i think Lazaruz also rose after 3 days ?
Then when Jesus came, he found that he had lain in the grave four days already. (John 11:17)
i think Lazaruz also rose after 3 days ?
This is the topic, as quoted from the OP:genuineoriginal,
re: "What reason do you have for doubting what Ignatius stated?"
That is still an issue for another topic.
I provided documentation from the first century where Ignatius explained in detail what the Christians at that time understood the about the days and nights from the quote in Matthew 12:40.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?
This is the topic, as quoted from the OP:genuineoriginal,
re: "What reason do you have for doubting what Ignatius stated?"
That is still an issue for another topic.
I provided documentation from the first century where Ignatius explained in detail what the Christians at that time understood the about the days and nights from the quote in Matthew 12:40.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 greatly respect genuineoriginal , but have to disagree with his theory on this. If Messiah hadn't started the days and the nights, the issue could possibly lean m oh really in favor of a sixth day crucifixion. As it stands, a Wednesday crucifixion makes more sens of the text. Especially taking the 'high' Sabbath into account.genuineoriginal,
re: "I provided documentation from the first century where Ignatius explained in detail what the Christians at that time understood the about the days and nights from the quote in Matthew 12:40."
I don't see where Ignatius provided examples to support those who say that Matthew 12:40 is using common idiomatic language where a day or a night was counted as a day or a night when no part of the day or night took place. If it was common, there ought to be examples in order for that assertion to be made.
genuineoriginal,
I should have posed post #345 as a question. Where does Ignatius provide examples to support those who say that Matthew 12:40 is using common idiomatic language where a day or a night was counted as a day or a night when no part of the day or the night took place?
You might be interested that both Passover and Easter are on the same days this year.
The three days mentioned are the crucifixion on Friday, the time Jesus was in the grave on Saturday, and the resurrection on Sunday.
i think Lazaruz also rose after 3 days ?
...when Jesus got to Lazarus' burial place, he was there already 4 days.
The writings of Ignatius say Jesus died on Friday and resurrected on Sunday.Two nights and one day do not meet Jesus' sign of Jonah.
The writings of Ignatius say Jesus died on Friday and resurrected on Sunday.
Are you claiming that Jesus was a false prophet, or are you claiming that the people of the first century who talked to the people at the event couldn't figure out that there was a difference between Wednesday and Friday?
Ignatius plainly stated what the Christians in the first century understood as the meaning behind Jesus's words about the "three days and three nights."
Here it is again:
"The day of the preparation, then, comprises the passion; the Sabbath embraces the burial; the Lord’s Day contains the resurrection."
The three days mentioned are the crucifixion on Friday, the time Jesus was in the grave on Saturday, and the resurrection on Sunday.
This has been how Christians have understood the "three days and three nights" since the beginning of Christianity until the recent Wednesday crucifixion movement was started.
The writings of Ignatius say Jesus died on Friday and resurrected on Sunday.
Are you claiming that Jesus was a false prophet, or are you claiming that the people of the first century who talked to the people at the event couldn't figure out that there was a difference between Wednesday and Friday?
Every one of the early Christian writers that wrote about the crucifixion or the resurrection agree that Jesus was crucified on Friday and rose on Sunday.
Except for Luke and Mark.
In what period are these writers writing? Who else wrote about it?Every one of the early Christian writers that wrote about the crucifixion or the resurrection agree that Jesus was crucified on Friday and rose on Sunday.
There is no reason to doubt the accuracy of their accounts, so the next logical thing to question is our interpretation of the phrase "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."
Most people focus on trying to figure out how Jesus could have been dead for the "three days and three nights" of the prophecy.
There are others that question what Jesus meant by "the heart of the earth."
Where else in the Bible is this phrase (or any other like it) used for death?