Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by Salty, Feb 28, 2014.
Please Vote Early and often!:smilewinkgrin:
I would, but there's little message that hinders me. It says "You have already voted in in this poll."
Sounds ominous. :laugh:
It is impossible regardless of how much tampering with math is done or how one counts days to have the crucifixion on Friday and the Lord in the grave for three days and three nights.
Three days and three nights is not literal, it was a Hebrew figure of speech. I'm not saying I espouse a Friday crucifixion, but it would not be negated by "three days and three nights"
Any day of the week runs into a train wreck if we try to understand that phrase literally.
Similarly, our modern phrase "9 to 5" has nothing to do with a literal 9am to 5pm work day. It simply means a job where someone punches a time clock
A little early for this. But Friday.
What day was he made alive again?
If we can't count forward maybe we can count back.
Three days and three nights.
I wonder how many hours Jesus believed to be in the three days and the three nights of the Hebrew figure of speech of Mathew written in??
Be careful about assuming that Jesus rose on Sunday morning. Read the accounts carefully. The women found the tomb empty on Sunday morning, which means he could have risen much, much earlier.
We just don't know. But if that's the case, it leaves room for Wednesday or Thursday.
I could be Friday if you count Friday, Saturday and Sunday as three days. But that leaves only two nights.
If Jesus were in the tomb for three days and three nights as we understand it, he would have risen on the fourth day. But it is plainly stated in scripture (Acts 10:40, 1Corinthians 15:4) that He rose on the third day.
As for the phrase "3 days and 3 nights" in Hebrew, I am saying that it meant something similar to "until the third day". That would be without any regard to the literal days or nights, as it was a simple figure of speech. Similar to using our modern expression "9 to 5" in relation to our work.
When this phrase is used, it is referring to having a job where one will punch a time clock. Most times, people who work a 9 to 5 do not actually work from 9am to 5pm, because that's only 8 hours. Where is the lunch break? In actuality, the phrase has nothing to do with what time a person starts or ends his work day, it is simply an idiom.
If we look at different ways that someone might express their work situation, he might say:
1) I work a 9 to 5
2) I work from 7:30am to 4pm
3) I'm at work 8 hours a day, plus lunch
If we try to blend these statements somehow, we will find ourselves in conflict. Why do #2 add up to 42.5 hours? Why does #3 not jibe with #1? If we take the figure of speech as our starting point for measuring the work week, we will be fighting ourselves in trying to twist the others into making sense.
In Matthew 12:38, the Scribes and Pharisees had asked Jesus for a sign. It was to them that He spoke of the sign of Jonah. Later in the same gospel, we again see these same Pharisees (along with the Chief Priests), this time speaking to Pilate. We read "Sir, we remember that when He was still alive that deceiver said, 'AFTER three days I am going to rise again'. Therefore, give orders for the grave to be made secure UNTIL the third day, otherwise his disciples may come and steal him away..." (Matthew 27:62-64)
If the Pharisees understood Jesus to mean after the third day as we understand it, which would be on the fourth day, why would they ask to secure the tomb only until after the second day?
Do we find evidence of this idiom in the Old Testament? As a matter of fact, we do. In 1Samuel 30, David and his men are pursuing the Amalekites after Ziklag had been raided. As they pursue, the find an Egyptian who was a servant of an Amalakite. We read "Now they found an Egyptian in the field and brought him to David, and gave him bread and he ate, and they provided him water to drink....For he had not eaten bread or drunk water for three days and three nights. David said to him, 'To whom do you belong? And where are you from?' And he said, 'I am a young man of Egypt, a servant of an Amalakite; and my master left me behind when I got sick three days ago.' "
There are three points to this account - he gets sick, his master leaves, and then he doesn't eat for three more days. But that would conflict within the same account. It would have been the fourth day since he ate (after his master left), but his master left three days ago.
The Egyptian would have eaten (and Jesus would have risen) after three days and three nights, after the third day, and on the third day. All three phrases would have still been speaking of the same time frame.
Also, concerning "three days and three nights", three is not the only number joined to this figure of speech. In Genesis, we are told that it rained for "forty days and forty nights". Moses was on the mountain for "forty days and forty nights". Job's friends sat with him for "seven days and seven nights". Jonah was in the belly of the great sea creature for "three days and three nights"
We could easily take these phrases at face value, and nothing seems distorted. But as I noted with the Egyptian servant, he seems conflicted in his own account because the figure of speech is not to be understood from a wooden-literal perspective. Same for the death and resurrection of Jesus. If we take this figure of speech literally, and use that as our starting point, then measure all other accounts from a literal understanding of it, we find ourselves trying to twist about 20-30 scriptures to match the one that shouldn't have been taken literally in the first place.
Once and for all, it's Friday. No ifs, ands, or buts.
I believe Jesus died on Thursday and was buried just before sunset. This would be the first day. At sunset it would have been Friday for the Jews, this was the first night. Friday morning was the second day. At sunset it would be Saturday for the Jews, this was the second night. Saturday morning would be the third day. At sunset it would be Sunday, this is the third night. Jesus rose from the dead just before sunrise.
This would be three days and three nights in order just as Jesus said. It would also agree with the two Sabbaths that week.
The way the ancients counted any part of a day as being a "day" when referenced in casual conversation or even as part of a contract, Friday through Sunday would be two days. There don't appear to be two Sabbaths in the gospel accounts, meaning the regular Sabbath and the Passover Sabbath were on the same day.
And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. KJV Mark 16:1
That verse says after a sabbath (singular) was past the bought spices.
and early in the morning of the first of the sabbaths, they come unto the sepulchre, at the rising of the sun, Mark 16:2 YLT And on the eve of the sabbaths, at the dawn, toward the first of the sabbaths, came Mary the Magdalene, and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre, Matt 28:1 YLT
Comparing the two accounts of the same morning you can see two sabbaths (plural) had gone by.
So the women bought the spices after a singular sabbath was past, the sabbath of the 15th day of the first month, and we are also told in Luke that after seeing where Jesus was lain at the end of the 14th, the women bought and prepared and rested the sabbath (singular) according to the commandment.
And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day (siingular) according to the commandment. Luke 23:56 KJV
It appears to me. Died the 14th after 3pm, entombed the 14th just before the sabbath of the 15th and the women saw the place of entombment. The 15th day, a day of rest. The 16th day the women went and bought spices, returned home with them, prepared them, yet it must have been getting late for we are told they then rested the sabbath according to the commandment. The 17th day of the first month the weekly sabbath.
While still dark on the 18th day they arrive at the tomb and find it empty.
Wednesday and IMHO he was probably made alive sometime after 3pm on the weekly sabbath.
Not in the NASB
1 Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave.Sorry. This is going to be a long response, but I've seen this argument before. It doesn't hold up in examining the original text. The Greek word for "Sabbath" is often plural, even when it has singular construal. There is a historical reason for this. Understanding the way the word developed over time will avail us to explicate Matt 28:1, where some would relish to verbally express the designation is, "first of the [Christian] Sabbaths." Generally it simply denotes "first day of the week." Here's why.
The Hebrew word for "Sabbath" is ’šabbat. The Aramaic word for "Sabbath" was equivalent, i.e., ’šabbat. But in Aramaic there was more of a propensity to include the definite article ("the") on words that in Hebrew would not require it. The article in Hebrew comes before the word it modifies, while the article in Aramaic comes after the word it modifies. Both mean "the Sabbath," but the article is affixed differently. So the Hebrew word, with article, was haššabbat and the Aramaic word was ’sabbatā.
Carrying the Aramaic, which is what Jesus verbalized, over into Greek requires transmuting to a three-gender language from a two-gender language. Greek has male and female entities, but it integrates a third gender, Neuter. Customarily, neuters appear in the plural form in Greek ending in "ia", whether they are plural or not: ta arguria, "the coins"; ta tekna, "the disciples (or children)"; ta himatia, "the robe", though in Matthew 27:31, 35 the phrase is translated "the garments," very nearly in an erroneous manner, again because of the plural form despite the Greek word being singular.
The definite article for neuter plural nominatives in Greek is ta, as in the examples above. Thus, ta sabbata. The corresponding plural genitive is tμn sabbatμn. There are other forms, but they do not figure prominently in this list of examples. The quandary is that when we look back at all of this from a abstract of some 2000 years we visually perceive ta sabbata and postulate that the form is neuter plural, but we're going to miss something of what is authentically involved if we don't ken the history of the form we're examining.
In Matt 28:1 the question is why the word translated "Sabbath" or "week" should be plural, and for that matter why it should be translated in two different ways ("Sabbath" and "week"). There are reasons for both of these facts, but the explication involves linguistic questions that would not capture everyone's interest. For now, however, notice that the wording in Matt 28:1 and the wording in Act s 20:7 is virtually identical. In English it is identical ("on the first day of the week" in both passages), and in Greek it is plenarily equivalent -- eis mian sabbatμn in Matthew 28:1, and tē mia tμn sabbatμn in Acts 20:7.
Eis mian is an accusative construction, while tē mia is dative. Both mean "on [day] one." Sabbatμn is a genitive that signifies "of [the] Sabbath." If you're a first century Jew and you're counting days starting from the Sabbath –- as everyone did -– the first one you come to is going to be Sunday, the first day of the week. The Sabbath was, and still is, the last day of the week.
In both cases the phrase designates "[day] one of [from] the Sabbath." Idiomatically we could translate, "[day] one after the Sabbath." For the most part Jews did not denominate the days of the week. Instead they used numbers. Friday is an exception. It was called "Preparation" (visually perceive John 19:31, 42). In Mark 15:42 it is called prosabbaton, i.e., "[Day] Before Sabbath." Because the Sabbath brought each week to a close, and was the most prominent feature of each weekly cycle, the word "Sabbath" came to be identified with "week." Notice that the word mia designates "one." It doesn't genuinely mean "first," albeit it is true that the day immediately following Sabbath is the first day after the Sabbath. So in context it is not erroneous to verbally express "first," but we shouldn't give the word more consequentality that it has. The literal meaning is "one." Therefore, the correct translation is "Sabbath," not "Sabbaths."
There is no way to get 3 days and 3 nights from Friday to Sunday morning as it has been commonly believed that Jesus was in the tomb; it would work only if He died on Thursday.
By our reckoning, you're right. That isn't how the ancients "reckoned" however.
Three days and three nights was not literal as we would understand it anyway.
Otherwise, multiple passages would be incorrect, which state that Jesus rose on the third day:
From that time Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised up on the third day.
and they will kill Him, and He will be raised on the third day.” And they were deeply grieved.
and will hand Him over to the Gentiles to mock and scourge and crucify Him, and on the third day He will be raised up.”
Therefore, give orders for the grave to be made secure until the third day, otherwise His disciples may come and steal Him away and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead,’ and the last deception will be worse than the first.”
saying, “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed and be raised up on the third day.”
and after they have scourged Him, they will kill Him; and the third day He will rise again.”
saying that the Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.”
But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel. Indeed, besides all this, it is the third day since these things happened.
and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day
God raised Him up on the third day and granted that He become visible,
1 Corinthians 15:4
and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures
If we start from an idiom, and misunderstand it in a literal way, then we are going to have fits trying to twist every other passage in order to make them jibe with the one we shouldn't have taken literally in the first place
I am just thankful He arose...
Jesus rising from the dead on Sunday evening (after sunset on Saturday to us) before Sunday morning meets all of this scripture. Jesus arose on Sunday the third day.
Thursday before sunset - 1st day
Thursday after sunset (Friday to the Jews) - 1st night
Friday morning- 2nd day
Friday evening after sunset (Saturday to the Jews)- 2nd night
Saturday morning- 3rd day
Saturday evening after sunset (Sunday to the Jews)- 3rd night.
What is most important is that He did not stay dead, He came out of the grave! He arose and He now sits at the right hand of God.
24. But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
25. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.
26. For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;
27. Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.