-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Is Mattew 12:40 Employing Common Jewish Idiomatic Language?
- Thread starter rstrats
- Start date
- Status
And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.
John Gill
..... As Moses did, when he was about to deliver the law to the Israelites, Exodus 34:28 and as Elijah did, when he bore his testimony for the Lord of hosts, 1 Kings 19:8 so did Christ, when he was about to publish the Gospel of his grace, and bear witness to the truth. "Forty nights" as well as days, are mentioned; partly to show that these were whole entire days, consisting of twenty four hours; and partly to distinguish this fast of Christ from the common fastings of the Jews, who used to eat in the night, though they fasted in the day: for according to their canonsF26, they might eat and drink as soon as it was dark, and that till cock crowing; and others say, till break of day. MaimonidesF1 says, they might eat and drink at night, in all fasts, except the ninth of Ab. What is very surprising in this fasting of our Lord, which was made and recorded, not for our imitation, is, that during the whole time he should not be attended with hunger; for it is added,
John Gill
..... As Moses did, when he was about to deliver the law to the Israelites, Exodus 34:28 and as Elijah did, when he bore his testimony for the Lord of hosts, 1 Kings 19:8 so did Christ, when he was about to publish the Gospel of his grace, and bear witness to the truth. "Forty nights" as well as days, are mentioned; partly to show that these were whole entire days, consisting of twenty four hours; and partly to distinguish this fast of Christ from the common fastings of the Jews, who used to eat in the night, though they fasted in the day: for according to their canonsF26, they might eat and drink as soon as it was dark, and that till cock crowing; and others say, till break of day. MaimonidesF1 says, they might eat and drink at night, in all fasts, except the ninth of Ab. What is very surprising in this fasting of our Lord, which was made and recorded, not for our imitation, is, that during the whole time he should not be attended with hunger; for it is added,
Last edited:
The answer to Matthew 12:40 (three days and three nights) is to accept that Jesus was using a colloquialism, three days and three nights only referring to three days or part days rather than 72 literal hours. In 1 Samuel 30, verse 12, the account of a starving servant is recorded as follows: “…For he had not eaten bread or drunk water for three days and three nights.” But in verse thirteen, his problem had started three days ago. This passage therefore suggests, and I accept that “three days and three nights” is a figurative reference to days or parts of days and not to a literal 72 hours or a literal three daylight periods and three darkness periods because three days ago would only include two darkness periods. If you compare 2 Chronicles 10:5 (return to me in three days) with 2 Chronicles 10:12 (came to Rehoboam on the third day) you will see that three days and on the third day mean the same thing, indicating that both inclusive counting was used and parts of days were counted as days in the pre-scientific culture. Inclusive counting means that you count today as the first day when saying something happened three or any number of days ago or in the future. Therefore, “three days and three nights” is a figurative reference to three days ago, and three days ago is the day before yesterday or literally only two nights ago. The point of Matthew 12:40 was not to create conflict with the many scriptures that say “on the third day” but only to draw a parallel with Jonah by using the terminology of Jonah 1:17.
Similarly, the reference to “after three days” in Mark 8:31 refers to parts of days such that the hours between His death and sundown represents one day and the hours of darkness on Sunday until He arose before sunup represents the third day. Using this interpretation the idea that Jesus was crucified on Friday can be supported. Note that the parallel passages to Mark 8:31 in Matthew (16:21) and Luke (9:22) say “on the third day.”
The idea that “on the third day” refers to the day after tomorrow (Friday to Sunday) is supported by Luke 13:31 to 33. Jesus is on His way to Jerusalem (v. 22) and says in verse 32 that He will reach His goal (reach Jerusalem in my opinion) on the third day. Jesus then clarifies His itinerary in verse 33 by stating, “I must journey on today and tomorrow and the next; for it cannot be that a prophet should perish outside of Jerusalem.” Therefore, in the idiom of the day, “on the third day” means the day after tomorrow or in our period of interest, from Friday to Sunday.
Similarly, the reference to “after three days” in Mark 8:31 refers to parts of days such that the hours between His death and sundown represents one day and the hours of darkness on Sunday until He arose before sunup represents the third day. Using this interpretation the idea that Jesus was crucified on Friday can be supported. Note that the parallel passages to Mark 8:31 in Matthew (16:21) and Luke (9:22) say “on the third day.”
The idea that “on the third day” refers to the day after tomorrow (Friday to Sunday) is supported by Luke 13:31 to 33. Jesus is on His way to Jerusalem (v. 22) and says in verse 32 that He will reach His goal (reach Jerusalem in my opinion) on the third day. Jesus then clarifies His itinerary in verse 33 by stating, “I must journey on today and tomorrow and the next; for it cannot be that a prophet should perish outside of Jerusalem.” Therefore, in the idiom of the day, “on the third day” means the day after tomorrow or in our period of interest, from Friday to Sunday.
Van,
re: "And if you read my on topic post, you found that the answer is yes. As you may know, the bible contains two examples of using three days to mean the day after tomorrow. And one of them is from the lips of Jesus. Case closed."
It would be if that is what the topic is about. It isn't.
re: "The answer to Matthew 12:40 (three days and three nights) is to accept that Jesus was using a colloquialism, three days and three nights only referring to three days or part days rather than 72 literal hours."
The topic is not looking for 72 hours.
re: "In 1 Samuel 30, verse 12, the account of a starving servant is recorded as follows: '…For he had not eaten bread or drunk water for three days and three nights.' But in verse thirteen, his problem had started three days ago. This passage therefore suggests, and I accept that 'three days and three nights' is a figurative reference to days or parts of days and not to a literal 72 hours..."
Again, I'm not looking for 72 hours.
re: "...or a literal three daylight periods and three darkness periods because three days ago would only include two darkness periods."
Also, the 1 Samuel 30:12 and 13 reference also does not support your premise. If it had been, say Thursday, when the Egyptian said that 3 days ago he became sick, then 1 day ago would have been Wednesday; 2 days ago would have been Tuesday and 3 days ago would have been Monday. Again, nothing here precludes at least parts of 3 night times and at least parts of 3 daytimes.
re: "If you compare 2 Chronicles 10:5 (return to me in three days) with 2 Chronicles 10:12 (came to Rehoboam on the third day) you will see that three days and on the third day mean the same thing, indicating that both inclusive counting was used and parts of days were counted as days in the pre-scientific culture."
Agree. Any part of a calendar day could be counted as a calendar day. However, The 2 Chronicles account is not applicable because nothing is said about daytimes and night times. There is nothing in the account that precludes at least a portion of 3 daytimes and at least a portion of 3 night times.
re: "And if you read my on topic post, you found that the answer is yes. As you may know, the bible contains two examples of using three days to mean the day after tomorrow. And one of them is from the lips of Jesus. Case closed."
It would be if that is what the topic is about. It isn't.
re: "The answer to Matthew 12:40 (three days and three nights) is to accept that Jesus was using a colloquialism, three days and three nights only referring to three days or part days rather than 72 literal hours."
The topic is not looking for 72 hours.
re: "In 1 Samuel 30, verse 12, the account of a starving servant is recorded as follows: '…For he had not eaten bread or drunk water for three days and three nights.' But in verse thirteen, his problem had started three days ago. This passage therefore suggests, and I accept that 'three days and three nights' is a figurative reference to days or parts of days and not to a literal 72 hours..."
Again, I'm not looking for 72 hours.
re: "...or a literal three daylight periods and three darkness periods because three days ago would only include two darkness periods."
Also, the 1 Samuel 30:12 and 13 reference also does not support your premise. If it had been, say Thursday, when the Egyptian said that 3 days ago he became sick, then 1 day ago would have been Wednesday; 2 days ago would have been Tuesday and 3 days ago would have been Monday. Again, nothing here precludes at least parts of 3 night times and at least parts of 3 daytimes.
re: "If you compare 2 Chronicles 10:5 (return to me in three days) with 2 Chronicles 10:12 (came to Rehoboam on the third day) you will see that three days and on the third day mean the same thing, indicating that both inclusive counting was used and parts of days were counted as days in the pre-scientific culture."
Agree. Any part of a calendar day could be counted as a calendar day. However, The 2 Chronicles account is not applicable because nothing is said about daytimes and night times. There is nothing in the account that precludes at least a portion of 3 daytimes and at least a portion of 3 night times.
The OP question has been answered, the OP author has arbitrarily ruled against the answer. Fine. Jesus was buried on Friday, and arose on Sunday, less than 48 hours, yet it was on the third day and is consistent with the colloquialism used in Matthew 12:40.
Van,
re: "The OP question has been answered..."
Actually, it hasn't. Examples have yet to be provided which show that it was common for a daytime or a night time to be forecast to be involved with an event when no part of the daytime or no part of the night time could have occurred.
re: "The OP question has been answered..."
Actually, it hasn't. Examples have yet to be provided which show that it was common for a daytime or a night time to be forecast to be involved with an event when no part of the daytime or no part of the night time could have occurred.
I want to add, though it may give very little, that according to Jewish custom a day starts at the fall of night and continues until the next fall of night. (The Jewish Day).
This can be combined with the fact part of a day may be reckoned as a day using Jewish idomatic language. (Australia Jews for Jesus: Three Days? Three nights? How does that work?)
Now the final judge of whether Jesus is using idiomatic language is that given we are given less than 72 hours in the bible, it would seem. Thus, He must have been using idiomatic language given what the Word of God tells us. This, I believe on faith that the bible is in fact the very Words of God Himself.
Thus, Jesus is crucified towards the end of one day, which in idiomatic language may be counted as a day. Jesus is in the grave for a whole day. Then Jesus is in the grave about half a day, which may count as a day. Thus the term "three days."
There is more to be explained it would seem, given the quote concerning Jonah, but that will likely take language scholars to explain things to us.
This can be combined with the fact part of a day may be reckoned as a day using Jewish idomatic language. (Australia Jews for Jesus: Three Days? Three nights? How does that work?)
Now the final judge of whether Jesus is using idiomatic language is that given we are given less than 72 hours in the bible, it would seem. Thus, He must have been using idiomatic language given what the Word of God tells us. This, I believe on faith that the bible is in fact the very Words of God Himself.
Thus, Jesus is crucified towards the end of one day, which in idiomatic language may be counted as a day. Jesus is in the grave for a whole day. Then Jesus is in the grave about half a day, which may count as a day. Thus the term "three days."
There is more to be explained it would seem, given the quote concerning Jonah, but that will likely take language scholars to explain things to us.
The problem is the Jewish calendar. The only year that fits the astronomical observations is 31 AD. And the preparation day for the feast of the Passover fell on Wednesday, Nisan 14. So, if He was not in the grave for three days (daylight period of Nisan 15, 16, and 17, and the dark period of Nisan 14, 15, and 16, and arose at or shortly after nightfall on Nisan 17, according to Jewish reckoning, the first day of the week) then where was He?
The answer has been provided, and you simply offered absurd arguments to nullify the presentation. Your rebuttal betrays a bias against the obvious. I provided two examples and I carefully explained how they demonstrated unscientific statements concerning duration. I showed how the term "three days and three nights" was used to describe a period containing less than three nights, thus showing that the term is used without regard for our scientific counting bias. And I showed how "in three days" sometimes refers to the day after tomorrow or less than 72 hours. If you put the examples together, then three days and three nights can refer to 3 days and 3 days can refer to the day after tomorrow or Friday to Sunday. Case closed as far as providing examples.
Jesus was buried on Friday, and arose on Sunday, and that period of time, less than 48 hours, was described as three days and three nights.
Last edited:
I was going to suggest going to the sabbaths and the feasts to time Christ's crucifixion and His resurrection.
I don't think tradition is so wrong in this respect. Jesus is quoted over and over as saying He would be raised on the third day. Not on the fourth. That pretty much settles it for me.
Preparation Day, An high Sabbath Day, the following Day. The following day was the first day of the week. That means the previous day was Saturday, and the day before that was Friday.
The Preparation Day, A High Sabbath (first day of passover always a high sabbath), the following Day, the weekly sabbath, the following day, the next day was the first day of the week.
Put in the tomb at sundown Wednesday, the beginning of the Jewish Thursday. Sundown Wednesday to Sundown Thursday. One day.
Sundown Thursday to Sundown Friday. Two days.
Sundown Friday to Sundown Saturday. Three days.
Was not in the tomb prior to sunup on Sunday when the ladies arrived. He arose at Sundown Saturday, the Jewish "first day of the week."
And, again, it is the only way the astronomical data fits.
Your explanation makes sense, but so do these others:The Preparation Day, A High Sabbath (first day of passover always a high sabbath), the following Day, the weekly sabbath, the following day, the next day was the first day of the week.
Put in the tomb at sundown Wednesday, the beginning of the Jewish Thursday. Sundown Wednesday to Sundown Thursday. One day.
Sundown Thursday to Sundown Friday. Two days.
Sundown Friday to Sundown Saturday. Three days.
Was not in the tomb prior to sunup on Sunday when the ladies arrived. He arose at Sundown Saturday, the Jewish "first day of the week."
And, again, it is the only way the astronomical data fits.
John Wesley: It was the preparation of the passover — For this reason both the Jews and Pilate were desirous to bring the matter to a conclusion. Every Friday was called the preparation, (namely, for the Sabbath.) And as often as the passover fell on a Friday, that day was called the preparation of the passover.
B.W. Johnson: 31. Because it was the preparation. For the passover. See verse 14. That sabbath was a high day. A double Sabbath, both the weekly Sabbath and a passover Sabbath.
John Gill's comment is lengthy: John 19 - John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible - Bible Commentary
B.W. Johnson: 31. Because it was the preparation. For the passover. See verse 14. That sabbath was a high day. A double Sabbath, both the weekly Sabbath and a passover Sabbath.
John Gill's comment is lengthy: John 19 - John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible - Bible Commentary
But I think the question of whether or not idiomatic language was employed is answered in the last part of the the prophecy: " . . . in the heart of the earth."
And both ignore the astronomical evidence.
Astronomically are there other years that could fit?
I have read that the census described in Luke likely took place in 4 BC for instance.
- Status