The Hoax of the Three Days and Three Nights

[Robert_in_SD]

The Hoax of the Three Days and Three Nights

On the third day or in three days, simply means after a short period of time. (Hosea 6:2)

Night or day for three days, as we have in the request of Esther to fast for her, means three days or three nights whether one follows the tradition to fast by day or by night. Those terms were used here because it was in the Diaspora where most Persians followed the tradition to fast by night. So, Esther’s maids who were not Jewish, would share Esther’s pain by showing their solidarity with their night fast. (Esther 4:16)

The case of Jonah dispenses all explanation because it happened during a vision. Therefore metaphorical language. That could be the entire three days and three nights, since everything is possible in a vision or dream. (Jonah 2:1)

Now, for the three days and three nights we are talking about, for Jesus to spend in the tomb, according to Matthew 12:40, the writer must have had a very poor insight about parables or metaphorical language to draw his prophecy in the terms of Jonah,s allegory. If he had used the language of Esther or Hosea, he could have saved his prophecy from being a hoax, but now he must account for the whole three days and three nights or parts thereof.

We don’t even need another gospel writer to contradict the one of Matthew. This contradicts himself as he declares that the next day, the one following the Day of Preparation, the chief Priests asked Pilate for a guard of soldiers to watch the tomb area for three days. (Mat. 27:62-64) The Jewish Preparation Day is always Friday, and the following day is the Sabbath.

Then, after that Sabbath, as the first day was dawning, the women went to see the sepulcher, there was an earthquake, an “angel” came down from Heaven, removed the stone, and the tomb was empty. Someone had cheated the angel by raising Jesus from there long before the “angel” could at least be an eyewitness to the resurrection.

Based on the Jewish method that a whole day or night can be accounted for any part of the day or night, we can consider the first day for those minutes that took Joseph of Arimathea to get Jesus into the tomb before sunset. The first night from sunset to sundawn of Saturday, the second day from sundawn Saturday to sunset that Saturday, and the second night from sunset that Saturday to the sundawn of the first day. It was still dark when the women arrived at the tomb to find the tomb empty. Therefore we are missing a whole day and a whole night to save Matthew 12:40 from becoming a prophetical hoax and a classical contradiction in the NT.

Who volunteers to solve this puzzle?

Ben

Where does it say that I am supposed to read the statement in Matthew… that analogizes Christ’s death with Jonah’s experience in the great fish… in such a literalistic manner.

How do we know that Jonah was literally in the great fish for three days AND nights. Three has such a symbolic meaning. Why should it be taken in such a literalistic manner? It seems from my reading that Jonah was released on the third day. How do you know that he wasn’t thrown into the sea after sunset on the first day? How do you know that he wasn’t vomited up after sunset, making the literal counting 4 nights and 3 days?

I don’t find these arguments very persuasive. It seems like you are straining at gnats and swallowing camels to me. Just my two cents.

Peace,
Robert

 

[Ben_Masada]

Where does it say that I am supposed to read the statement in Matthew… that analogizes Christ’s death with Jonah’s experience in the great fish… in such a literalistic manner.

How do we know that Jonah was literally in the great fish for three days AND nights. Three has such a symbolic meaning. Why should it be taken in such a literalistic manner? It seems from my reading that Jonah was released on the third day. How do you know that he wasn’t thrown into the sea after sunset on the first day? How do you know that he wasn’t vomited up after sunset, making the literal counting 4 nights and 3 days?

I don’t find these arguments very persuasive. It seems like you are straining at gnats and swallowing camels to me. Just my two cents.

Peace,
Robert

**I can see why you don’t find these arguments very persuasive. Your questions remind me of wheels not well tight to the axle.

I am not the one being literalist here, but the guy who wrote Matthew 12:40. And what happened to Jonah, and how it happened has become irrelevant before the literalism of Matthew 12:40. Then, the guy who wrote Jonah 2;1 is under no obligation to prove his accuracy. The whole book is a parable. Everything is possible in a parable. Matthew 12:40 is not a parable or meant to be taken metaphorically. He specified three days and three night. Now, he, or those who believe him are under obligation to prove accuracy. Besides, I am not analyzing Jonah but the blunder of Matthew 12:40.

Sorry but your two cents failed to be worthy even the name they stand for.**

 

[shoewindow3000]

Jesus was in the tomb part of** Friday (day 1)**, all of Saturday(day 2), and
part of Sunday(day 3).

The part of Sunday is the third day, and since He rose after part of the third day, he rose after the third day.

It is simple.
Did you also know that:

** 4+ 5 = 9** ???

 

[Ben_Masada]

Jesus was in the tomb part of** Friday (day 1)**, all of Saturday(day 2), and
part of Sunday(day 3).

The part of Sunday is the third day, and since He rose after part of the third day, he rose after the third day.

It is simple.
Did you also know that:

** 4+ 5 = 9** ???

**No, you are absolutely mistaken. Let us work together on this one.

Matthew 28:1 - At the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn towards the first day of the week. It means the night was finishing. In the process to finish. Came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulcher. And behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door and sat upon it. Where was Jesus when the angel rolled back the stone? The tomb was empty. Therefore, where is the third day in the tomb? While you look for the third day, let someone else look for the third night. The man said three days and three nights. Don’t forget!**

 

[shoewindow3000]

The sun rises in the morning of the current day, not the night of the previous day.
What are you talking about???

There is no shame in admitting you are wrong.

 

[elvisman]

And you should have read the thread. You would have seen that I acknowledge that tradition.
Look at the thread. There is no better explanation about the case of Esther.
On the third day of the Jewish fast, which would be on the third night of the non-Jewish ones who were fasting.
This is a classic mistake made by those who read blinded by preconceived notions. Esther does not say three days and nights. She said three days OR nights. Reread the text or the thread.

**Here we go again with you trying to hijack the meaning of the Scriptures so you can fit your square peg in a round hole. **

**Esther didn’t say three days or nights - she said three days - night OR day. This means three days and three nights. All you’re doing is playing semantic games and trying to win an argument because you’re an anti-Christian antagonist.

Peter spoke well of you when he spoke of those ignorant and unstable people who twist and distort the Scriptures to their own destruction (2 Pet. 3:16).

 

[mangy_dog]

That’s okay. Don’t be afraid. We won’t bite.

Are you guys talking about the prophecies of Fátima, Garabandal, Medjugorje etc etc??

 

[cthulhubryan]

**The only reference to a son of God in the Scriptures that Jesus used to handle is in Exodus 4:22,23. “Israel is My Son; so let My Son go, so that he may serve Me.” Your idea of Jesus being son of God is Hellenistic and mythological.

The Jews did not kill Jesus; this is an antisemitic lie you are perpetuating from the lies of the NT. Even the late Pope John 23rd asked publicly from the Jewish People to forgive Christianity for this false accusation. As I can see, you don’t love this Pope for having recognized the truth, because you continue spreading the same accusation.**

Here we go again. With Ben it’s not about Truth. It’s about antisemitism if he’s wrong. The Bible is the Bible.

Jesus is the Son of God. Yet you refuse to recognize Him. Therefore you refuse God.
As I have shown you time and time again, the timing of the gospels make lie of your ‘paul did this’ theory.

No, technically the Jews didn’t actually kill Jesus. Good grief, quit being a whiner. The Jews simply forced Pilate into doing it for them. They were responsible for His death, though they didn’t drive the nails themselves.

Get real Ben, stop with your ludicrous statements. Oh, I forgot, you are the only one who can interpret scripture. You’ve told us that before.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

I can see why you don’t find these arguments very persuasive. Your questions remind me of wheels not well tight to the axle.

Your insults mean nothing to me. They have no place in this discussion.
Ben Masada:

I am not the one being literalist here, but the guy who wrote Matthew 12:40.

Where does it say he’s being a literalist in his writing? I’d like to know the basis for your conclusion. As an honest person who reads scripture, I assume you have some proof for your assertion. Please share it.
BM:

And what happened to Jonah, and how it happened has become irrelevant before the literalism of Matthew 12:40.

Once again, your argument is launched from a presumption (literalist position) that you decline to support.
BM:

Then, the guy who wrote Jonah 2;1 is under no obligation to prove his accuracy.

If the author of Jonah is under no obligation to prove his accuracy and it could have been 4 nights or 2 nights or 2 days, etc., then why not hold Matthew’s author to the same standard. He is comparing the events of the OT and the NT. Does there have to be 100 percent accuracy or does there simply have to be a unifying theme - darkness and removal to under the earth for a symbolically “complete” period of time? Whether Jonah or Jesus spent a literal 3 days/nights in the fish/tomb does not change the meaning of the story. In both cases, the person spent the full amount of time that was required to complete God’s plan. That seems to be the unifying theme here. Matthew’s allusion to the text of the OT does not seem to be an assertion that Jesus did not rise until after sunset on Sunday. That would contradict the rest of the NT’s description of the resurrection. Rather, it seems that Matthew’s author is merely alluding to a passage in the OT that you already admit need not be understood literally.
BM:

Everything is possible in a parable. Matthew 12:40 is not a parable or meant to be taken metaphorically.

Again, my question to you, with respect to the “3 days and 3 nights” langauge of Matthew is, how do you know it’s not supposed to be taken in some manner that is not literal. It seems, rather, that the author is drawing a typological analogy between Jonah and Jesus. The typology does not fall apart if Jesus is in the tomb for parts of three different days. Jonah was not a literal prophecy of the Messiah (as you have readily conceded). So, why are you suggesting that Matthew’s analogy of Jonah and Jesus, with reference to the time period in the “fable” of Jonah, falls apart if Jesus were not literally in the tomb for three days AND three nights? Absent some showing that this phrase was a literal assertion that Jesus did not rise until after sunset on Sunday, I think it has to be read in context with the rest of scripture, meaning the language is simply a reference to the similarities between Jonah’s experience in the fish and Jesus’s experience in the grave.
BM:

He specified three days and three night. Now, he, or those who believe him are under obligation to prove accuracy.

Again, I don’t think the intention of the author was to p(name removed by moderator)oint the exact amount of time that Jesus spent in the tomb, but to show that - like Jonah - Jesus was absent for a three day period.
BM:

Besides, I am not analyzing Jonah but the blunder of Matthew 12:40.

How is it a blunder to compare Jesus and Jonah in such a manner unless (as you have yet to prove) the intention is to read the time period as exactly three days and three nights? What authority do you have to assert that Matthew’s author intended to mean a literal three days and three nights as opposed to merely quoting the OT language?

[39] But he answered them, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.
[40] For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Mt. 12:39-40 italics added.)If Jonah is not a literal three days and nights, and the “sign” of Jonah is the what is being referred to, then why does Jesus resurrection have to follow the literal three days and nights language as you urge?
BM:

Sorry but your two cents failed to be worthy even the name they stand for.

Again, please know that your insults have no meaning and no place in this discussion.

Peace,
Robert

 

[mangy_dog]

I hope you guys aren’t thinking of pistols at dawn, 30 paces, turn and shoot.

 

[Ben_Masada]

elvisman
Regular Member Join Date: June 15, 2004
Posts: 2,410
Religion: Hard Core Catholic

Re: The Hoax of the Three Days and Three Nights

And you should have read the thread. You would have seen that I acknowledge that tradition.
Look at the thread. There is no better explanation about the case of Esther.
On the third day of the Jewish fast, which would be on the third night of the non-Jewish ones who were fasting.
This is a classic mistake made by those who read blinded by preconceived notions. Esther does not say three days and nights. She said three days OR nights. Reread the text or the thread.

Here we go again with you trying to hijack the meaning of the Scriptures so you can fit your square peg in a round hole.

Esther didn’t say three days or nights - she said three days - night OR day. This means three days and three nights. All you’re doing is playing semantic games and trying to win an argument because you’re an anti-Christian antagonist.

Peter spoke well of you when he spoke of those ignorant and unstable people who twist and distort the Scriptures to their own destruction (2 Pet. 3:16).

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

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.

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?**

 

[Ben_Masada]

Are you guys talking about the prophecies of Fátima, Garabandal, Medjugorje etc etc??

Now, you are either biting or about to.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Here we go again. With Ben it’s not about Truth. It’s about antisemitism if he’s wrong. The Bible is the Bible.

No, it is about lying. Every time you accuse the Jews with having killed Jesus you are perpetuating a lie.

Jesus is the Son of God. Yet you refuse to recognize Him. Therefore you refuse God.
As I have shown you time and time again, the timing of the gospels make lie of your ‘paul did this’ theory.

No, Jesus was Jewish, and a Jew cannot be son of God with a woman. This is possible only in Greek Mythology. So, to say that a Jew was born of God with a woman is a Hellenistic lie.

No, technically the Jews didn’t actually kill Jesus. Good grief, quit being a whiner. The Jews simply forced Pilate into doing it for them. They were responsible for His death, though they didn’t drive the nails themselves.

No, that’s the same lie dressed with a different cloth. You are so ignorante of Roman History that you can imagine a timid Pilate being forced by the Jews. Read Josephus about Pilate and you will change your mind.

Get real Ben, stop with your ludicrous statements. Oh, I forgot, you are the only one who can interpret scripture. You’ve told us that before.

**Well, Logic now comes into show. Who can better interpret the Scriptures, the one who wrote the Bible or the one who reads it? I am a member of the People who wrote the Bible, while you are a member of the people who read it. So, according to Isaiah 2:2,3, whenever the Gentiles want instruction in the Word of God, the address is Zion, the Jewish People. Does it make sense or not? **

 

[cthulhubryan]

No, it is about lying. Every time you accuse the Jews with having killed Jesus you are perpetuating a lie.

Nope, sorry. Go back and read the gospels.

No, Jesus was Jewish, and a Jew cannot be son of God with a woman. This is possible only in Greek Mythology. So, to say that a Jew was born of God with a woman is a Hellenistic lie.

Nope, it IS possible. It DID happen. Just because you are willfully ignorant does not change reality.

No, that’s the same lie dressed with a different cloth. You are so ignorante of Roman History that you can imagine a timid Pilate being forced by the Jews. Read Josephus about Pilate and you will change your mind.

You again are the ignorant one. Pilate was in a bad situation and did not want any uprisings in Judea. Therefore he agreed to crucify one whom he knew to be innocent to assuage the Jews.

**Well, Logic now comes into show. Who can better interpret the Scriptures, the one who wrote the Bible or the one who reads it? I am a member of the People who wrote the Bible, while you are a member of the people who read it. So, according to Isaiah 2:2,3, whenever the Gentiles want instruction in the Word of God, the address is Zion, the Jewish People. Does it make sense or not? **

What logic? That has to be one of the stupidest things I have ever read. Jews wrote the Bible, Ben is a Jew, therefore Ben knows the mind of God.
Once again, you are wrong. The scripture in Isaiah refers to the end of times. Therefore it will be the rebuilt temple. This is foreseeing Christ’s return at some point in the future.

Ben, if all you want is to come here and insult Christians, defy God and tout your self-proclaimed Omniscience then please, in the immortal words of Jack Nicholson, “Sell crazy someplace else, we’re all stocked up here”

 

[Ben_Masada]

Where does it say he’s being a literalist in his writing? I’d like to know the basis for your conclusion. As an honest person who reads scripture, I assume you have some proof for your assertion. Please share it.

He specified three days and three nights, when he could have said just after threes days.

If the author of Jonah is under no obligation to prove his accuracy and it could have been 4 nights or 2 nights or 2 days, etc., then why not hold Matthew’s author to the same standard. He is comparing the events of the OT and the NT.

Because what happened to Jonah, happned during a vision and not in reality. How did Matthew 12:40 happen in a vision?

Does there have to be 100 percent accuracy or does there simply have to be a unifying theme - darkness and removal to under the earth for a symbolically “complete” period of time?

In the case of Matthew 12:40 yes, he specified three days and three nights.

Whether Jonah or Jesus spent a literal 3 days/nights in the fish/tomb does not change the meaning of the story. In both cases, the person spent the full amount of time that was required to complete God’s plan. That seems to be the unifying theme here.

Jonah did not spend 3 days and 3 nights anywhere because the fact happened in a vision. Matthew 12:40 was not a vision.

Matthew’s allusion to the text of the OT does not seem to be an assertion that Jesus did not rise until after sunset on Sunday. That would contradict the rest of the NT’s description of the resurrection. Rather, it seems that Matthew’s author is merely alluding to a passage in the OT that you already admit need not be understood literally.

Are you implying that Matthew 12:40 was a vision or dream? It is very possible because Jesus did not spend even more than 3 hours in the tomb.

Again, my question to you, with respect to the “3 days and 3 nights” langauge of Matthew is, how do you know it’s not supposed to be taken in some manner that is not literal. It seems, rather, that the author is drawing a typological analogy between Jonah and Jesus.

Very good! So, we are understanding each other now. Nothing happened literally. No wonder there is no eyewitness to the tale of the resurrection.

The typology does not fall apart if Jesus is in the tomb for parts of three different days. Jonah was not a literal prophecy of the Messiah (as you have readily conceded). So, why are you suggesting that Matthew’s analogy of Jonah and Jesus, with reference to the time period in the “fable” of Jonah, falls apart if Jesus were not literally in the tomb for three days AND three nights?

**Congratulations! I rather agree with you than with anyone else so far. Everything was metaphorical, either with Jonah or Jesus. **

Absent some showing that this phrase was a literal assertion that Jesus did not rise until after sunset on Sunday, I think it has to be read in context with the rest of scripture, meaning the language is simply a reference to the similarities between Jonah’s experience in the fish and Jesus’s experience in the grave.

**That’s the bottom line of our understanding. When Matthew 12:40 compared Jesus in the tomb with Jonah in the belly of the fish, he was making of both cases a metaphor. But now you need to change what you used above from “Jesus did rise” to “Jesus was raised.” That’s the term all the 4 gospel writers use. To rise, one is risen by the power of God. To be raised, one is raised by the power of man. That’s what happened to Jesus. **

Again, I don’t think the intention of the author was to p(name removed by moderator)oint the exact amount of time that Jesus spent in the tomb, but to show that - like Jonah - Jesus was absent for a three day period.

Dont’ back up what you have revealed so far. That both cases were metaphorical. Therefore, Jesus could have been raised from that tomb after a couple of hours.

How is it a blunder to compare Jesus and Jonah in such a manner unless (as you have yet to prove) the intention is to read the time period as exactly three days and three nights? What authority do you have to assert that Matthew’s author intended to mean a literal three days and three nights as opposed to merely quoting the OT language?

**You don’t have to keep rubbing. I already agreed with your revelation that both cases were metaphorical of being in the heart of the earth for three hours or three days. In the case of Jonah a metaphorical 3 days which served to symbolize 3 hours for Jesus.

Robert, congratulations! I never thought someone would be able to unriddle this puzzle as you have done. It means, the case is closed, as I proclaim that Matthew 12:40 was not a hoax but a comparison of three parts of time to the metaphorical three days of Jonah for both Jonah and Jesus to be in the heart of the earth. Enjoy your credibility. If there is a way to grant you a prize, I am ready to donate to you 500 of my points.**

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben, if all you want is to come here and insult Christians, defy God and tout your self-proclaimed Omniscience then please, in the immortal words of Jack Nicholson, “Sell crazy someplace else, we’re all stocked up here”

**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.**

 

[shoewindow3000]

**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.**

In reality, it was the JEWS who used( and are still influenced by) elements of pagan Greek mythology and philosophy.

Ever heard of, oh I don’t know…

… Hellenistic Judaism???

To quote the** Jewish** historian Flavius Josephus( first century):

“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”

 

[Ben_Masada]

In reality, it was the JEWS who used( and are still influenced by) elements of pagan Greek mythology and philosophy.

Ever heard of, oh I don’t know…

… Hellenistic Judaism???

To quote the** Jewish** historian Flavius Josephus( first century):

“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”

**Yes, I have heard of Hellenistic Jews, like for example, the great Jewish Philosopher Judaeus Philo of Alexandria. But these Hellenistic Jews were of those who adopted the Classic Hellenistic Philosophy and not Greek Mythology. Philo, again for an example, was a Hellenistic Jew who never accepted or adopted the Christian idea of a Jew being born of God with a woman. Myself, also for an example, am quite fun of Classic Philosophy. I am even an avid reader of Plato. But Socrates, Plato and Aristotle in their enlightenment were no promoters of Greek Mythology as Paul and the gospels writers (name removed by moderator)orted it into Judaism.

Your quotation above of Josephus is a forgery made by the Church in the 4th Century. Josephus could never have written about Jesus in those terms.**

 

[shoewindow3000]

The “fake” that you refer to was this one:

“Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”

That is not what I posted.

 

[Ben_Masada]

The “fake” that you refer to was this one:

“Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”

That is not what I posted.

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.