Common Figure of Speech/Colloquial Language?

Thomas said:
Much more likely is the Johannine reading (he being the closest thing we have to an 'eye witness') that puts the crucifixion not on the Friday. The Passover is marked according to the moon, not the day of the week, and if we follow John then He could have been in the tomb for three days and three nights, and all the problems are resolved.
Click to expand...
I agree. The Sabbath mentioned is not the "usual" Friday Sabbath, it is the High Holy Day Sabbath of Passover, marked by the moon, which could occur on any day of the week.

Where I suspect we may differ is that I see deliberate confusion spread regarding this matter specifically (among others) at the time of Nicea, and promulgated through the centuries upon the illiterate masses. By our time it is simply easier to dismiss with the tried and true "brush off" than to actually affirm what historically happened as that would come perilously close to Judaizing.
 
Thomas said:
It was a simple step, from there, to 'dispose' of the Hebrew calendar and fix a uniquely Christian 'stand-alone' event. Easter is still worked from the lunar calendar, but rather than the three days being determined according to the highpoint of the Jewish year, it's determined according to the highpoint of the Christian one — which was, by the then-established tradition, a Sunday.
Click to expand...
Sunday Sabbath was established at Nicea.

For the Christian, the Resurrection is the thing: "And if Christ be not risen again, your faith is vain, for you are yet in your sins" (1 Corinthians 15:17).
Click to expand...
Agreed. Without the resurrection, Christianity has "nothing" to distinguish it from other morality traditions. Notwithstanding those who draw from Mitraic and Pagan resurrection mythos in a bid to create a more palatable mythos for the Roman masses of the period.

I think this practice was first established in Rome. In the east the communities continued to follow the Hebrew calendar for some while longer.
Click to expand...
This I question. I don't think it came into prevalent use until after Nicea, so Nicea would have been first. Until I am shown comprehensively otherwise.
 
juantoo3,

re: "Sure 'nuf:http://www.interfaith.org/community/threads/8875/"

I don't see where your link shows any writing from the first century or before which shows a phrase stating a specific number of daytimes and/or a specific number of night times when it couldn't have included at least a part of each one of the specific number of daytimes and at least a part of each one of the specific number of night times.
 
And you won't find such from the first century, certainly little if any from Christian sources. Three days and three nights was three days and three nights, Jew and Christian alike.

What you would find at the reference I gave, which points to further detailed reference if one is so inclined, is why the obfuscation, and why it persists until the present day. It's not about what is written, it is about how what is written is interpreted, and how certain interpretations gained traction of political necessity.

As I said previously, the answer you seek is from the Council of Nicea, circa 325 AD. That is where the line of distinction was drawn with a heavy hand between Jews vs Christians, and indeed Arian Christians vs Athanasian Christians. Therein lies the answer to your entire question. Since Nicea, no Jewish interpretation would ever again be sufficient for Christianity.
 
juantoo3,
re: "As I said previously, the answer you seek is from the Council of Nicea, circa 325 AD."

I don't see where the Council shows any writing from the first century or before which shows a phrase stating a specific number of daytimes and/or a specific number of night times when it couldn't have included at least a part of each one of the specific number of daytimes and at least a part of each one of the specific number of night times. That is the question that I've asked.
 
I don't think this Thread is going to resolve any ideas. The 3 day-3 night argument is used a lot in attempting to prove Christianity wrong. IMO it shouldn't be the focus. The truth is Men wrote the Bible's books with good intentions (assumedly). They wrote them as stories and some "facts" were omitted, and some were exaggerated. Was Jesus killed on the Cross? This is the fundamental difference in Christianity and Islam. When I read the Biblical accounts as a Muslim, I'd say there are holes in the story that could go either way. When I was Christian... it wasn't a question, it was certainty. You could have told me every single argument about hole in the story, it wouldn't have mattered because what is read and what is taught it clear. This conversation is null and void without accepting the Biblical accounts are those of men who were embellished and copied and re-embellished.
 
rstrats said:
I don't see where the Council shows any writing from the first century or before which shows a phrase stating a specific number of daytimes and/or a specific number of night times when it couldn't have included at least a part of each one of the specific number of daytimes and at least a part of each one of the specific number of night times. That is the question that I've asked.
Click to expand...
I see.

So you already know the answer to your question before you even asked?

That tells me a great deal.
 
juantoo3,

re: "I see."

I don't think you do.



re: "So you already know the answer to your question before you even asked?"

That would be no. What makes you ask that question?
 
juantoo3 said:
Would you not say exactly the same of the Quran? Or would that risk having your neck sliced for even daring?
Click to expand...
Are you high? Or drunk? The last 2 posts from you have been very direct opponents to Islam, with no basis whatsoever. Did a Muslim attack you this week or something? This believe or die mentality you seem to be associating with us is very stupid. Someone of your tenure here at IO should know better.

OTT, No I wouldn't say the same. The Bible never makes claim that it is the word of God. It claims to have words of God in it. Just for example the titles of the books... "Gospel According to Mark"; "Acts of Paul"; etc. The Quran states clearly that it is from God. Barring that claim, seeing as how you are a disbeliever, the intricacy and elaborate language, the time-strong signs; scientifically accepted signs, conditions of it's final messenger which brought it, and the test of time on the words themselves are all signs of divine procurement. There is no embellishment, no elaborate mention of the messenger who received it. No Glorifying of his ancestors over the "cousins" who had treated his line very lowly for generations. For any actual discussion on the topic, or any beef you have with Islam as a religion, please take it to the "What's wrong with Islam" thread. or start a new one.
 
BigJoeNobod,
re: "The 3 day-3 night argument is used a lot in attempting to prove Christianity wrong."


I don't see how that could be used as an argument. What do you have in mind?
 
Since it's crucifixion week, someone new looking in may know of examples.
 
"In three days and three nights."
Click to expand...

The expression "in three days" can mean "in a short time" but, in three days and three nights, the statement must indicate the presence of three days and three nights. It means that the three days and three nights of Mat. 12:40 musts account for specifically "three days and three nights" and the Hellenist who wrote that gospel and attributed it to Matthew, the apostle of Jesus committed a blunder because the only chance for Jesus to have spent three days and three night in the tomb was nil. Probably he spent about three hours until Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus could bring servant to remove Jesus from that tomb into another place where they could take care of Jesus' wounds. (John 19:38,39)
 
Maranquape,

Since you're not a 6th day of the week crucifixion advocate, you probably won't know of any examples. Perhaps someone new looking in will.
 
The Messiah said that 3 night times would be involved with His time in the "heart of the earth". However, there are those who believe that the Messiah died on the 6th day of the week and who think that the "heart of the earth" is referring to the tomb or at the earliest to the time between the leaving of His spirit from His body and His resurrection on the 1st day of the week. But this belief allows for only 2 night times to be involved. To reconcile this discrepancy some say that the Messiah was using common Jewish figure of speech/colloquial language. I am simply asking for examples to support that assertion of commonality; i.e., examples where a daytime or a night time was forecast to be involved with an event when no part of the daytime or no part of the night time could have occurred.
 
Since the year is almost over, perhaps someone new looking in may know of examples.
 
Hi Rstrats, I am sure you are aware that Jesus was a Jew and, as a Jew, he would never contradict the Word of God in his own gospel aka the Tanach. Resurrection is not a doctrine in the Tanach. Rather the opposite is true that, once dead, one will never return from the eternal home of the dead if you read Psalm 49:12,20 in the JPS Jewish translation of the Bible. You can also see about the impossibility of resurrection in Job 7:9; 14:12; and II Samuel 12:23.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top