firstly it would be good to understand, the Jewish days begins at 21:00, not 24:00. This means, the timing of the Passover went like this:

The reckoning of time in the gospels is in the Greek fashion, related as hours from sunrise. This is pretty clear from the parable of the vineyard in Matthew 20:

For the Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who was the master of a household, who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. When he had agreed with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard. He went out about the third hour, and saw others standing idle in the marketplace. He said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard, and whatever is right I will give you.’ So they went their way. Again he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour, and did likewise. About the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing idle. He said to them, ‘Why do you stand here all day idle?’

However we reckon exact times, counting begins "early in the morning."

Ok, I can agree that the day begun at sunrise and night at sundown (It is not only Greek system, but common in many ancient cultures). It is not necessary exactly 21:00, or 9 pm as in modern western system. Makes no meaningful difference to my point.

First hour of the night disciples of Jesus ate the meal.

If you say so. The text just says that evening had arrived.

Which obviously means beginning of night and a new 24 h day.

Sixth hour of the night (about 24:00), Pilates speech and judgment.

This makes no sense. I don't know where you're getting the "sixth hour of the night" business or how that translates to midnight, but according to the text, Pilate's speech happened sometime after daybreak. Mark 15:1 says that the Jewish coucil consulted first thing in the morning and then took Jesus to Pilate. Luke puts the consultation "as soon as it was day."

Mark doesn't seem to have the word "daybreak". And it doesn't tell the exact time. It can be said that morning begins right after midnight.

After that Jews who had not yet eaten the Passover meal had still about 6 hours to eat the Passover meal, without braking the rules for it.
3th hour of the day (about 8:00) crucifixion.
6th hour of the day, darkness came.
9th hour of the day, Jesus died.

So, it looks to me like you're adding almost a whole day in there somewhere between Mark 15:1 and 15:6. In the Synoptics, the Passover meal had already been eaten the evening before. In John, the Passover meal hadn't been eaten yet.

Interesting, I am not adding a whole day. Only showing that there are 12 hours of night and 12 hours of day. And it seems disciples and Jesus ate the Passover in the first hour of the night, and many Jews ate the Passover after the judgment, in the late hours of the night, in the morning.

15th day was the Shabbat day of the feast of the unleavened bread. (Thursday)
Disciples did no work.

Nowhere is the Passover day called a Sabbath as such. John 19:31 says (or at least strongly implies) that the Passover and Sabbath coincide. Passover is on Saturday.

Bible tells Passover meal is 14th day of the month. The next day is the feast of unleavened bread, which is the Shabbat day, because no work was allowed to be done that day. The 14th day is the preparation day for that.

On the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread to Yahweh. Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread. In the first day you shall have a holy convocation. You shall do no regular work. But you shall offer an offering made by fire to Yahweh seven days. In the seventh day is a holy convoca-tion: you shall do no regular work.'"
Lev. 23:6-8

"Preparation" means Friday. Mark 15:42 explicitly says that παρασκευὴ ("Preparation") means the προσάββατον ("day before the Sabbath").

Nice, there are also other Shabbat days than the Saturday, which is why there is also other preparation days.

[1213]

...However, all the other things that it does say logically make Friday the correct day...

The other things say for example, 3 days and nights in the grave, which makes the Friday wrong instantly.

For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
Matt. 12:40

I never said there weren't contradictions and errors in the text as well. Congats on finding one. It seems you would rather ignore all the other text in favor of something the author of Matthew wrote (who famously likes to make mistakes around trying to make prophesy true).

Sorry, no contradiction, if the whole Bible is considered and understood correctly.

It might also be instructive to learn about whale anatomy or fish/sea mammals in general. Hint, there is no breathable air chamber inside anything's stomach assuming a human could even end up there (maybe in a sperm whale). ...

If a whale breaths air, I don't see how there could not be air chamber. But, the "fish" could be also some other than modern fish or whale.