Matthew 12:40 (paradise, crucifixion, Gospels, hell)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Whenever 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 a phrase stating a certain number of days, as well as a certain number of nights was ever used in the first century or before when it absolutely didn’t include at least parts of the specified number of days and at least parts of the specified number of nights?
I'd suggest you search a Bible dictionary or encyclopedia, if you want a further explanation. However, I think what are seeking is evident in Genesis, in the creation account. In counting the days it says, there was evening and morning and that is the first day. So the first day is one, then this continues on in the account.
re: 'In counting the days it says, there was evening and morning and that is the first day. So the first day is one, then this continues on in the account."
I'm afraid I don't see your point insofar as it applies to my request in the OP. I wonder if you might elaborate a bit?
Whenever 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 a phrase stating a certain number of days, as well as a certain number of nights was ever used in the first century or before when it absolutely didn’t include at least parts of the specified number of days and at least parts of the specified number of nights?
Is this in regards to the 3 days 3 nights, Wednesday vs Friday Crucifixion?
I agree one cant get 72 hrs form Fri to Sun. Feast of Unleavened Bread is a Sabbath, so that is what Mark is more than likely referring to than Friday.
Mt 12:40 are 72 hours, when day and night are mentioned, you cannot allegories it. Jesus died on Wednesday 3 PM and rose on Saturday 3 PM. He was not longer in the heart of the earth. That is Hell and not Paradise, because there is no tree of life, which is in the 3. Heaven. When the Gentile Church came to power, they threw out every one that kept the Sabbath and celebrated the 17th Nisan as the Resurrection day (about 325 AD). The Sunday is not the Resurrection day (especially not Easter Sunday). In Mark 16:9 the comma is on the wrong place: The right translation: "Now when Jesus was risen, early......"
Mt 28:1: "In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn towards the first day of the week" is Saturday evening according to Jewish and bible time. The dawn here is also in the evening, the same Greek word is used in Luke 23:54, the beginning of the Sabbath. At that time Jesus was already risen. The Resurrection of Christ`s body was the third day. The body was laid into the grave Wednesday eve before the Great Sabbath of Passover began and was in the grave less than 72 hours. Good Friday and Easter Sunday are made by man. The Crucifixion day is the 14th of Nisan and Resurrection day is the 17th of Nisan, which are during the Jewish Passover. It is a date in the year as our birthday and has nothing to do with Sunday. God bless!
I do believe he rose after the sun went down on the Sabbath when it was dark and that would still be considered the 1rst day of the week. The whole Sunday morning at sunrise doesnt add up when you compare all gospels side by side. The Messiah became the First Fruit and that Feast day is always on the 1rst day of the week after the sabbath, so if he didnt rise on a Sunday he cant be the First Fruit.
re: "The Messiah became the First Fruit and that Feast day is always on the 1rst day of the week after the sabbath, so if he didnt rise on a Sunday he cant be the First Fruit."
Why did the moment of resurrection have to take place on the first day of the week? The only reference of the first day of the week with regard to Firstfruits is to say when it is to be waved/presented to the Lord. While the Messiah did indeed became the antitype when He resurrected, what scriptural reason do you have for thinking that the moment of resurrection met the first day waving of the sheaf requirement of First Fruits instead of later when He presented Himself to the Father?
BTW, do you have any documentation asked for in the OP?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
