Figure of speech/colloquialism?

[rstrats]

@rstrats -- I'm meaning for You to find the examples.

That's what I'm trying to do.

 

[Sue D.]

@rstrats -- you are asking Other people to find and share examples Of.

 

[rstrats]

@rstrats -- you are asking Other people to find and share examples Of.

That is incorrect. I have never asked anyone to find examples.

 

[Sue D.]

1. The Messiah said that three nights would be involved with His time in the "heart of the earth".

2. There are some who believe that the crucifixion took place on the 6th day of the week with the resurrection taking place on the 1st day of the week.

3. Of those, there are some who believe that the "heart of the earth" is referring to the tomb.

4. However, those two beliefs allow for only 2 nights to be involved.

5. To account for the discrepancy, some of the above say that the Messiah was using common figure of speech/colloquial language of the time, i.e., that it is was common to forecast or say that a day or a night would be involved with an event when no part of the day or no part of the night could occur.

6. In order for someone to legitimately say that it was common, they would have to know of more that 1 example to make that assertion.


I wonder if there is anyone here that knows of examples?

So, yes, you have been.

 

[rstrats]

So, yes, you have been.

Nowhere in your quote did I ask anyone to find, i.e., to go looking for examples. This topic is directed to anyone who says that it was common to forecast or say that a daytime or a night time would be involved with an event when no part of a daytime or no part of a night time could occur. And to say that it was common, they would have to already know of instances in order to legitimately assert that was common.

 

[Sue D.]

@rstats -- Do you even read what you type? "I wonder if there is anyone here that knows of examples" So, yes, you Have been. And, no , there aren't.

 

[rstrats]

@rstats -- Do you even read what you type?

Of course, and nowhere have I asked anyone to go looking for examples.

 

[Sue D.]

Seeings how 'this' is going round and round in circles -- why not just let 'it' die. No one has found any examples of what You are looking for -- You apparently don't want to look for or present the non-existent examples -- so -- why not just let it drop.

 

[rstrats]

Sue D.,
re: "Seeings how 'this' is going round and round in circles -- why not just let 'it' die. No one has found any examples of what You are looking for -- "

Not yet, but there may be someone in the future visiting this topic who may know of examples. And again, I'm not asking anyone to go looking for examples.


re: " You apparently don't want to look for...non-existent examples..."

That would be a good trick. How would one locate examples which don't exist?

 

[Sue D.]

@rstrats -- and That is the 64,000 dollar question -- How would one locate examples which don't exist? And Why take time Looking for 'that' -- why not spend time sharing the Gospel unto salvation with others and share That experience with others here on Forum.

 

[rstrats]

Sue D.,

re: " How would one locate examples which don't exist?"

Again, I'm not asking anyone to locate examples. If someone says that it was common to forecast or say that a daytime or a night time would be involved with an event when no part of a daytime or no part of a night time could occur, they would have to already know of examples in order to legitimately make the assertion.


re: "And Why take time Looking for 'that' -- why not spend time sharing the Gospel unto salvation with others and share That experience with others here on Forum."

That would be an issue for a different topic. Perhaps you might start one.

 

[Sue D.]

@rstrats -- you are really obsessed with "when no part of daytime or no part of a night time could occur,"

Please give it a rest.

 

[rstrats]

Perhaps someone new visiting this topic may know of examples.

 

[Sue D.]

Perhaps someone new visiting this topic may know of examples.

Why not just do your own research and let us know what You come up with.

 

[complete]

1. The Messiah said that three nights would be involved with His time in the "heart of the earth".
2. There are some who believe that the crucifixion took place on the 6th day of the week with the resurrection taking place on the 1st day of the week.
3. Of those, there are some who believe that the "heart of the earth" is referring to the tomb.
4. However, those two beliefs allow for only 2 nights to be involved.
5. To account for the discrepancy, some of the above say that the Messiah was using common figure of speech/colloquial language of the time, i.e., that it is was common to forecast or say that a day or a night would be involved with an event when no part of the day or no part of the night could occur.
6. In order for someone to legitimately say that it was common, they would have to know of more that 1 example to make that assertion.

I wonder if there is anyone here that knows of examples?

'For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly;
so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.'
(Mat 12:40) (see Jonah 1:17 & 2:1)

Hello @restrats,

'Three days and three nights' is a figure of speech called an 'idiom', it covers any parts of three days and three nights. The Lord's words do not disagree with the Scripture assertion that He should rise on, 'the third day'.

* You ask for examples:-

1) In 1 Samuel 30:11-12, it is said that a certain Egyptian had not eaten bread and drunk water for 'three days and three nihts', and yet it was only three days since he fell sick (v. 13), not four days.

2) In Ester 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.

--------------------

The expression, 'after three days,' is found once in Matthew 27:63, and, 'in three days,' once in (John 2:19). But the common expression is, 'on the third day,' and it occurs 10 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 Corinthians 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; Matthew 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 (Matthew 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, that is 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 hrs) and the parts of two nights (36 hrs in all) fully satisfy both the idiom and the history.

* For the most part the New Testament is Hebrew in idiom, but Greek in language.

In English there is a similar usage, for 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 committed to prison for three days - and he reaches it on Monday night - he leaves it the first thing on Wednesday morning.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

(Ref. 'Figures of Speech used in Scripture' by Dr E.W.Bullinger)

 

[rstrats]

complete,
re: "You ask for examples:...1 Samuel 30:11-12...[and]Est[h]er 4:16, Esther says she and her maidens will fast 'three days and three nights,'..."

There is nothing in the 1 Samuel account which precludes at least a portion of three daytimes and at least a portion of three night times.
And in most translations the Esther account says "three days, night or day" and not "three days and three nights" which is not necessarily the same thing. Esther said that three calendar days would be involved with a fast and that the daytimes and night times which occurred during the time of the fast , depending on when the fast began on the first calendar day and ended on the third calendar day, would be included in the fast. So if the fast began, say, during the daytime of the first calendar day and ended during the night time of the third calendar day, three calendar days would be involved but only two daytimes and two night times.



re: "Neither can we alter the history which records His death and burial as taking place the day before the Sabbath."

If by the "Sabbath" you're referring to the weekly Sabbath then this topic is intended for you as long as you think that the "heart of the earth" refers to the tomb and you try to explain the lack of a third night by saying that the Messiah was using common figure of speech/colloquial language of the period.



re: "'The sabbath drew on '(Luke 23:54; Matthew 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)."

If the first day of the week was the third day since those things happened what would the first day since those things happened be?




re: "In English there is a similar usage, for 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 committed to prison for three days - and he reaches it on Monday night - he leaves it the first thing on Wednesday morning."

Your comment is not applicable since the sentencing said nothing about the number of daytimes and the number of night times which were to be involved.

 

[Sue D.]

@rstrats -- since you're never satisfied with anyone's response, why keep on asking.

 

[rstrats]

@rstrats -- since you're never satisfied with anyone's response, why keep on asking.

Because so far none of the responses have been responsive. If you think they have, how about indentifying the number of a post which provides examples which show that it was common to forecast or say that a daytime or a night time would be involved with an event when no part of a daytime or no part of a night time could occur.

 

[Sue D.]

@rstrats -- 'complete' was just doing what you requested and you Still were not satisfied with his comments. " your comment is not applicable Because of........"

Then you comment to Me that 'so far none of the responses have been responsive." That is what You typed. And it doesn't make any sense.

Which indicates that you won't be satisfied with Any response -- so -- Why do you continue with 'this' -- Why keep on 'beating an apparently dead horse'. Why not move on to a different topic for discussion. ?!

 

[rstrats]

Sue D.,
re: "Then you comment to Me that 'so far none of the responses have been responsive." That is what You typed. And it doesn't make any sense."

By "responsive" I mean providing the information requested. Show me where anyone has done that.



re: "Which indicates that you won't be satisfied with Any response..."

That is incorrect. I'll be satisfied when someone responds with the requested information.



re: "...Why do you continue with 'this'..."

Because someone new visiting this topic may know of examples.