Three Days and Three Nights

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Wednesday - Jesus crucified at evening, per the required time of the evening passover sacrifice. Jesus' body buried in the tomb. Thursday begins at sunset.

Thursday, began at sunset, evening to dawn = 1st night
Thursday, dawn to following sunset = 1st day
Friday, began at sunset, evening to dawn = 2nd night
Friday, dawn to following sunset = 2nd day
Saturday, began at sunset, evening to dawn = 3rd night
Saturday, dawn to following sunset = 3rd day
Sunday, began at sunset, evening to dawn = sometime before dawn Jesus arose.

Davy: <<Wednesday - Jesus crucified at evening, per the required time of the evening passover sacrifice. Jesus' body buried in the tomb. Thursday begins at sunset.>>

<<crucified at evening>> No Scripture; no definition; no logic, no clarity, no stance.

<<per the required time of the evening passover sacrifice>> Right: crucified and DIED: "between the latter quarters of days'-light" [behn-ha-arba-yim] = mid-afternoon "the ninth hour". The passover-sacrifice : ONE, this one! On the fourteenth day of the First Month "the Preparation of Passover" John 19:14 2Chronicles 35.

Davy: <<Thursday, began at sunset, evening to dawn = 1st night ... Thursday, dawn to following sunset = 1st day>> --- <<= 1st day>>

What about <<Wednesday - Jesus crucified at evening, per the required time of the evening passover sacrifice>> "mid-afternoon" before <<Thursday begins at sunset>>!? Thursday according to YOU was the second day, oukie, not the <<1st day>>.

Davy: <<Wednesday - Jesus crucified ... Jesus' body buried in the tomb. Thursday begins at sunset.>>

IGNORING, DISCARDING, REJECTING, SCORNING, INSULTING Mark 15:42 Matthew 27:57 John 19:31,38 Luke 23:50 DELETING Exodus 12:6, 8, 14, 15, 17,18 Leviticus 23:5, 6 Numbers 33:3 et al.

Davy: <<Friday, began at sunset, evening to dawn = 2nd night>>

TRUE! So what happened with the night-part <sunset to dawn> of the day before, the day Jesus was crucified and died on and therefore was the first of the "three nights"?!

Davy: <<Friday, dawn to following sunset = 2nd day>>

TRUE! So what happened with the day-part <dawn to sunset> of the day before, the day Jesus was crucified and died on and which therefore was the first of the "three days"?! This is CRAZY!

Davy: <<Saturday, began at sunset, evening to dawn = 3rd night>>

TRUE! <Saturday>, the Sabbath, after Friday daylight, <<began at sunset starting evening to dawn = 3rd night>>. Congratulations! So what happened with the night-part <sunset to dawn> of the day before, "At the First Night" of ulb in which Jesus was taken from the cross and Joseph "prepared the body" for "to be buried to the custom-law of the Jews", which therefore was the second of the "three nights"?! IGNORED, DISCARDED, REJECTED, SCORNED, INSULTED Mark 15:42 Matthew 27:57 John 19:31,38 Luke 23:50 DELETING Exodus 12:6, 8, 14, 15, 17,18 Leviticus 23:5, 6 Numbers 33:3 the VERY SAME Scriptures!

How TRUE then, <<Saturday, began at sunset, evening to dawn = 3rd night>> of the "three nights", and <<Saturday, dawn to following sunset = 3rd day>> of the "three days", JUST WHAT Matthew 27:62 to 28:4 SAYS, "the day ('Saturday') which is after the Preparation ('Friday') .. THE THIRD DAY HE SAID HE WOULD RISE AGAIN .. ON THE SABBATH BEFORE the First day of the week".

HOW will YOU, make the Word of GOD, clearer?! And THEREFORE IT IS A CONGLOMERATION OF LIES TO CLAIM: <<Sunday, began at sunset, evening to dawn = sometime before dawn Jesus arose.>>

 

[BreadOfLife]

BreadOfLife,

The Esther account is not an example because nothing in the account prohibits at least a portion of 3 daytimes and at least a portion of 3 night times.

WRONG.

The Esther account is simply an illustration of how Jews reconciled a "Day" in their culture.
ANY PART of a day or night constituted a "Day and Night".
That being said . . .

- He was placed in the tome BEFORE sunset on Friday (1st day, Friday)
- At sunset on Friday (1st day and night)
- He was in the tomb all day Saturday (2nd Day)
- Sunset on Saturday (2nd night)
- Sunday morning (3rd Day/Night)

Jewish culture dictates how time is reconciled here . . .

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Davy,
re: "That question is moot..."

It's not. If someone believes that the crucifixion took place on the 6th day of the week/with a 1st day of the week resurrection, and thinks that the "heart of the earth" is referring to the tomb, and tries to explain the lack of a 3rd night by saying that the Messiah was using common figure of speech/colloquial language, I'm simply asking that person to provide examples to support their assertion of commonality.

Your comments are actually the ones that are moot with regard to this topic.

At last, after all these YEARS, you speak commonly so that even I can understand. Thanks chum.

So you are looking for that 'missing' night in the "three days and three nights" Jonah speaks about. But it was the first of those three nights of the first day of those "three days" Jesus said He would be IN THE HEART of the earth which is COMMON figure-of-speech for Jesus' having been IN ANGUISH OF SOUL UNTO DEATH "IN THAT "NIGHT" OF THE 14TH OF ABIB ALIVE! Yes, ALIVE SUFFERING THE DEATH OF DEATH in that night first day-part of "THAT WHOLE DAY BONE-DAY" IN ANGUISH OF SOUL IN THE HEART OF THE EARTH.

WILL YOU EVER LEARN? Will you ever be humble enough to admit that you have been TAUGHT, and that by me, whom all these years you have been treating as spoke I satanic rubbish?

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

WRONG.

The Esther account is simply an illustration of how Jews reconciled a "Day" in their culture.
ANY PART of a day or night constituted a "Day and Night".
That being said . . .

- He was placed in the tome BEFORE sunset on Friday (1st day, Friday)
- At sunset on Friday (1st day and night)
- He was in the tomb all day Saturday (2nd Day)
- Sunset on Saturday (2nd night)
- Sunday morning (3rd Day/Night)

Jewish culture dictates how time is reconciled here . . .

Re:<<Jewish culture dictates how time is reconciled here . . .>>

Yes and no. The Bible and specifically the passover here dictate how time is reconciled.

Re: <<- He was placed in the tome BEFORE sunset on Friday (1st day, Friday)

- At sunset on Friday (1st day and night)>>

Yes and no.

<<He was placed in the tome BEFORE sunset on Friday>> Yes, latter part of “the Preparation” ‘Friday’ daylight.

<<(1st day, Friday)>> No. Because "At The First Night" "first day UNLEAVENED BREAD (would) be eaten .. feast .. night to be solemnly observed", was the second of the “three days” which had STARTED “evening already come .. and there came Joseph” in Mark 15:42 Matthew 27:57 John 13:1,30 Luke 23:50.

Therefore <At sunset on Friday> Luke 23:56c, the THIRD DAY “the women started to rest the Sabbath according to the Commandment”.

And therefore <<Sunset on (after) Saturday>>, the fourth night and the fourth day began. And therefore <<Sunday morning (3rd Day/Night)>> not only is wrong, but is a LIE.

 

[FHII]

WRONG.

The Esther account is simply an illustration of how Jews reconciled a "Day" in their culture.
ANY PART of a day or night constituted a "Day and Night".
That being said . . .

- He was placed in the tome BEFORE sunset on Friday (1st day, Friday)
- At sunset on Friday (1st day and night)
- He was in the tomb all day Saturday (2nd Day)
- Sunset on Saturday (2nd night)
- Sunday morning (3rd Day/Night)

Jewish culture dictates how time is reconciled here . . .

I've debunked that in this thread already, though it was years ago.

3 days is an idiom. 3 days and 3 nights is not. Esther proves it is not. When Esther gave directions, it was for a fast. Fasts are very precise to the point that often they fast an hour longer to make sure they have fulfilled the requirement. Esther called for a fast of 3 days and 3 nights for those following her lead and herself. They are indeed 72 hours if such a fast is called for and are carefully planned.

Esther saw the king on the third day, but that is not when the fast ended. There is no reason to believe that fast was less than 72 hours, despite when she went to see the king.

Furthermore, I have detailed the words of a Rabbi who confirms what I said. He says that "3 days" is an idiom, but it ceases to be so when it's "3 days and 3 nights". While he probably doesn't even believe Jesus is God in the flesh, his analysis is Jesus was crucified on Wednesday and rose shortly before what we would call 6 pm Saturday.

There are a lot of subtile clues to back this up. The timeline allows for nothing other than a Wednesday crucifixion and a Saturday late resurrection if you read carefully.

One compelling reason is that the women bought spices to anoint Jesus after the Sabbath, but anointed him with those spices before the Sabbath. How? The only way is if there were two separate Sabbath's not back to back.

Check the archives of this thread... I've detailed it complete with scriptures.

But this Esther reference is nonsense. A proper reading of it is debunks the notion that 3 days and 3 nights is and idiom unless you believe Jewish people call a fast from late Friday to early Sunday a 3 day fast.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

One compelling reason is that the women bought spices to anoint Jesus after the Sabbath, but anointed him with those spices before the Sabbath. How? The only way is if there were two separate Sabbath's not back to back.

Compelling indeed, that FH11 has all the years been wrong, too headstrong to check up the archives for anybody's but his own stuff. <Complete with Scripture>!? Hahahaha

NO Scripture that any women or woman <anointed him> before or after any Sabbath. Please <detail> your 'scripture', here, let's SEE.

Much better than Mike Tyson - first blow, full count out like a candle as the rabbi's <idiom> goes ... flies ... out the window.

I love you hate the guts of me.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Christians CAN'T be taught by Jews-- they reject all Scripture rejecting "the CHRIST in all the Scriptures".

 

[FHII]

NO Scripture that any women or woman <anointed him> before or after any Sabbath. Please <detail> your 'scripture', here, let's SEE

Well, you are sort of right. They went to anoint him before the Sabbath ended. They were on their way around 5:50 PM on Saturday. Yet, they bought the spices after the Sabbath.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I've debunked that in this thread already, though it was years ago.

3 days is an idiom. 3 days and 3 nights is not. Esther proves it is not. When Esther gave directions, it was for a fast. Fasts are very precise to the point that often they fast an hour longer to make sure they have fulfilled the requirement. Esther called for a fast of 3 days and 3 nights for those following her lead and herself. They are indeed 72 hours if such a fast is called for and are carefully planned.

Esther saw the king on the third day, but that is not when the fast ended. There is no reason to believe that fast was less than 72 hours, despite when she went to see the king.

Furthermore, I have detailed the words of a Rabbi who confirms what I said. He says that "3 days" is an idiom, but it ceases to be so when it's "3 days and 3 nights". While he probably doesn't even believe Jesus is God in the flesh, his analysis is Jesus was crucified on Wednesday and rose shortly before what we would call 6 pm Saturday.

There are a lot of subtile clues to back this up. The timeline allows for nothing other than a Wednesday crucifixion and a Saturday late resurrection if you read carefully.

One compelling reason is that the women bought spices to anoint Jesus after the Sabbath, but anointed him with those spices before the Sabbath. How? The only way is if there were two separate Sabbath's not back to back.

Check the archives of this thread... I've detailed it complete with scriptures.

But this Esther reference is nonsense. A proper reading of it is debunks the notion that 3 days and 3 nights is and idiom unless you believe Jewish people call a fast from late Friday to early Sunday a 3 day fast.

This is unsubstantiated nonsense - and your opinion - NOT a fact.

The point of Esther's fast was for her successful intercession with the king.
There would be NO point in continuing the fact AFTER she spoke to him.

As for what the rabbi stated about the idiom earlier in this thread - I, rebutted your position back then.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Well, you are sort of right. They went to anoint him before the Sabbath ended. They were on their way around 5:50 PM on Saturday. Yet, they bought the spices after the Sabbath.

Luke 23: "56a They ("Mary M and the other Mary") returned home (after they had seen "55c how his body was laid in the tomb"), 54 mid-afternoon and That Day was the Preparation and the Sabbath drew on 56b and PREPARED spices and ointments, then, at home, started to rest the Sabbath according to the (Fourth) Commandment."

So they rested the Sabbath...

Mark 16: "1a Then WHEN the Sabbath was PAST...", those same women, "Mary M and the other Mary", "1b ...AND Salome bought spices SO THAT WHEN THEY WOULD GO they might anoint Him." "2a So went they went to the sepulchre .. 2b very early before sunrise on the First Day of the week."

Quite the opposite of what you said at first as well as afterwards.

 

[FHII]

This is unsubstantiated nonsense - and your opinion - NOT a fact.

The point of Esther's fast was for her successful intercession with the king.
There would be NO point in continuing the fact AFTER she spoke to him.

As for what the rabbi stated about the idiom earlier in this thread - I, rebutted your position back then.

No, on both accounts.

 

[FHII]

Quite the opposite of what you said at first as well as afterwards.

Nope.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Well, you are sort of right. They went to anoint him before the Sabbath ended. They were on their way around 5:50 PM on Saturday. Yet, they bought the spices after the Sabbath.

Anyone can see that you assume there were two 'sabbaths' in That Week. And yes, there were two. But you are trying to shove a day of your imagination in between the two sabbaths.

You know that verse at the end of Revelation that says if one take away or add to the words of the Book (all the Bible?), God shall take away his part out of the book of life? Let us view it this way, if we try to add or take away a day in between the day Jesus was Crucified and Died on, and the day He was Buried on, and or the day He Resurrected on, we as it were force God to take away HIS NAME THE NAME OF THE MESSIAH out of the Book of LIFE-- 'The Book of The Life Of Christ', the whole Bible! Because we "change Times and Law of the Most High", his "Sure Word of Prophesy" and make it UNTRUSTWORTHY BECAUSE WE MAKE IT UNTRUE AND FALSE with creating a fourth day where God spoke that it would be "the third day"!

It's HIS NAME "taken out of the Book of Life", not ours only.

 

[BreadOfLife]

No, on both accounts.

Okay - whatever you say . . .

 

[FHII]

Anyone can see that you assume there were two 'sabbaths' in That Week. And yes, there were two. But you are trying to shove a day of your imagination in between the two sabbaths

You listed the verses. It says they purchased the spices after the Sabbath in one account, but another account says they prepared them before the Sabbath.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Okay - whatever you say . . .

Tolerance is the virtue of the man with, conviction! Exposing Roman Catholic lies 70 years

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

You listed the verses. It says they purchased the spices after the Sabbath in one account, but another account says they prepared them before the Sabbath.

Correct, you noted the different accounts -- OF DIFFERENT EVENTS with different women, different spices, on different times of day, on different days of the week, after different days and the different things that happened on each, and all this seen, in just these <listed verses>; what about the other verses?

More important-- Why are you against these plainest of facts? THAT, IS YOU ROOT-PROBLEM!
You harbour and nurse the MISCONCEPTION that The Law prohibited 'work to be done on a sabbath' including the feast-days sabbaths. But the Law clearly states "servile work" THE WHILE it spells out the specific works which the ceremonial sabbaths REQUIRED.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Tolerance is the virtue of the man with, conviction! E

That makes absolutely no sense.

 

[FHII]

Correct, you noted the different accounts -- OF DIFFERENT EVENTS with different women, different spices, on different times of day, on different days of the week, after different days and the different things that happened on each, and all this seen, in just these <listed verses>; what about the other verses?

Absolutely. They were different events: one was buying the spices, one was preparing the spices. Mark 16:1 says the women bought spices after the Sabbath to annoint him. Luke 23:56 says they prepared the spices before the Sabbath and RESTED the Sabbath. It does not say they did any servile work in any sense pertaining to the spices.

These are the facts. And if they bought them after the Sabbath and prepared them before the Sabbath please give your explanation how that works.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Absolutely. They were different events: one was buying the spices, one was preparing the spices. Mark 16:1 says the women bought spices after the Sabbath to annoint him. Luke 23:56 says they prepared the spices before the Sabbath and RESTED the Sabbath. It does not say they did any servile work in any sense pertaining to the spices.

These are the facts. And if they bought them after the Sabbath and prepared them before the Sabbath please give your explanation how that works.

You do not explain how you worked your theory out. But I know your theory better than any of you who sell it, IS PREPARED TO KNOW!

Now your theory's <facts> are just that - theoretical according to your theory. They cannot even stand normal common sense, e.g., <<bought spices after the Sabbath .. prepared the spices before the Sabbath>>.

Then your <explanation> is by adding not only to facts, logic, and Scripture, but by adding to the Eternal Purpose of God for Christ to have raised "the third day", another day in between "the first day KILL" and "the first day EAT" before "the third day RISE". Why? To explain what you explain as <<bought spices after the Sabbath .. prepared the spices before the Sabbath>>....

....IGNORING EVERY OTHER SCRIPTURE "concerning the Christ HOW HE HAD TO SUFFER AND THE THIRD DAY, RISE" in both "the Law and the Prophets" AND the Gospel according to Mark, Matthew, John and Luke, and, the rest of the NT and Paul.

Then, sure, <<It does not say they did any servile work in any sense pertaining to the spices.>> Which FACT implies for sure they DID do the LAWFUL work pertaining "the Custom-Law of the Jews TO BURY" John 19:40, the Law of Moses pertaining the passover and the exodus.