Matthew 12:40

[rstrats]

B-A-C,

re: "Apparently no one knows of any writings."

That does indeed appear to be the case. Yet there are still those 6th day of the week crucifixion advocates who say that Matthew 12:40 is using common idiomatic language where the Messiah's forecast of 3 nights actually means 2 nights. I wonder how they know it is common?

 

[rstrats]

B-A-C,

re: "Why does Jesus need to be raised on the 6th day of the week?"

I'd like to know the answer to that also. What is there in scripture that makes it absolutely, positively, no question about it necessary for the crucifixion to have taken place on the 6th day of the week?

 

[Bendito]

According to the Word, Jesus was in the grave for three days and Daniel said. What's the problem and why is it important what day Jesus was crucified. What's important is that He was crucified and that for us. Thank you Jesus

 

[rstrats]

OOPs, I just noticed that your question was about resurrection and not crucifixion. Who has said anything about a 6th day of the week resurrection?

 

[B-A-C]

OOPs, I just noticed that your question was about resurrection and not crucifixion. Who has said anything about a 6th day of the week resurrection?

The title of this thread is "Matthew 12:40". Do you believe the 3 days and 3 nights in this verse are about the crucifixion, or the time
Jesus was "dead" before his resurrection?

 

[rstrats]

B-A-C,

re: "Do you believe the 3 days and 3 nights in this verse are about the crucifixion, or the time
Jesus was 'dead' before his resurrection?"

It concerns both.



BTW, you have a question directed to you in post [HASHTAG]#144[/HASHTAG].

 

[rstrats]

Since it's again been awhile, someone new looking in may know of some writing.

 

[rstrats]

B-A-C,

re: "Why is [it] so important to you?"

For the purpose of this topic, it's not. A number of 6th day of the week crucifixion advocates frequently assert that Matthew 12:40 is using common Jewish idiomatic language where a night time is counted as a night time when no part of the night time could have occurred. I'm simply curious to see some examples that show the commonality of such usage.



re: "Are you trying to discredit the Bible?...Jesus said He would rise on the third day. Are you trying to make Him a liar?"

What!!!!!!! What on earth have I written that makes you ask such a question?



re: "Why does Jesus need to be raised on the 6th day of the week?"

Where has anything been said about a 6th day of the week resurrection?



re: "Nearly 20 verses here all say 3 days. Now you want to take one single verse.... and somehow make it disagree with the preceding 20 verses above?

Where have I done that?



re: " Why spend so much time and effort trying to make this disagree with the rest of the Bible?"

Where have I done that?



re: "Even if the preceding 20 verses all said 6 days..."

Where are you getting 6 days?



Perhaps someone new looking in will know of some writing.

 

[Brother Paul]

Really! Aren't you tired of this yet? Since many scriptures declare He would or did rise ON THE THIRD DAY (and we know this refers to the third day following crucifixion) and the day He was crucified IS the FIRST DAY of the three....then do the math....(part of the first day is day one, then there was the second day, and He rose with part of the third day remaining...thus is the meaning of 3 days and 3 nights)

Now we also KNOW that He rose early in the MORNING after the Sabbaths (thus on the first day of the week following the 7th day sabbath) and that this first day of the week WAS THAT THIRD DAY upon which He and the Apostles tell us He would rise. Since this 1st weekly day was the third day (not after the third day and night) then the 7th day sabbath WAS INDEED the 2nd day, and the preceding 6th weekly day (from our Thursday eve to Friday sundown) was the day upon which He was crucified.

SO....regardless of whether or not someone can find any writings still extant that support the idiomatic application of Matt 12:40...the testimony of Rabbis that any part of a day IS the day AND because from history we can see that THIS UNDERSTANDING was what was taught by the APOSTLES to the first appointed leaders of the churches (no matter which Apostle founded, which church, wherever) THEN we can say with confidence that even this one passage should be understood in light if the many and NOT taken literally.'

He was crucified ON the 6th day (near the end of that day which is AFTER the evening portion...an evening and then a morning equaling a day) and rose on the following first day (in the early part OF that day)...so do the math and interpret Matt 12:40 via the reality and these other known facts.

 

[rstrats]

Brother Paul,

re: "Really! Aren't you tired of this yet?"

Not yet.


re: "Since many scriptures declare He would or did rise ON THE THIRD DAY (and we know this refers to the third day following crucifixion..."

If the crucufixion had taken place on the 6th day of the week as you claim, then the first day following the crucifixion would have been the 7th day of the week, and the second day following the crucifixion would have been the 1st day of the week. So the third day following the crucifixion would have been the 2nd day of the week and not the 1st day of the week. But at any rate, that's an issue for another topic. For the purpose of this one, i'm only interested in what is requested in the OP and clarified in post 136.



re: "...regardless of whether or not someone can find any writings..."

So without any examples, how can anyone legitimately say that Matthew 12:40 is using common idiomatic language where the Messiah's 3 night time's forecast actually meant 2 night times? How can it be said that it was a common way of counting and not just a one time unique usage of an idiom?

 

[Bendito]

Brother Paul,

re: "Really! Aren't you tired of this yet?"

Not yet.


re: "Since many scriptures declare He would or did rise ON THE THIRD DAY (and we know this refers to the third day following crucifixion..."

If the crucufixion had taken place on the 6th day of the week as you claim, then the first day following the crucifixion would have been the 7th day of the week, and the second day following the crucifixion would have been the 1st day of the week. So the third day following the crucifixion would have been the 2nd day of the week and not the 1st day of the week. But at any rate, that's an issue for another topic. For the purpose of this one, i'm only interested in what is requested in the OP and clarified in post 136.



re: "...regardless of whether or not someone can find any writings..."

So without any examples, how can anyone legitimately say that Matthew 12:40 is using common idiomatic language where the Messiah's 3 night time's forecast actually meant 2 night times? How can it be said that it was a common way of counting and not just a one time unique usage of an idiom?

It really looks like someone is building an entire doctrine on one single bible verse...What do you think?

 

[rstrats]

Bendito,

re: "It really looks like someone is building an entire doctrine on one single bible verse...What do you think?"

I don't know if I'd say that they're building an entire doctrine on it, but it certainly seems to be at least a part of their building process.

 

[Bendito]

Bendito,

re: "It really looks like someone is building an entire doctrine on one single bible verse...What do you think?"

I don't know if I'd say that they're building an entire doctrine on it, but it certainly seems to be at least a part of their building process.

Scary!

 

[stephen]

Scary!

Genesis 1 ("So the evening and the morning were the first day.") reveals what the Biblical day consists of. This is why Seventh-day Adventists celebrate Sabbath from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday.

Mark 15:41-43 tells us that before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathaea went to Pilate to ask for the body of Jesus. The point not to miss here is that Jesus died Friday afternoon "before the Sabbath".

The Jewish nation considered any part of a day, however small, as a full day when it was included with a period of days. Thus, they counted the day on which any period began as the first day, and then did the same thing on the day the period ended. Thus, just as Jonah was in the belly of the giant fish "three days and nights", so Jesus was in the tomb for "three days and three nights".

Friday (during the day) = Day 1
Sabbath (Jesus rested!) = Day 2
Sunday (eve/morning) = Day 3

Blessings......Trust this helps....

 

[Shutterbug]

Can someone answer me on three days and three nights? I have no problem with rising on the third day, but when is the third night if I use Friday as the first day/night?

Friday - day/night, or night/day
Saturday - day/night, night/day
Sunday - day/night, night/day

The third day could be Monday morning. Or, does the third night have zero relevance?

 

[Bendito]

Genesis 1 ("So the evening and the morning were the first day.") reveals what the Biblical day consists of. This is why Seventh-day Adventists celebrate Sabbath from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday.

Mark 15:41-43 tells us that before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathaea went to Pilate to ask for the body of Jesus. The point not to miss here is that Jesus died Friday afternoon "before the Sabbath".

The Jewish nation considered any part of a day, however small, as a full day when it was included with a period of days. Thus, they counted the day on which any period began as the first day, and then did the same thing on the day the period ended. Thus, just as Jonah was in the belly of the giant fish "three days and nights", so Jesus was in the tomb for "three days and three nights".

Friday (during the day) = Day 1
Sabbath (Jesus rested!) = Day 2
Sunday (eve/morning) = Day 3

Blessings......Trust this helps....

The Jewish Shabbat (sabbath) starts at sundown Friday and ends at sundown Saturday too.

Let me add a bit of information to make it a bit more complicated..Because of Passover there were two Shabbats (Sabbaths) that week.
LOL That doesn't help does it?
Personally I have no issue with what day Jesus died..I'm just superglad He rose from the dead

 

[Brother Paul]

Yes Bendito it is scary! Cults have been formed over such things. Christian Science on Mark 23:11.Oneness Pentecostalism on Acts 2:38. Each then interprets, contradicts, or insists on the rest of scripture be questioned based on one misunderstood passage. If Matthew 12:40 is to be taken literally then there is a lie that was told by the Apostles (who Jesus Himself taught) and it was perpetuated for the first 300 (actually more) years of Christendom.

And this would mean they and their writings are untrustworthy and we are all children of the deceiver.

And brother Shutterbug all you need to do, to answer your question, is to go to the beginning of this thread and read....Jesus indeed rose ON the third day (which was NOT followed by a third "night") and that third day was a weekly 1st day (the feast of first fruits)...

From the scriptures we must always interpret any single passage in light of the many on the same subject in this case, this reveals that Matthew 12 passage referred to CANNOT be taken literally. And Rstrats already had his answer before he began this thread...he knows there is no additional EXTANT writings that explain this plainly but understanding the "inclusive reckoning" as described even by Rabbis is what is going on here.

A common error of modernists is that they think like moderns (using the rules and principles of modern English grammar) OR thinking themselves wise they think like more ancient Greeks. However all the writers of the Bible save Luke were Hebrews and thought like ancient Hebrews thus the oft brought up confusion over things like the idea of "the Word" (explore "the Memra"), or the phrase "in the name of" or his "name" shall be called (see "The Hebrew word Shem"), or even the word "day" (Yom)....to best clarify what these Hebrew writers meant you can begin by exploring these three and will lead you into a whole new vista of understanding. Have fun...the three examples I referred to will only take about an hour of your life but it will be well worth it I assure you (if only to make you think as I am sure you already do quire deeply)

In His love

Paul

 

[Brother Paul]

Jesus rises "EARLY IN THE MORNING" on the feast of first fruits (which ALWAYS follows the 7th day sabbath in the feast of Unleavened Bread)...it was BY LAW a weekly 1st day...(this is the "on the third day resurrection)...so this 1st weekly day IS day three

Now lets go backwards once again....which day came before this day? The weekly 7th day sabbath! This IS the 2nd day...

Now then, the day before this (which is the 1st day of the three days in question) is so obviously the weekly 6th day (which for Hebrews goes from OUR Thurs eve to our Friday sunset) it is painful to keep repeating it.

THEREFORE Matt 12 :40 IS NOT referring to a literal 72 hours or else all the rest of scripture is in error and Jesus rose on the 4th day....

And I apologize Shutterbug because I thought this was any one of the many exhaustive threads on so many forums disguised by many Thread Names that RSTRATS has done this on....but the sisters and brothers here have done a fine job...

 

[Shutterbug]

Jesus rises "EARLY IN THE MORNING" on the feast of first fruits (which ALWAYS follows the 7th day sabbath in the feast of Unleavened Bread)...it was BY LAW a weekly 1st day...(this is the "on the third day resurrection)...so this 1st weekly day IS day three

Now lets go backwards once again....which day came before this day? The weekly 7th day sabbath! This IS the 2nd day...

Now then, the day before this (which is the 1st day of the three days in question) is so obviously the weekly 6th day (which for Hebrews goes from OUR Thurs eve to our Friday sunset) it is painful to keep repeating it.

THEREFORE Matt 12 :40 IS NOT referring to a literal 72 hours or else all the rest of scripture is in error and Jesus rose on the 4th day....

And I apologize Shutterbug because I thought this was any one of the many exhaustive threads on so many forums disguised by many Thread Names that RSTRATS has done this on....but the sisters and brothers here have done a fine job...

Good afternoon Paul;

No need to apologize as I couldn't tell if it were meant for me or someone else until I saw my name in the text. I take the "third day" to be a relative event and not literal. The troops here know their stuff and despite the occasional disagreement, none are out to mislead anyone.

 

[Brother Paul]

Good afternoon Paul;

No need to apologize as I couldn't tell if it were meant for me or someone else until I saw my name in the text. I take the "third day" to be a relative event and not literal. The troops here know their stuff and despite the occasional disagreement, none are out to mislead anyone.

Agreed!