Search results

wil, re: "Discussing religious nuance between believers has value in each developing understandings...Arguing minutia between believers and non believers has little real value to either." Those are issues for a different topic.

And that "someone new" needs to be someone who believes the crucifixion took place on the 6th day of the week with a 1st day of the week resurrection, and who thinks that the "heart of the earth" is referring to the tomb, and who tries to explain the lack of a 3rd night by saying that the...

Someone new looking in may know of examples.

Thomas, re: "I would, but I fear we'd just end up in a repetition of previous discussions." No need for discussion. Just tell me what "at last" refers to.

Thomas, re: "At last!" I'm afraid I don't understand. I wonder if you could explain what you mean?

In thinking about it, I realize that it doesn't make any difference with regard to sunset versus sunrise; there would still be a lack of a third night with a 6th day of the week crucifixion.

I need to add to post #150 - "and who thinks that a calendar day began at sunset".

Perhaps someone new visiting this topic may know of examples.

RJM, re: "I can't provide them." OK, no problem. Perhaps someone new looking in may know of examples. re: "But I do believe the points and explanations gathered in this year's replies to your query should be enough to convince most anyone not to disregard the whole resurrection narrative...

RJM, re: "...as @Thomas observes, the written reference you seek is Matthew 12.40 itself. It's a perfect example really of 'three days' being colloquially written as 'three days and three nights'." Even if Matthew 12:40 were referring to a 6th day of the week crucifixion - and there is no...

RJM, Do you have any actual examples, i.e., instances which show where a daytime or a night time was forecast or said to be involved with an event when no part of a daytime or no part of a night time could occur?

Thomas, re: "OK. Last effort." Since your last "effort" ignores my 2 questions to you in post #168, I think we're done.

Thomas, re: "I know, but they're just compounding your error." So help me out. Answer my 2 questions and explain why what I wrote in post #168 is in error.

Thomas, You have 2 questions directed to you in post #168.

Thomas, re: "My bad: post 130." As I said in post 131, I don't see where the link shows examples where a daytime or a night time was forecast or said to be involved with an event when no part of a daytime or no part of a night time could have occurred. What do you have in mind? Also, you...

Thomas, re: "So whether one accepts the tradition of the crucifixion on a Friday, or the probably more accurate testimony of a Thursday, then the expression should be no cause for concern, once one gets one's head round the Hebrew idiomatic style." But the only issue for this particular topic...

wil, Since you're not a 6th day of the week crucifixion advocate, you probably won't know of any examples. But perhaps someone new looking in may.

Thomas, re: "The examples shown in the link in post 121." Post 121 is my post and there is no link given in it. What do you have in mind?

wil, re: "Will is imagining the arguments if the Bible said it was raining cats and dogs" What do you think his point would be with regard to this topic?

Thomas, re: "Oh, it was quite common." So what actual examples do you have which show that it was common to forecast or say that a daytime or a night time would be or was involved with an event when no part of a daytime or no part of a night time could or did occur?