cabdle2, re: "The very essence of your question concerns 'time'."
Actually, the essence concerns the commonality of forecasting or saying 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 have been.
re: "To assume that 3 days & 3 nights is equal to 1 day and 2 nights takes a leap of faith.
re: "I would gladly go out of my way to find examples (assuming there are any), if you show me why you or anyone else refuse to believe what Matthew so clearly stated"
I don't know about anyone else, but I see no reason to disbelieve Matthew's account.
You say that you "would like to know if anyone is aware of instances in which an individual used 'common' sense language to express '3 days & 3 nights,' when this is exactly what that individual meant." I'm afraid I don't understand what you're saying. I wonder if you might word it differently?
BTW, you have a question directed to you in post #153.
I say move on from this topic. Its boring. You can keep waiting for someone new to show up, however. Its now been years.
"Sure. Looking back through this topic of yours, I see your prime motivation.
From what you've written I don't think that you do.
"jar brings up the point of 'so what'?"
That's an issue for a different topic.
" Basically, he was answering your question by agreeing with you that there likely was no example of common Jewish idiomatic speech."
He couldn't have been agreeing with me because I never said that.
"So I guess my question is why keep the topic going?"
Because there is always the possibility that someone new may visit this topic.
"What are the implications if your argument [assertion] is true?"
My assertion is that for someone to say that the Messiah was employing the common figure of speech/colloquial language, then the person would have to know of examples in order to legitimately make the assertion of commonality. So if that is true, then it's more than an implication - it's a fact.
"Do you believe that the Bible is in any way inerrant, reliable, or accurate in its claims?"
I have no belief one way or the other with regard to your question. It is, however, an issue for a different topic.
"If your three points can be accepted, what is your ending conclusion?"
That my curiosity would be satisfied with regard to the commonality of forecasting or saying 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 have occurred.
"I will compliment you though for hanging in there with EvC for over three years!"
Thanks. I kinda pride myself on having the patience ability.
So here we are and you are still patient. Don't you have anything new to discuss with us, however? Surely you could get a decent topic exchange going on a topic other than this one...
Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.
“The only way I know to drive out evil from the country is by the constructive method of filling it with good.”lvin Coolidge "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " “As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.”-RC Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith - You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do. Anne Lamott
Thugpreacha, re: "I say move on from this topic. Its boring."
Might I then suggest that you just ignore it, especially since it appears that it doesn't apply to you.
re: "You can keep waiting for someone new to show up..."
re: "Don't you have anything new to discuss with us...?"
Not at the moment.
re: "Surely you could get a decent topic exchange going on a topic other than this one...?
This topic is not intended for exchanges going on. It merely is asking for 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. No discussion is necessary.
I personally think it is probably just an idiom of speech that people of that time recognized as meaning 'parts of three days', as other Hebrew scriptures often use a phrase of "three days' but dpn't require meaning 72 hours. And after all, none of the other gospel writers or the apostle Paul ever mentioned the specifics of the time periods other than referring to the time as just "three days". Nor does it appear anyone from that time period balking over the language's possible technical meaning.
Nevertheless, there is a way to explain it so that there are 3 actual nights being involved. But you have to drop an assumption being made.
re: 3. Of those, there are some who believe that the "heart of the earth" is referring to the tomb or at the earliest to the moment when His spirit left His body.
If the "heart of the earth" doesn't refer to only his being dead in the tomb, but also includes the time period where he was restrained, under arrest, and in custody by the authorities, then that would include the events of Thursday night/Friday morning during the night period after the celebration of the Passover he had with this disciples.