Matthew 12:40

rstrats · Post by **rstrats** » Wed Dec 26, 2012 7:46 pm

Whenever the three days and three nights of Matthew 12:40 is brought up in a â€œdiscussionâ€� 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 â€œxâ€� days and â€œxâ€�nights was ever used in the first century or before when it absolutely didnâ€™t include at least parts of the â€œxâ€� days and at least parts of the â€œxâ€� nights?

rstrats · Post by **rstrats** » Sat Jan 28, 2017 9:11 am

shnarkle,
re: "I know what you're asking, and my answer couldn't have been more simply stated: There are none. There are no examples."

So I wonder what those who say that the missing 3rd night can be explained by the use of common idiomatic language are using to make that assertion?

shnarkle · Post by **shnarkle** » Sat Jan 28, 2017 10:05 am

You take a protean view of biblical tales, adjusting when adjustment suits.

Aren't we both? With so much written with such drastically different interpretations it should come as no surprise that the bible is more than willing to oblige our biases. It practically takes opposing positions simultaneously. My point is that both sides are coherent.

Today it might be all literal and tomorrow we want symbol; yesterday it was deadly serious and now it is comedic.

And yet in both cases the logic is consistent. I'm not changing literal speech into figurative speech. The only time I did that was to illustrate what you were doing yourself. There is something quite horribly sad in Jonah's mission in life, but life is also a joke; some people get the punchline, some don't. Regardless, I'm not the one who is arbitrarily assigning figurative or literal meanings to words here, you are. I'm simply pointing out what is literal and what is figurative, and the necessary conclusions that follow from these facts.

We can dismiss Jonah as a joke...

The comedic value is not a dismissal, but a recognition of the value of humor in our lives.

while taking the resurrection as eternal truth; the terms of the joke-tale must be taken in their precise meaning with due attention to tense, else the joke is spoiled. Quite.

not to mention timing; timing is everything as they say. Yep, it's all in the telling...

We can certainly raise rubbish art to the status of Michelangelo with some wise observations.

Artistic observations.

And we can take Matthew and make more of his skill than Matthew ever knew about.

That's probably why they call it "inspired" writing. Some call it automatic writing. Some can actually perceive the Muse rushing toward them as they frantically scramble to find something to write with to get it all down. They have no idea where it comes from or what it means. The Muse knows though, and is not ignorant of the laws of language, nor how to intentionally violate those laws to get his message across to those he's communicating with. The rest are of no concern to him; what little the ignorant have will be rubbish in their own eyes, and taken away from them anyways.

marco · Post by **marco** » Sat Jan 28, 2017 10:30 am

shnarkle wrote:

That's probably why they call it "inspired" writing. Some call it automatic writing. Some can actually perceive the Muse rushing toward them as they frantically scramble to find something to write with to get it all down. They have no idea where it comes from or what it means. The Muse knows though, and is not ignorant of the laws of language, nor how to intentionally violate those laws to get his message across to those he's communicating with. The rest are of no concern to him; what little the ignorant have will be rubbish in their own eyes, and taken away from them anyways.

I believe there's a difference between inspired writing and automatic writing but of course I take your point that writers include in their works much more than they consciously injected. If you feel Matthew falls into this category, then fair enough; your extrapolations on his text may well be recognition of a divine influence.

We have wandered several miles from the original OP, so let us agree to differ on Jonah's funeral. Perhaps on another day we will fight for the same cause.

shnarkle · Post by **shnarkle** » Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:08 pm

rstrats wrote: shnarkle,
re: "I know what you're asking, and my answer couldn't have been more simply stated: There are none. There are no examples."

So I wonder what those who say that the missing 3rd night can be explained by the use of common idiomatic language are using to make that assertion?

They are using ignorance. "three days" is the Hebraism; the idiom. which can mean less than a whole day, month, year, decade, etc. Just because it can doesn't necessarily mean that it does.

"three days and three nights" is not a Hebraism; it is not an idiom. It is literal. It can NEVER refer to less than whole, complete days; 72 hours, three complete days and three complete nights. There are no examples of this literal expression meaning or including at least part of day or night.

It is no different than saying I got sick three days ago. If it's Saturday now, then I got sick either Wednesday or Thursday. If I then say that I got sick on Wednesday. Then I literally got sick on Wednesday. The idiom doesn't negate the literal fact that I got sick on Wednesday. The literal statement of fact determines the precise meaning of the idiom.

rstrats · Post by **rstrats** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 1:11 pm

shnarkle,
re: "'three days and three nights' is not a Hebraism; it is not an idiom. It is literal. It can NEVER refer to less than whole, complete days; 72 hours, three complete days and three complete nights."

So are you saying that the Messiah got His prophesy wrong or that Matthew wrote the prophesy incorrectly?

shnarkle · Post by **shnarkle** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 1:45 pm

rstrats wrote: shnarkle,
re: "'three days and three nights' is not a Hebraism; it is not an idiom. It is literal. It can NEVER refer to less than whole, complete days; 72 hours, three complete days and three complete nights."

So are you saying that the Messiah got His prophesy wrong or that Matthew wrote the prophesy incorrectly?

Neither. There are no inconsistencies or contradictions within the texts that I am aware of. If you are aware of any, then please feel free to present them

rstrats · Post by **rstrats** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 3:20 pm

OK, either you're just messing with me or in the immortal words of Struther Martin: "What we have here is a failure to communicate".

shnarkle · Post by **shnarkle** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:48 pm

rstrats wrote: OK, either you're just messing with me or in the immortal words of Struther Martin: "What we have here is a failure to communicate".

Communication is a two way street. You made the claim that I hold the view that Jesus' prophecy or Matthew's documentation of his prophecy was somehow incorrect. I don't hold that position. Do you hold that position? It's been a while since I've looked at the text dealing with this so I don't recall what you might be referring to. If you'd like to discuss it, I welcome your revelations.

rstrats · Post by **rstrats** » Fri Feb 03, 2017 3:58 am

shnarkle,
re: "You made the claim that I hold the view that Jesus' prophecy or Matthew's documentation of his prophecy was somehow incorrect. "

I made no such claim. I merely asked if that was your position.

shnarkle · Post by **shnarkle** » Fri Feb 03, 2017 10:55 am

rstrats wrote: shnarkle,
re: "You made the claim that I hold the view that Jesus' prophecy or Matthew's documentation of his prophecy was somehow incorrect. "

I made no such claim. I merely asked if that was your position.

Sorry, my bad. You presented two positions, neither of which makes any sense to me. I hold neither position. I hold that Jesus' prophecy was accurate, and Matthew's documentation was correct. I don't see any contradictions or inconsistencies in the text. The two positions you presented leads me to believe that you find one or the other to have some validity for some unknown reason. Evidently whatever reason you may have isn't worth presenting yet.