re: “He was crucified the day before the day of preparation aka Thursday…”
That would be an issue for a different topic. Maybe you could start one if you would like to discuss it.
MrE
re: “I think that what you were looking to discuss, was not at all clear from your OP.”
The only discussion that would be applicable to this topic would be with regard to whether or not any example provided were actually examples.
re: “Maybe you should reconsider how you framed things rather than being so critical of everyone who attempts to communicate with you”
So, how would you frame a response informing them that their replies were not relevant to this topic?
You should have done a better job of framing the topic and asking a clear question.
Hi,
If I understand you, you want use of time treated as a common figure of speech.
Every professional football game (American football) has a two minute warning.
Those final two minutes may take 15-20 minutes to play because of ways the teams can manipulate those two minutes.
But for purposes of the game, when we talk about the game, only two minutes have passed.
The next day, we still refer to the last 15-20 minutes of the game as the last two minutes.
Is that what you are asking about? We are trying here.
To the person who advocated for a Thursday crucifixion, the gospels do not support that.
We know that Jesus died on the sixth day because of the rush to get Jesus in the tomb before sundown. Also, the adorning of the body with spices had to be done on Monday.
Any other day Mary and the other ladies could have worked into the night to finish the adornment.
Based on Scripture, there is no way to read it and conclude anything other than a sixth day crucifixion.
Blessings
MrE,
re: “You should have done a better job of framing the topic and asking a clear question.”
I don’t see how it could be anymore clear.
BTW, you have a question directed to you in post #22.
That in a nutshell, is the problem I think. You think your post and question were clear. They were not. From the get-go people were confused about the topic – which itself was the question… “Common figure of speech?”
Is “what” a common figure of speech? The only thing you quote in your OP is the phrase “heart of the earth” so the assumption is that you are asking if the usage of that phrase was some sort of figure of speech. When people responded accordingly, you were immediately salty with them… telling each one that they were off topic, and to go start another thread.
Furthermore your OP centers on the number of nights Jesus was in the tomb, and again-- when people responded they were again told that they were off topic and that they didn’t understand the topic— like they were stupid or something.
“And that’s the only issue of this topic -the commonality of saying that a day time or a night time was forecast or said to be involved with an event when no part of a daytime or no part of a night time could have occurred.”
Clear as mud.
When people made an effort to explain their understanding of those days and nights- each and every time, you shut them down. I’m trying to help you here. As a brand new member to the site, try to find some common ground with people who respond (if you actually want a conversation, or if you have a question you want an answer to) and then use that as a foundation to build upon.
You could have responded to @Joe as just one example, with something like-- ‘Yes I understand what you are saying, but what I really am wondering is… did Jesus lie, when he said he was going to be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights?’
Isn’t that what you are actually asking?
MrE
A nice combination of “gentile” & “firm”. I think you DID say mostly what others were thinking. I also got confused at what rstrats was trying to get at.
MrE,
re: "That in a nutshell, is the problem I think. You think your post and question were clear. They were not. From the get-go people were confused about the topic – which itself was the question… ‘Common figure of speech?’”
Correct. Was it common figure of speech to say that a daytime or a night time would be involved with an event when no part of a daytime or no part of a daytime or no part of a night time could be?
re: “You could have responded to @Joe as just one example, with something like-- ‘Yes I understand what you are saying, but what I really am wondering is… did Jesus lie, when he said he was going to be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights?’ Isn’t that what you are actually asking?”
What? Absolutely not! What on earth did I write that would cause you to think such a despicable thing?
Hi–
It’s not intended to shame you. I just followed your premise to a natural conclusion. Others might have been confused by your original post, but I wasn’t. I immediately understood what you were actually asking, but declined to comment based on the responses you were dishing out to others who attempted to dialogue with you.
It seems to me that you are suggesting only a few possible explanations for what Jesus said in Matthew 12:
- Jesus was employing a common figure of speech when he said he would be 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth. --And you were seeking examples where others might have used similar inexact language as a prooftext for him doing so.
That’s one possibility-- that it was loose language, like “See ya next week” which doesn’t have to mean in exactly seven days. You seem to have concluded that Jesus was not in the tomb (heart of the earth) for exactly 3 days and 3 nights, so it must have been a figure of speech.
But if it wasn’t…? Then:
- Jesus was mistaken, didn’t know how to count, or was lying when he stated that he would be in the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights.
Others tried to bail you out by suggesting that the counting of days and nights accounts for any discrepancy, but since you rejected all of those proposals out of hand, you are left with option 1 or 2.
rstrats,
After reading all this confusing thread, I got to thinking.
Your OP seemed to infer that “three days and three nights” might just be a figure of speech. Am I correct? Or are you suggesting it is commonly misintrepreted to be just a “figure of speech”? Eithery way, maybe we are looking at it wrong. In the quote from Jesus:
" For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Matthew 12:40 ) , maybe we should be looking at what Jesus meant by “in the heart of the earth” instead of what he meant by “three days and three nights”. Maybe Jesus was not saying he would be physically dead (in the tomb) for that long, but “in the heart of the earth” meaning given over to the “earthly ones”, i.e., time he would spend subject to the worldly powers. Just thinking.
KP
KPuff,
re: “Your OP seemed to infer that ‘three days and three nights’ might just be a figure of speech. Am I correct?”
No. It would be the ones to whom this topic is directed that would be thinking it’s a figure of speech.
re: “Or are you suggesting it is commonly misintrepreted to be just a ‘figure of speech’?”
No.
re: " Eithery way, maybe we are looking at it wrong. In the quote from Jesus: 'For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Matthew 12:40 ) , maybe we should be looking at what Jesus meant by ‘in the heart of the earth’ instead of what he meant by “three days and three nights”…"
No, because this topic is directed to those who think that the heart of the earth is referring to the tomb.
rstrats
OK, Got it.
Is that what you also believe; that “the heart of the earth” means “dead in the tomb”?
thanx
KP
KPuff,
re: “Is that what you also believe; that ‘the heart of the earth’ means ‘dead in the tomb?’”
Yes, but what I believe about that is irrelevant to this topic.
rstrats
Got it. Just wondering. Thanx.
KP
MrE,
re: "It’s not intended to shame you. I just followed your premise to a natural conclusion.
The only premise is that a Friday crucifixion/Sunday resurrection with the heart of the earth referring to the tomb would only allow for 2 night times to be involved.
re: “Others might have been confused by your original post, but I wasn’t. I immediately understood what you were actually asking…”
Unless you understood that I was asking for examples (plural) to show that it was common to say that a daytime or a night time would be involved with an event when no part of a daytime or no part of a night time could be, then you didn’t understand.
I understood perfectly. You are insisting that Jesus misspoke (or lied) by stating he would be in the heart of the earth 3 nights, when it was only two nights.
MrE,
re: “You are insisting that Jesus misspoke (or lied)…”
I don’t know where you’re getting that from because I never insisted or even implied any such thing.
It’s the only logical outcome of your premise.
- You say unequivocally that Jesus was not in the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights.
- Jesus said unequivocally that he would be, just as Jonah was.
Those two things are seemingly irreconcilable, so something is amiss unless (a) Jesus mispoke (or lied) or (b) he was simply using some kind of figure of speech.
Since you can’t find any sort of evidence that it was some kind of figure of speech, your conclusion then must be-- what?
MrE,
re: “You say unequivocally that Jesus was not in the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights.”
There you go again, misrepresenting me. I never said that.
re: “Since you can’t find any sort of evidence that it was some kind of figure of speech, your conclusion then must be-- what?”
That so far no one has visited this topic who believes the crucifixion took place on the 6th day of the week with a 1st day of the week resurrection and who also believes that the heart of the earth refers to the tomb and tries to account for the lack of an actual 3rd night time - which would be the case with that timeline - by saying that the Messiah was employing common figure of speech or colloquial language of the period and that can provide examples to support the idea of commonality.
There’s no wiggle room in your premise above.
How do YOU account for that third night? It seems like you are insisting it never happened.