Some Questions

[wil]

Why if the virgin birth and resurection are so important, cornerstones of Christianity, why did Paul never mention either?

Nor did the author of Matthew, who most likely read the letters circulating from Paul but felt no need to add that to the story of Jesus's life.

And the three days. If I wanted to describe something that was thirty-six hours later...would I ever say 3 days?

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by wil

Why if the virgin birth and resurection are so important, cornerstones of Christianity, why did Paul never mention either?

1 Corinthians 15:1-19
1 Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.
3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. 6 After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. 7 After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. 8 Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.
9 For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all, yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 11 Therefore, whether it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

12 Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. 14 And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. 15 Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise. 16 For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. 17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! 18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.

Romans 1:1-6
1 Paul, a bondservant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated to the gospel of God 2 which He promised before through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures, 3 concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, 4 and declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead. 5 Through Him we have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations for His name, 6 among whom you also are the called of Jesus Christ;

Romans 6:1-9
1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? 3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. 7 For he who has died has been freed from sin. 8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him.

There are many more examples of this in the Pauline scriptures about this
here.

Nor did the author of Matthew, who most likely read the letters circulating from Paul but felt no need to add that to the story of Jesus's life.

Matt 1 describes the virgin birth.
Matt 28 describes the resurrection, along with a blurb in Matt 27:53.

And the three days. If I wanted to describe something that was thirty-six hours later...would I ever say 3 days?

What are you on about here, wil?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Matt 28 describes the resurrection, along with a blurb in Matt 27:53.

What are you on about here, wil?

Friday afternoon through Sunday morning does not equal 72 hours (or three, twenty four hour days), if I haven't missed my mark...

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by wil

And the three days. If I wanted to describe something that was thirty-six hours later...would I ever say 3 days?

Not sure I follow you here, wil.

I noted the discrepency between the memorial observance (commonly called Easter) and the Biblical narrative long ago, but the story seemed pretty clear to me that Jesus was supposed to have spent three *nights* in the tomb. Given that he "gave up the ghost" likely around 3pm on a Thursday afternoon, quickly buried in anticipation of the High Sabbath leading to Passover prior to sundown Thursday evening, and the empty tomb being found by Mary and crew on the morning of the first day of the week Sunday.

Let us not forget, the *Jewish/Biblical day* is reckoned from sundown; not midnight, not sunrise. So 36 hours is a bit too short of a time span. Also, the *High Sabbath* can fall on any day of the week (depending on Passover), it is not limited to Friday night-Saturday day.

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by wil

Why if the virgin birth and resurection are so important, cornerstones of Christianity, why did Paul never mention either?

He does Wil, you must have missed it ... ?

But to answer your question in the broader sense, he tells you why himself:
"And I, brethren, could not speak to you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal. As unto little ones in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not meat: for you were not able as yet. But neither indeed are you now able: for you are yet carnal."
1 Corinthians 3:2

As noted elsewhere, Scripture comprises the kerygma — the public preaching — and didache — catechetical instruction. Kerygma is milk, and didache is meat.

But let's get back to Paul —
"Now if Christ be preached, that he arose again from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen again. And if Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain: and your faith is also vain."
1 Corinthians 15:12-14

So, as a Tiberman, I do wonder along with the tentmaker from Tarsus, if the Resurrection is absolutely central to the teaching, why would one question it? It's a take it or leave it question, it's not open to empirical enquiry.

And if one doesn't believe in it, why bother calling oneself a Christian at all?

Thomas

[wil]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

What are you on about here, wil?

Obviously confused.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

...the story seemed pretty clear to me that Jesus was supposed to have spent three *nights* in the tomb. Given that he "gave up the ghost" likely around 3pm on a Thursday afternoon, quickly buried in anticipation of the High Sabbath leading to Passover prior to sundown Thursday evening, and the empty tomb being found by Mary and crew on the morning of the first day of the week Sunday...

Again I got my story wrong? I thought Thursday was the foot washing, Friday he carried the crossbeam thru town and was crucified.

It's the and three days later he rose thing that confuses me. If it were Friday and I said I'll meet you back here in three days...It would be Monday. Now if your Thursday is correct all this is mute.

That would be in the tomb before sundown on Friday, and out before sunup on Sunday... Friday night and Saturday night (2 nights) less than 40 hours? Anyone have any other reckoning?

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by wil

Obviously confused. Again I got my story wrong? I thought Thursday was the foot washing, Friday he carried the crossbeam thru town and was crucified.

It's the and three days later he rose thing that confuses me. If it were Friday and I said I'll meet you back here in three days...It would be Monday. Now if your Thursday is correct all this is mute.

That would be in the tomb before sundown on Friday, and out before sunup on Sunday... Friday night and Saturday night (2 nights) less than 40 hours? Anyone have any other reckoning?

Paul says on the third day, not necessarily 3 full days.

1 Cor 15:3-4
For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,

The 'zero hour' would be the 'first day,' after sunset would be the beginning of the 'second day,' and the next sunset would be the beginning of the 'third day.' This would entail 2 nights.

[wil]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Paul says on the third day, not necessarily 3 full days.

1 Cor 15:3-4
For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,

The 'zero hour' would be the 'first day,' after sunset would be the beginning of the 'second day,' and the next sunset would be the beginning of the 'third day.' This would entail 2 nights.

Ok slowly in an attempt to get my foot out of my mouth can I correct my mistake of the first post...Mark, I meant Mark not mentioning resurection and virgin birth, not Matthew.

What I am getting on about is seeing when this occurred. Now Mark was written the think 64-70 and Corinthians 57, Matthew as early as 85 and Luke and John not till 90?

So my question is, what scripture was Paul referring to?

[earl]

Just speaking for me personally, while I have no problem seeing a resurection of some sort as a literal historical event, my association to it and why it's important is that it denotes that what Christ was and preached transcended the material, form and even the temporality of mortality. "I am with you always." Now, as to the virign birth-not so important in my scheme of things. earl

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by wil

Obviously confused. Again I got my story wrong? I thought Thursday was the foot washing, Friday he carried the crossbeam thru town and was crucified.

In the traditional observance, yes. But don't forget Constantine made a point of distancing from Jewish observances, which helps explain the tradition as we have it today. It not about accuracy...its about remembering.

Originally Posted by wil

It's the and three days later he rose thing that confuses me. If it were Friday and I said I'll meet you back here in three days...It would be Monday. Now if your Thursday is correct all this is mute.

That would be in the tomb before sundown on Friday, and out before sunup on Sunday... Friday night and Saturday night (2 nights) less than 40 hours? Anyone have any other reckoning?

Right. But again, its about remembering.

Check with Dauer, BB or any preferred Jewish source...the Jewish "day" begins at sundown, at least in Biblical times. So three "days" in the tomb is actually three nights, the High Sabbath is not to be confused with a stock and standard Sabbath (the whole trial and execution was hurried in preparation for the High Sabbath and Passover), and the tomb was found empty sometime before dawn on the third day. Jesus was sacrificed and gave up the ghost at about the same time the Passover lambs were being slaughtered.