"after three nights and three days I will rise again"

Page 1 of 4 (67 items) 1 2 3 4 Next >
This post has 66 Replies | 10 Followers

Posts 2
wag9570 | Forum Activity | Posted: Mon, Mar 8 2010 3:34 PM

OK, but why do we have the death on 'good friday' and then the resurection on Sunday, only two nights and two days if you count Friday as one day???????????

Who or what group set these dates into play since it dows NOT follow the Bible!!!!! And why hasn't it been changed to follow the biblical scripture writtings??

Please clearify...............

Posts 18644
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 8 2010 3:54 PM

In Jewish reckoning, it was considered to be "three days" from Friday to Sunday because they counted the partial day at the beginning of a group of days as well as the partial day at the end.

If you search in Logos for "three days" NEAR Jewish you should find some explanations of this Jewish calendrical idiom.

UPDATE: See, for example, the note in The Apologetics Study Bible on Matthew 12:38–40. This resources comes with all base packages besides Original Languages, so you probably have it.

Posts 2
wag9570 | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 8 2010 3:57 PM

OK, what about "three nights"??????

Posts 98
Tim Lord | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 8 2010 4:33 PM

Dr. John MacArthur explains in his excellent MacArthur Study  Bible commentary (available from Logos) that such expressions like this "were common in Semitic usage, and seldom were employed in a literal sense to specify precise intervals of time."  See, for example, other expressions such as "forty days and forty nights" (an expression associated in the Bible identically with Jesus, Moses, and Elijah), and which in some cases refers to a period of time longer than one month.  With that in mind, the statement "three days and three nights" is an emphatic way of saying "three days", which, "by Jewish reckoning this would be an apt way of expressing a period of time that includes parts of 3 days," writes Dr. MacArthur.  Thus we do not need to take an extreme literal meaning of these words as long as we see it from the Hebrew context.

Posts 2774
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 8 2010 7:09 PM

wag9570:
Please clearify..............
See if this illustration helps you understand it http://www.morethancake.org/2007/10/christology-who-is-christ.html

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 175
Bill Coley | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 8 2010 7:40 PM

I don't know whose advocate I am being when I ask this, but.... Isn't the phrase "extreme literal" redundant in the same way as is "very unique"? Either something is unique or it's not. Either we take the literal meaning of words, or we don't?

So MacArthur's claim is that "three days and three nights" doesn't really mean "three days and three nights." That's means he chooses not to read those words literally. Fine with me; I carry no flame for the issue. But used in language interpretation/reception, "literal" has a meaning by which we should abide.

Blessings (please take them literally),

Bill Coley

Posts 9050
Forum MVP
Mark Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 8 2010 7:49 PM

Bill Coley:
Either we take the literal meaning of words, or we don't?

Not when a figure of speech is being used. MacArthur seems to be claiming that three days and three nights is a figure of speech common in Jesus' day. I don't know so can't argue that point. But when a figure of speech is used we understand that the literal word-for-word meaning is not intended. Therefore is this phrase is a figure of speech it can mean something other than three actual days and three actual nights.

Pastor, North Park Baptist Church

Bridgeport, CT USA

Posts 175
Bill Coley | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 8 2010 8:14 PM

Mark, you seem to make my point (which for me is as much a leisurely volley as anything!). Edited to its core assertion, your last sentence contends that a given set of words (a phrase) may not mean what that set of words seems to (literally) mean. You say that's because the phrase is a figure of speech. With all respect, that's a non sequitur. Why words are not to be taken literally is irrelevant to the issue of *whether* they are to be literally.

If I cry out, "I have a million things to do today!" You probably will conclude that I don't really have a million things to do. You probably also infer that I have used a common figure of speech. But you probably also will know my cry is not literally true. All three of those statements can be true; none is mutually exclusive -- neither is the "why" and the "whether" of a phrase.

Blessings,

Bill

Posts 1178
David Wilson | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 8 2010 8:19 PM

"on the third day" is a common figure of speech used in Jesus' Day. 

Day one is today, not tomorrow.   The figure of speech in English would be "the day after tomorrow".

 

Posts 433
Vincent Setterholm | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 8 2010 8:26 PM

Another tack on the issue is to explore the idea that in the Passion week there may have been two Sabbaths. The normal Saturday Sabbath (that begins on Friday night) and a special Sabbath associated with one of the feasts related to Passover week that might have been on Friday (starting Thursday night). John 19:31 specifies the coming Sabbath with "this Sabbath was a great day" (ESV reads "high day" and NIV reads "special Sabbath"), which at least presents the possibility that he is distinguishing that Sabbath from a more common seventh-day Sabbath: a detail the Church might have missed when establishing its calendar traditions.

So perhaps the solution is that we should be celebrating Good Thursday. Maybe.

Lightfoot's Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica has some extended discussion on the chronology of the Passion week. I haven't quite sorted through his view on it yet myself.

Posts 1178
David Wilson | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 8 2010 8:39 PM

Answers to Tough Questions :  http://www.logos.com/ebooks/details/answertq

Q: How could Jesus have remained in the tomb three days and three nights if He was crucified on Friday and rose on Sunday?

McDowell, J., & Stewart, D. D. (1993). Answers to tough questions. Originally published: San Bernardino, Calif. : Here's Life Publishers, c1980. Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers.
Posts 1178
David Wilson | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 8 2010 8:53 PM

Looks like an Aramaic/Greek/English idiom translation issue:  What language was it spoken in ?  What was the first language of the one who wrote it in Greek ?  Did they use LXX as their translation dictionary for this idiom when putting it into Greek ?

NICNT http://www.logos.com/products/details/5184 on Matthew 12:40 suggests: 

The different phrasing of the three-day period compared with the "third day" of Matt 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 27:64 and the "after three days" of Matt 27:63 is due to the LXX wording, but in Semitic inclusive time-reckoning these do not denote different periods as a pedantic Western reading would suggest.

The same phrase, "three days and three nights" occurs in 1 Sam 30:12 to denote a period which began (literally) "today three days," the day before yesterday (v. 13). Similarly in Esther a period described as "for three days, night and day" (4:16) is concluded "on the third day" (5:1). It is worth noting that the partially Pharisaic delegation which requests the guard at the tomb, and which may reasonably be assumed to be recalling this, the only public pronouncement by Jesus about his resurrection, nevertheless uses the terms μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας and ἡ τρίτη ἡμέρα to specify the period Jesus had spoken of (27:63–64). Underlying this flexible usage is the Jewish tendency to speak of a period of 24 hours as a day and a night, so that Jesus’ time in the tomb can be said to embrace (parts of) three "day-nights."

Posts 116
Chris Thompson | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 8 2010 9:59 PM

OH, That this were the largest issue i had, in understanding Scripture.Smile

Posts 3163
Dominick Sela | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Mar 9 2010 3:56 AM

I was going to chip in to this conversation but it's raining cats and dogs here so I have a busy schedule today!

Posts 116
Chris Thompson | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Mar 9 2010 5:11 AM

Dominick Sela:

I was going to chip in to this conversation but it's raining cats and dogs here so I have a busy schedule today!

 

BUSY?....You think you are busy?...I have a camel stuck in the eye of a needle.Confused

Posts 3767
Forum MVP
Friedrich | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Mar 9 2010 5:48 AM

Abi--Gail aka Bubba Nunya . . . you are a funny one . . . Wink

I like Apples.  Especially Honeycrisp.

Posts 6479
Forum MVP
Lynden Williams | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Mar 9 2010 8:02 PM

wag9570:

OK, but why do we have the death on 'good friday' and then the resurection on Sunday, only two nights and two days if you count Friday as one day???????????

Who or what group set these dates into play since it dows NOT follow the Bible!!!!! And why hasn't it been changed to follow the biblical scripture writtings??

Please clearify...............

Here is another Logos resource which sheds light on the problem. libronixdls:jump|pos=LLS-AOL:0<V5R280>.2800.0|res=LLS:900.3.1902

Here is the link to the web for the resource: http://www.logos.com/products/details/3441 I dare you. Big Smile

Everything ever written in Religion and Theology formatted for Logos Bible Software.Logos Youtube Channel

Posts 38
Joe Hicks | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Mar 10 2010 4:26 AM

As a self-professed literalist, I am with Bill and Mark on this.  For me everything starts out literal until some evidence proves it otherwise.  Even if we had a perfect original text we would still have to understand the local application of the phrase to glean the full "local" meaning.  My favorite figure requiring such thought is "face to face".  My favorite LOGOS reference for figures of speech was written long ago and is "FIgures of Speech Used in the Bible" by Bulinger.  The summary on this from that reference is that this idiom covers any part of three days and three nights. 

Posts 8601
TCBlack | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Mar 10 2010 7:02 AM

Joe,

That article from Bullinger is a great pointer complete with scriptural cross references to explain and demonstrate.  libronixdls:jump|pos=LLS-AOL:0<IDIOMA.I.VIII.12>.0.0|res=LLS:46.50.9

Indeed for those not in possession of the resource:

12. “Three days and three nights”
Jonah 1:17 (2:1), quoted in Matt. 12:40.
The expression, “three days and three nights,” is an idiom which covers any parts of three days and three nights.
In 1 Sam. 30:11 (12), it is said that a certain Egyptian had not eaten bread and drunk water for “three days and three nights,” and yet it was only three days since he fell sick (ver. 13), not four days.
In Est. 4:16, Esther says she and her maidens will fast “three days and three nights,” and yet it was on “the third day” that Esther went in to the king; not the fourth day, which it must have been if the expression were literally understood.
It may seem absurd to Gentiles and to Westerns to use words in such a manner, but that does not alter the fact.
Now the New Testament is for the most part Hebrew in idiom, but Greek in language. This is the simple explanation of the difference between it and classical Greek. Moreover, there is reason to believe that the First Gospel, as we have it, is a translation from a Hebrew Original. This is one of the idioms. It is used in Jonah 1:17 (2:1), and by our Lord in Matt. 12:40. And yet many Scriptures say that He should rise, and did actually rise on “the third day.” This could not have been if the expression were used in its literal sense. It must have been the fourth day and not the “third.”
The fact is that the idiom covers any part of “three days and three nights.” This method of Hebrew reckoning is as distinct from Gentile reckoning, as their commencing the day at sunset and our commencing it at midnight. All these different modes of reckoning are peculiar to the respective peoples and languages and must be duly taken into account.
The Lord’s words in Matt. 12:40 do not disagree with the Scripture assertion that He should rise on “the third day.”
We have the expression “after three days” once (Matt. 27:63), and “in three days” once (John 2:19). But the common expression is “on the third day,” and it occurs ten times. But if the expression be literal and not an idiom, all these passages should say the fourth day! Paul preached the resurrection on “the third day” according to the Scriptures (1 Cor. 15:4), and this is the great Scriptural fact which we cannot get away from.
Neither can we alter the fact that He rose on “the first day of the week.”
Neither can we alter the history which records His death and burial as taking place the day before the Sabbath. “The sabbath drew on” (Luke 23:54. Matt. 27:62); “the day before the sabbath” (Mark 15:42); and yet the two disciples going to Emmaus on the first day of the week say, “This is the third day (not the fourth) since these things were done” (Luke 24:21).
From all this it is perfectly clear that nothing is to be gained by forcing the one passage (Matt. 12:40) to have a literal meaning, in the face of all these other passages which distinctly state that the Lord died and was buried the day before the Sabbath and rose the day after it, viz., on the first day of the week. These many statements are literal and are history: but the one passage is an idiom which means any part of “three days and three nights.” The one complete day and night (24 hours) and the parts of two nights (36 hours in all) fully satisfy both the idiom and the history.
It may be added that we have a similar usage in English. When a person is sentenced to “three days’ imprisonment,” it may be late in the evening of the first day when he arrives at the prison, but when the doors open on the morning of the third day (not the fourth) he walks out a free man. In other words, if a person is commited to prison for three days—and he reaches it on Monday night—he leaves it the first thing on Wednesday morning.
See The Coming Prince, by Dr. Robert Anderson, C.B.
Ethelbert William Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (London; New York: Eyre & Spottiswoode; E. & J. B. Young & Co., 1898), 845–847.

 

Truth Is Still Truth Even if You Don't Believe It

Check the Wiki

Warning: Sarcasm is my love language. I may inadvertently express my love to you.

Posts 1674
Paul Golder | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Mar 10 2010 7:05 AM

"after three nights and three days I will rise again"

When I first saw this, I was thinking that someone was indexing on a netbook...Big Smile

"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."

Page 1 of 4 (67 items) 1 2 3 4 Next > | RSS