The Hoax of the Three Days and Three Nights

[elvisman]

What is the difference between three days or night and three days, day or night? You become yourself impossible to commonsense.

It means 3 days and nights. You have GOT to take some reading comprehension classes.

From the same breath that you say I am an anti-Christian, you give me all the right in the world to say that you are an anti-Semite.

That’s utter nonsense. I don’t attack Judaism like you attack C****hristianity.
I do not go on Jewish forum sites to attack them for their beliefs as you do on this Catholic site.
Ummm . . WHY do you, by the way?

Peter did not say anything of that sort. Even the Catholic version of Saint Joseph’s edition of the New American Bible acknowledge that the Letters that carry the name of Peter were written by an unknown author and not by Peter. Are you contradicting your own Church?

Okay, Ben - now you’re a liar.
I have the St. Joheph’s New American Bible right in front of me and i****t says nothing of the kind.
It says that from Irenaeus (2nd century) on down, these letters were believed to be from Peter the Apostle.

**It goes on to say that some later scholars don’t believe it to be so and yet, still others disagree with those scholars. Don’t forget who you’re dealing with - an educated Catholic who will not allow people to lie and falsely accuse the Church. **
In short, my angry anti-Christian friend - I do my homework. Maybe you should do yours.

 

[Joe_Brown]

While through the eyes of the twenty-first century reader these statements may appear at first glance to contradict one another, in reality they harmonize perfectly if one understands the liberal methods ancients used when reckoning time. In the first century, any part of a day could be computed for the whole day and the night following it (cf. Lightfoot, 1979, pp. 210-211). The Jerusalem Talmud quotes rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah, who lived around A.D. 100, as saying: “A day and night are an Onah ‘a portion of time’] and the portion of an Onah is as the whole of it” (from Jerusalem Talmud: Shabbath ix. 3, as quoted in Hoehner, 1974, pp. 248-249, bracketed comment in orig.). Azariah indicated that a portion of a twenty-four hour period could be considered the same “as the whole of it.” Thus, in Jesus’ time He would have been correct in teaching that His burial would last “ three days and three nights,” even though it was not three complete 24-hour days.

The Scriptures are filled with references which show that a part of a day is sometimes equivalent to the whole day. Notice the following examples:

* According to Genesis 7:12, the rain of the Noahic Flood was upon the Earth “forty days and forty nights.” Verse 17 of that same chapter says it was on the Earth for just “forty days.”
* In Genesis 42:17 Joseph incarcerated his brothers for three days. Then, in verse 18, he spoke to them on the third day, and from the context it seems that he released them on that same day—i.e., the third day.
* When Israel asked King Rehoboam to lighten their burdens, he wanted time to contemplate their request, so he instructed Jeroboam and the people of Israel to return “after three days” (2 Chronicles 10:5, emp. added). Verse 12 says that Jeroboam and the people of Israel came to Rehoboam “on the third day, as the king had directed, saying, ‘ Come back to me the third day’ ” (emp. added). Fascinating, is it not, that even though Rehoboam instructed his people to return “after three days,” they understood this to mean “on the third day.”
* In 1 Samuel 30:12,13, the phrases “three days and three nights” and “three days” are used interchangeably.
* When Queen Esther was about to risk her life by going before the king uninvited, she instructed her fellow Jews to follow her example by not eating “for three days, night or day” (Esther 4:16). The text goes on to tell us that Esther went in unto the king “on the third day” (5:1, emp. added).

 

[Joe_Brown]

Found this on apologeticspress.org/articles/570 I dont know if it is a Catholic site. Thought I would share

 

[Joe_Brown]

Dont read anything else from that site. I feel its a little heretical. It explains the 3 days and 3 nights good though.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

**I would like to remind you that this is a section of the forum for non-Catholics. You cannot show me the door out. Others have tried and the Moderator has voted against. There is a way for me to leave without your opening the door for me: Drop the claim that Jesus was Jewish and I am out. As long as you claim that he was a Jewish man, and use a Jew to distort the image of Judaism before the world, with Hellenistic innovations of Greek Mythology, I will stick around to defend the Faith of Jesus which was Judaism. Is that clear enough?

I am not here to insult Christians. You are the one insulting Judaism by teaching the world that there is room in Judaism for Greek Mythology. That’s an insult.**

Jesus was a Jew. Even your hero Josephus insinuated that.

Christ’s claim was “Do you see these stones?” (re. the temple). “I tell you, not one will be left standing on another”.

And forty years later, in the time of the “children’s children” as called down by the crowd upon themselves, that is precisely what happened.

Why? Because God had come Himself in the form of Christ, and the Temple sacrifices were no longer necessary. Once Christ had been, the Jewish Temple was the very first icon to be relegated to the dust heap of history. Even the Greek and Roman temples lasted longer.

But you’ve got a closed mind. Just as the Jews of Christ’s time had. And in time history came and swept them away.

I remember a comment by my old Protestant pastor. He felt God was going to destroy the Jewish race and religion, as they’d fulfilled their role. After all the Church as come, and is now around the world. I found from experiene he was usually right. For example he warned one young bloke in his ***very own congregation ***who was riding his motor bike dangerously, that if he didn’t smarten up, he "wouldn’t last two weeks’. He told me he’s wished he’d warned him some other way, as he felt guilty about it, and he found what he said usually happend. He buried the young bloke precisely two weeks later.

When I consider the Moslem attitude to Israel, and the ambivalent attitude of the current US administration, plus the powers who find it convenient for the sake of oil to back the Arab states, I sometimes wonder what the future holds for Israel.

You can keep putting your faith in the Wailing Wall if you want to. But God’s moved on, and He’s not going to wait just for you.

 

[shoewindow3000]

Any quote in Josephus about Jesus is a forgery. Josephus never wrote anything about Jesus. And the Church started quoting him from the
4th Century. It means that by then, the Church had inserted the forgery into Josephus’ writings.

Here is where I got it from:

In 1971, Shlomo Pines, a Jewish professor, published a translation of a different version of the Testimonium, quoted in an Arabic manuscript of the tenth century. The manuscript in question appears in the Book of the Title written by Agapius the historian, a 10th-century Arabic Christian and Melkite bishop of Hierapolis Bambyce (Manbij).Agapius’ version of the Testimonium reads:

(For he says in the treatises that he has written in the governance of the Jews) “At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon their loyalty to him. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive. Accordingly they believed that he was the Messiah, concerning whom the Prophets have recounted wonders” - Shlomo Pines’ translation, quoted by J. D. Crossan

 

[Anne_Carmel]

Thank you for the discussion. Since the posts have resorted to a bit of ‘shouting’ and name calling, the thread is now closed.