Posted on 08/14/2006 11:19:14 AM PDT by Gamecock
OK. Like I posted before, I don't know much about other Church historical people's or documents. My studies have focused mostly on what the Scriptures themselves say.
Whatever you do, don't take this comment about what the apostle John allegedly said at face value.
The fact is we do not know what the apostle John may or may not have said about the gospel of Mark. For all we know he said nothing. There is a tradition within the church that Papias was a disciple of the presbyter named John. Not the apostle. Papias never makes any reference to having been a disciple of the apostle John. What we have from Papias comes down to us from other, later church fathers, like Eusebius. His own writings have disappeared. All we have are fragments quoted in other sources. In one place Papias admits that he received nothing directly from the apostles, but only from an early "oral tradition".
So, ultimately this alleged comment about Mark's writing counts for nothing. It's opart of an opral tradition would dubious roots in the early church.
We get our true understanding of Scripture from Scripture itself.
Absolutely
The only sign that Jesus Christ would give that he was the messiah was that he would be in the "heart of the earth" the same amount of time that Jonah was in the fish:
Mat 12:38 Then some of the scribes and Pharisees said to Him, "Teacher, we want to see a sign from You."
Mat 12:39 But He answered and said to them, "An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet no sign will be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet;
Mat 12:40 for just as JONAH WAS THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS IN THE BELLY OF THE SEA MONSTER, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
So how long was Jonah in the fish?
Jon 1:17 And the LORD appointed a great fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was in the stomach of the fish three days and three nights.
Your position is that Jonah was NOT literally in the fish for three days and three nights and that this is an idiom. He was really literally in the fish for only 1 day and 2 nights, you say.
So the scribes, Pharisees and an "increasing crowd" (Luke 11:29) were told by Jesus Christ that the sign that Jesus was the messiah was that he would be in the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights.
This is the ONLY sign Christ gave that he was the messiah, so I'm pretty sure that you would agree that it be accurate.
So how long did the scribes and the pharisees and the increasing crowd think Jonah was really in the fish?
If it is an idiom then they had NO IDEA! The only sign that Jesus gave was a sham sign, a trick, because nobody really knew how long Jonah was in the fish. After all, there was nothing in their scripture or tradition to indicate that it was anything but a literal 3 days and 3 nights. If it wasn't, then the sign that Jesus gave that he was the messiah was a sham.
However, if they understood it to be a literal three days and three nights, then Jesus Christ HAD to be in the heart of the earth a literal three days and three nights or else he WAS NOT the messiah.
To top it off, the sign that Jesus gave was a KNOWN period of time. Being God incarnate, he knew exactly how long he would be in the heart of the earth and how long Jonah was in the fish. Yet you insist that he specified an inexact amount of time for both, preferring to use a vague idiom instead.
Your position makes no scriptural sense whatsoever. The only thing that harmonizes scripture and fulfills the sign of Jesus being the Christ was exactly what Jesus the Christ said:
Mat 12:39 But He answered and said to them, "An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet no sign will be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet;
Mat 12:40 for just as JONAH WAS THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS IN THE BELLY OF THE SEA MONSTER, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
A literal three days and a literal three nights.
Jesus refers to himself countless times in scripture as the "son of man". Well, not "countless", but 84 times. He is referred to as the "son of man" in all 4 gospels as well as Acts, Hebrews and Revelation.
In fact Acts explicitly identifies Christ as the "son of man".
Act 7:55 But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God;
Act 7:56 and he said, "Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God."
So on scriptural grounds Jesus Christ is indeed the son of man and Matthew 12:40 is indeed referring to Jesus Christ.
As for the "heart of the earth", a more credible explanation is that Jesus used language familiar to the scribes, pharisees and increasing crowd.
Jon 1:17 Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.
"Belly" is:
mê‛eh
may-aw'
From an unused root probably meaning to be soft; used only in plural the intestines, or (collectively) the abdomen, figuratively sympathy; by implication a vest; by extension the stomach, the uterus (or of men, the seat of generation), the heart (figuratively): - belly, bowels, X heart, womb.
The same word is translated "heart" here:
Psa 40:8 I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.
So Christ was making a clear comparison between being in the "heart" (or middle, center, bowels, etc.) of the fish, with being in the "heart of the earth" and was using phrasing that would convey the meaning more accurately and make more of an impact to his listeners.
You're surprised that reading, studying and discussing God's word is done on his holy sabbath?
Sigh. I never made the claim that Jesus did NOT ever refer to himself by the phrase "son of man". I already had to point that out in post 231. I get the impression that the number one goal here is for people to shout past each other in order to push their pet doctrines.
I was trying to point out how traditions and doctrines risk going awry, when people assume and cling to interpretations that are not demanded by the text. Kind of a Bible study version of verifying one's scientific methods: searching for and analyzing places in the text where experimental error is possible. It's tedious and it sure irritates people, but oh well. That's life.
Ireneus also credits Papias with being a "Hearer of The APOSTLE John" as well as a companion to Polycarp. We now have two early Church Fathers who agree on that point. You can find the statement of fact in Book V, Chapter XXX, Paragraph 4. It says......."And these things are born witness to in writing by Papias, the hearer of John, and a companion of Polycarp".
I doubt Ireneus, being himself a disciple of Polycarp, would make this distinction about Papias. Both Eusebius and Ireneus lay claim to Papias being a hearer of John......so maybe there is some credence to my contention that the Apostle told the folks to be cautious when reading Mark. But, if you would like to disregard this as it is not scripture, that is fine by me.
You still have to deal with the obvious facts that the Sabbath in [Mark 16:1] is not the weekly....but the High Sabbath spoken of in [John 19:31]. You must also deal with the fact that the only place in the four gospels that speaks of an early Sunday morning visit to the tomb (in the Greek) is Mark 16:2 and is easily proved to be other women....not Mary Magdalene and friends who have visited earlier the previous afternoon.
Thank you, Douglas, for pointing out to our friends that we do indeed study and discuss God's word on His Holy Sabbaths.
Because the Roman Church insists that Friday was the day of crucifixion is no reason you should keep that tradition. The Passover Lamb was to be slaughtered on the 14th of the month and most any historical source you go to will agree that the year of birth was anywhere from 3 to 6 A.D.
Indeed, if you look at the year 33 A.D. you will see that the day of preparation from Leviticus 23 (Nisan 14) falls on a Friday. This lines up perfectly with the Roman view of things.....but not scripture. It does not allow the non Sabbath day to purchase and prepare the spices spoken of in [Mark 16:1] and [Luke 23:56] and then.....rest another day for "ANOTHER" Sabbath.
A more appropriate calendar is 30 A.D. where the 14th falls on a Wednesday...a High Sabbath day (Unleavened Bread) on a Thursday...a non Sabbath day to purchase and prepare spices falls on a Friday...and a weekly Sabbath day to observe, according to the commandment, on a Saturday!
Our Lord came out of the tomb shortly before sunset on the Sabbath and to say a Sunday resurrection is scriptural, you have to invent a different timetable.
The context isn't about the sabbath, but about the time that Christ spent in the grave. The reason for quoting the verse was to show that there is a scriptural precedent, from the mouth of Christ, to show that he can and did consider a day and a night more than just "part" of day and night.
God didn't command Sabbath keeping for the whole world, just the Jews in Israel.
You're right in that he didn't give the sabbath commandment for the whole world. He only gave it to all of those who wish to worship the one, true God. This included Israel AND gentiles:
Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
That sabbath commandment is the only one of the ten commandments that God said specifically that non-Israelites, strangers, should observe.
There was no time conflicts for the Jews of Israel when this was in effect.
The sabbath varies, as you pointed out, from place to place. Wherever you are, at sunset, on the 7th day, begins the sabbath. There is scriptural precedent for this in the book of Daniel where Daniel was in captivity in Babylon and kept the sabbath according to the local sunset on the 7th day.
You don't run into these conflicts with moral laws, just the ceremonial law of the Sabbath.
Sure you do. It's called "moral relativism" and it's often the justfication for breaking all of God's commandments. And the sabbath is a moral law.
1)Never commanded by Jesus, even with plenty of opportunities.
The sabbath commandment was written by Christ at Sinai, with his own finger, before he became incarnate.
2)Never mentioned as a sin in the New Testament when sins are listed (breaking the Sabbath that is)
Sure it is:
1Jo 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
The sabbath is part of God's law. Transgressing it is the same as idolatry or taking God's name in vain.
3)The other 9 commandments are rementioned in the New Testament, but the "Remember the Sabbath" is not.
Sure it is:
Luk 23:56 And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.
4)Moral laws are "written on the heart" (Ask any "lost tribesman" what murder is, and then ask what keeping the Sabbath is)
Every human alive was born a sinner. There is no moral law written on anyone's heart, except those who have God's holy spirit. The scripture you're referring to is describing this event.
5)Jesus "broke" the Sabbath (only in the Pharisee's eyes because the failed to recognize that Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath). Read John 9:15 and ask yourself why Jesus did not speak against those accusations?
Jesus didn't break the sabbath. It's impossible for him to sin. He did violate manmade, hypocritical rules created and instituted by men, but he never broke the scriptural sabbath.
6)No where in the OT or NT is the Sabbath given for all mankind to keep perpetually. Rather it is given to a specific nation at a specific time until Christ. (Galatians 3:19)
You're right. Only those who worship the one, true God were commanded to keep the sabbath perpetually. In fact, God established a special covenant for this purpose:
Exo 31:16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.
I'm not sure why you keep bringing up the sabbath in response to how long Jesus was in the grave, but I'm going to break this into two posts to separate the issues.
Oh, okay I see. Jesus did not die on a Friday. He was crucified and died just before sunset Wednesday. He was placed in the grave at or just before sunset.He was resurrected on the sabbath, just before sunset, three days and three nights later.
The "third day"...day 1 = Thursday, day 2 = Friday, day 3 = Saturday. Saturday was the third day.
Do have a complete answer on why the Jonah conundrum...no. But you are obviously reaching to have "three days and nights" overrule "third day" and Sunday.
There is no conundrum if you simply believe that Jonah was actually in the fish literally three days and three nights and if you believe Christ when he said that was the sign that he was the messiah.
1Co 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
Thank you Diego for your excellent references on this thread. I'm really enjoying the research and study.
Sorry, I was just pointing out that there is more than adequate scriptural evidence to point out that indeed Matthew 12:40 was referring to Christ.
I was trying to point out how traditions and doctrines risk going awry, when people assume and cling to interpretations that are not demanded by the text.
Oh, I certainly agree with that. However, the text should also not be isolated in a particular verse. Considering the context, it's much more reasonable that "son of man" in Matthew 12:40 is referring to Jesus Christ. He was in the grave (heart of the earth) for three days and three nights just as Jonah was in the fish for three days and three nights.
Kind of a Bible study version of verifying one's scientific methods: searching for and analyzing places in the text where experimental error is possible. It's tedious and it sure irritates people, but oh well. That's life.
I'm all for that. However there's a difference between embracing a particular viewpoint because you CAN make it fit and truth. I think your "heart of the earth" view is well thought out and interesting (You've posted it at least one other time and I did study it), but sometimes the simplest explanation really is the correct one.
My mistake....it should be Ireneus Book V, Chapter 33, Paragraph 4 instead of Chapter XXX.
If it wasn't exactly the same time as Jonas was in the whale, why did Jesus go out of His way to use that exact verse? Personally, I'm cool with a Sunday morning resurrection, but then Jesus would have had to been crucified on Thursday and the latest. Friday/Sunday isn't close enough to 3 days/3 nights for me. Diego's exposition on Wednesday Crucifixion/Thursday Passover/Sabbath resurection make a lot of sense to me. (I bet you didn't see that coming:))
I was rude to you and I shouldn't have been. I was peeved about your take on SDA's and that set me off. I am upset that SDA's don't ever defend their faith here on FR.
I was being sarcastic to topcat because we go back a ways. My sarcasm wasn't supposed to lead into an attack. Sorry, topcat.
I do wish y'all would read that Bible as well as you read the Bill of Rights!
Thanks, Douglas. How this can be debatable to those in Bible churches is perplexing.
A woman and came to our services today with her 2 daughters. She showed me the definition of the Sabbath in the back of her KJV (Friday sunset to Saturday sunset) and it bothered her. She asked her Baptist Pastor about the Sabbath and he actually fessed up. She was also bothered by the false Christmas holiday. Let us give praise to God in our prayers tonight for this blessing.
Yeah....and if you work it backward from there you'll find that the traditional "Palm Sunday" arrival in Jerusalem was actually happening on the 10th of the month, a Sabbath (Saturday) and was the day of The Selection of The Lamb.....who was our Passover.
Isn't it funny how everything seems to line up when you get the sequence correct?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.