tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post7385980139315687889..comments2024-03-28T16:55:57.201-04:00Comments on AS BEREANS DID: COGWA on the Resurrection: That's Nice, Now What?Marthahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12438486498450616814noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-15460493399293678062023-12-10T13:04:47.421-05:002023-12-10T13:04:47.421-05:00Anon 12-9-23
Thanks for the comment. I could do th...Anon 12-9-23<br />Thanks for the comment. I <i>could</i> do that, but I don't see why I would. The people at that time and in that place would not count that way. Those people in that place at that time counted inclusively. To them, three days before Sunday is Friday, not Thursday.xHWAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01061716053302210598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-87225873212449377412023-12-09T08:51:36.804-05:002023-12-09T08:51:36.804-05:00Just count back 3 days & 3 nights from Sunday ...Just count back 3 days & 3 nights from Sunday and all of Christ's predictions are fulfilled in a Thursday crucifixion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-25739159352210800952016-04-07T05:38:34.946-04:002016-04-07T05:38:34.946-04:00xHWA: Very good comment. Thank you.xHWA: Very good comment. Thank you.Darren C.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-45741572317570492662016-04-05T13:12:55.115-04:002016-04-05T13:12:55.115-04:00Anonymous,
From your comments it seems as if you ...Anonymous,<br /><br />From your comments it seems as if you feel that there is a compelling reason to believe that "3 days and 3 nights" is literal and taking it to mean 72 hours is the correct position. We once agreed with you but no longer. And we do not just disagree because we believe whatever we feel like. We disagree based on what we feel is overwhelming cultural and Biblical evidence. <br /><br />We no longer find simple statements of opinion such as "Jesus wouldn't have said it if He didn't mean it" to be compelling evidence. Jesus obviously said something important. It's how we should understand what He was really saying that matters the most. And just defaulting to "it must be literal" has to come with some supporting evidence. We have searched! Yet find none at all. Not only that, but if we take this verse to be literal, then what of the 19 other verses where the time of Jesus' interment was described? Only Matthew 12 verse 40 uses the phrase “three days and three nights”. In all of these nineteen other instances, none of them repeat Matthew 12: 40. Here is how they play out in the NKJV:<br />"The third day" 11 times.<br />"In three days" 5 times.<br />"After three days" 2 times.<br />"On the third day" 1 time.<br />"Within three days" 1 time.<br /><br />As you can see, we cannot take them all literally. Why should we take Matthew 12:40 literally and those other 19 not literally? This question needs an answer.<br /><br />How we answer that is first asking the Bible. There are other places in the Bible where the phrase "three days and three nights" or "three days night and day" appear. The one in Jonah which gives us no clue as to whether it was literal or not. There is simply no other evidence to help us in this one. So we go to the others. What do we see? Not a single one of them are literally 72 hours. So this phrase "three days and three nights" is a known idiom in the Bible and it would be improper for us to take it literally.<br /><br />Now we ask how would Jesus' audience have understood Him? His audience in Matt 12: 40 were the Pharisees. From the evidence of how they spoke regarding the event, they did not take it literally. In fact, they believed that part of a day counted as the whole day. There word for this is called the "onah." From the start of Israel, we see example after example of how they would not have seen time in the literal way you prefer.<br /><br />Now we ask if there was any additional evidence that might clear things up, and there is. We see from the discussion between Cleopas and Jesus on the road to Emmaus in Luke 24 that Sunday was the third day from the crucifixion. If Jesus was dead 72 literal hours, then Sunday would be the fourth day. Yet there Jesus and Cleopas are, on a Sunday, saying that day was the third day since the crucifixion.<br />And not only that, but from the earliest records we have outside of the Bible that the early church believed Jesus died on a Friday and rose on a Sunday and that this time period is to be understood as three days. You may not prefer accepting this as evidence, but if we are to be circumspect then we should leave nothing out.<br /><br />There is other evidence of course, and we lay it all out in the articles Martha referenced. But in the end we find absolutely no good reason to take the statement as a literal 72 hours beyond personal opinion and preference. And we know the counter-arguments. We lived those counter-arguments for decades. Perhaps you would like to add some new thing that we might not know that we should consider.xHWAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01061716053302210598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-87631779480914120752016-04-05T02:12:24.428-04:002016-04-05T02:12:24.428-04:00your article keeps referring to the Greek 3 days, ...your article keeps referring to the Greek 3 days, and that's fine....but Jesus specifically mentioned Jonas/ 3 days & 3 nights...He wouldn't have said that if He didn't mean it...and using that as the standard, the Greek "3 days" is easily understood to mean 72hr.<br /><br />anyway, believe what you will.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-51230373478420591432016-04-04T21:37:36.010-04:002016-04-04T21:37:36.010-04:00Thank you for reading, Anonymous.
Rather than re...Thank you for reading, Anonymous. <br /><br />Rather than re-invent the wheel, I am going to link an excellent post written by xHWA that explains the classic Armstrongist "Three Days and Three Nights" claims. <br /><br />http://asbereansdid.blogspot.com/2013/03/three-days-and-three-nights.html<br /><br />Herbert Armstrong painted himself into a lot of theological corners making claims based on interpreting the Bible through 1900s era American language and culture. Was it a repeated, ignorant mistake, or a more calculated attempt to drive a wedge between potential followers and their mainstream Christian leaders? Leaders who, I might add, have studied actual Hebrew idioms, among other things, and must offer a consistent Systematic Theology rather than creating a doctrinal package of disconnected prooftexts? <br /><br />Armstrong only looked backwards earlier than Victorian English and culture when it suited him. When he did, he twisted concepts beyond recognition and then claimed anyone who disagreed was deceived. <br /><br />http://asbereansdid.blogspot.com/2014/09/word-games.html<br /><br />http://asbereansdid.blogspot.com/2015/02/gennao.html<br /><br /><br />COG leaders today continue to repeat HWA's mistakes in this area. Are they deceived, ignorant or calculating? It would be amusing to watch if it hadn't cost so many relationships, dollars and lives. <br />Marthahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12438486498450616814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-48372671160310407352016-04-04T16:41:34.930-04:002016-04-04T16:41:34.930-04:00Well, the CoGWA and the rest of their ilk have a B...Well, the CoGWA and the rest of their ilk have a Bible which basically contains the Old Testament and Revelation. A few chapters in the New Testament may pop up -- like Matthew 24, but by and large, the religion is that of Olde Testament Christianity.<br /><br />While they may claim to lead to God the Father and that He is most important, I have yet to find any CoG which actually seems to know anything about God as The Father.<br /><br />Their God is an all powerful and vengeful God who is going to punish and destroy people. He is also a corporate CEO and that's the role they know Him best as. The Kingdom of God is really The Kingdom of God, Inc. and those who make into the Corporate Headquarters aren't really going to be kings and priests, ruling with Jesus, they are going to be Corporate Executives in middle management of the Corporation of God.<br /><br />There's very little to suggest that the CoGs know much of anything about the real God, The Father, let alone Jesus.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-33438181455980636462016-04-04T02:09:51.646-04:002016-04-04T02:09:51.646-04:00the only sign given was to be 3 days & 3 night...the only sign given was to be 3 days & 3 nights in the tomb<br /><br />good friday - easter sunday deny the sign, and therefore deny Jesus.<br /><br />it's amazing that so many don't get that.<br /><br />besides, Jesus said to proclaim His death by observing the passover, He said nothing about celebrating His resurrection.<br />if you are going to celebrate His resurrection, shouldn't you first proclaim His death as He instructed?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-7559203135615663062016-03-25T10:36:00.799-04:002016-03-25T10:36:00.799-04:00Now what? Why, that's simple!
Now that Jesus ...Now what? Why, that's simple!<br /><br />Now that Jesus has died to institute the New Covenant in His own blood, we have to return to the Old Covenant. It's what God wants.<br /><br />The Old Covenant is dead. Long live the Old Covenant!xHWAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01061716053302210598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-53095328705665034552016-03-24T11:19:15.593-04:002016-03-24T11:19:15.593-04:00Excellent.
I especially liked this: "After a...Excellent.<br /><br />I especially liked this: "After all, if God had wanted us to celebrate Christ's resurrection, He would have made it happen on a Holy Day!"<br /><br />Insightful and interesting. They seem more willing to commemorate Israel coming out of Egypt than they are Jesus coming out of the tomb.Darren C.noreply@blogger.com