Dr. Meh,
re: "I feel like Aaron has gone above and beyond to answer your question..."


I wonder if you might identify the number of the post where he provides examples which show that a daytime or a night time was forecast to be involved with an event when no part of the daytime or no part of the night time could have occurred?

If only you would take me to the moon... Then I'd believe that man has been to the moon. You just aren't doing the one thing you need to do to convince me!

More edit: I've been telling you the same thing *FOREVER*. (But not literally forever. It's just a colloquial expression based on our shared concept of time and the perception of something happening for a long period of time.)

Aaron. W.,

I see that for some reason you still don't understand my request.

It's a poor habit to take things out of context that totally change the original post. It's also bad form and rude to ignore the rest of the post. I said he answered it the best he could and suggested you try a more appropriate website for such a specific question for a niche audience. Why did you disregard the rest of my post?

I understand your request. It's just that you're asking to be flown to the moon. That's just not going to happen.

In order for your request to be fulfilled:

1) There would have needed to have been a TON of writings. This is almost certainly not the case as the literacy rates were really, really low. This already limits the total volume of writing one would expect to even be able to find. Requesting something as specific as you are is already not a very probable event on this measure alone.
2) Culturally, the writing of precise predictions isn't something people would have done. People who could write were not often making predictions that are sufficiently precise to meet your requirements.
3) There's basically no way of verifying that a prediction was made and understood in the way you are desiring it to be. For example, let's say that there was a merchant that posted a sale in writing (which would never have happened). We would require this happened, AND that the merchant decided to either start or end the sale before sundown, AND that someone decided it was important to write this down as well, AND that you believed everything that was written.

Try to imagine what it would actually take for all of your criteria to be met. You're demanding detailed written evidence from an oral culture. Basically, you're just taking a stupid approach to the question, which is consequently making you to say stupid things.

If you had a more intelligent view, you would understand that the central importance of counting the days after birth from both a cultural and legal perspective is going to give you a clear sense of the measurement of the counting of the time of events. If just a few minutes can count as a day for the purposes of ritualized circumcision, then it's absolutely obvious that a few minutes can count as a day.

That you can't understand this isn't anyone's fault but yours.

Dr. Meh,
re: "It's a poor habit to take things out of context that totally change the original post."

The OP asks: "I wonder if anyone knows of any writing from the first century or before that shows a phrase stating a specific number of days and/or a specific number of nights when it absolutely couldn't have included at least a part of each one of the specific number of days and at least a part of each one of the specific number of nights?" The only change was to clarify the OP in post #28: "...remember that the purpose of this topic is not to discuss how long the Messiah was in the heart of the earth. However, there have been some who say that Matthew 12:40 is using common Jewish idiomatic language such as the Messiah saying that He would be in the heart of the earth for 3 nights... . But in order to say that it was common, one would have to know of other instances where the same pattern had to have been used. I am simply looking for some of those instances, scriptural or otherwise." The operative word is "common", a word which I inadvertently left out of the OP.



re: "It's also bad form and rude to ignore the rest of the post."

Sorry; I was getting frustrated that I haven't been able to get folks to understand my request. BTW, I've made the same request with regard to commonality on over 40 different websites.



re: "I said he [Aaron W] answered it the best he could..."

Actually, you said "...Aaron has gone above and beyond to answer your question..." - And I responded to that comment by asking you: "...I wonder if you might identify the number of the post where he [Aaron W] provides examples which show that a daytime or a night time was forecast to be involved with an event when no part of the daytime or no part of the night time could have occurred?"

Aaron W.,
re: "...it's absolutely obvious that a few minutes can count as a day."


I agree, but that's an issue for a different topic.

Only because you want the experience of being on the moon.

You mean like an example of another part of scripture uses "days and nights" without people freaking out about whether some part of a day or some part of a night was missing?

Or you mean some sense that the conception of day can include just a part of a day and not the whole day?

But alas, no. You mean something that's so specific as to probably not exist.

Why are you frustrated? Because you can't fly to the moon? Maybe you should re-evaluate your expectations after going to 40 different websites and not finding the thing you're looking for.

There are two basic conclusions you can reach:

1) The request will remain unfulfilled. That is, the thing you're looking for literally doesn't exist.

2) There must be a different way of approaching the question. Clearly, there is an understanding of time that is being applied. You can be stubborn and insist that the only way one can reach the conclusion is to have one specific piece of information. Or you can be open-minded and try to understand how others have reached the conclusion they've reached. The choice is yours and has been yours for a while.

Aaron W.,
re: "You mean like an example of another part of scripture uses 'days and nights' without people freaking out about whether some part of a day or some part of a night was missing?"

No. And it doesn't necessarily have to be from scripture.



re: "Or you mean some sense that the conception of day can include just a part of a day and not the whole day?"

No. I've already agreed that it can.




re: "But alas, no. You mean something that's so specific as to probably not exist."

That has seemed to been the case so far.

rstrats:
re: "That has seemed to been the case so far."

Change to: "That seems to have been the case so far."

Right... because that wasn't a forecast. Because when you say:

You're not actually looking for colloquial uses of the phrasing "days and nights" with the desire to understand that as not requiring absolutely the entire part of each day in the statement. It is, in fact, an instance where the exact pattern has been used (and happens to be in scripture)!

You're looking for colloquial uses of that phrase in the context of making predictions. Because your concept of having a colloquial phrasing is so narrow as to preclude one's ability to understand it as a broader language usage. It *MUST* be used in the form of a forecast or prediction in order for you to accept it.

And yet...

Someday, someone may fly you to the moon. Until then, you can be content in not just your frustration with people not giving you things but also mocking you for what appears to be an abject unwillingness to intellectually engage in the conversation. All you have done is sit in the corner with your arms crossed like a petulant 4 year old whining, "BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT I ASKED FOR!!!!" (I'm sorry your sandwich had the crusts cut off. I'm not going to the kitchen to make you another one.)

Aaron W.,
re: "You're not actually looking for colloquial uses of the phrasing 'days and nights' with the desire to understand that as not requiring absolutely the entire part of each day in the statement."

That is correct.



re: "You're looking for colloquial uses of that phrase in the context of making predictions."

That is correct.




re: "Because your concept of having a colloquial phrasing is so narrow as to preclude one's ability to understand it as a broader language usage. It *MUST* be used in the form of a forecast or prediction in order for you to accept it"

That is correct. The Messiah made the prediction that He would be in the "heart of the earth" for 3 nights. Assuming that being in the "heart of the earth" is referring to being in a particular place no earlier than the time of His death, there is no way to get 3 nights with a 6th day of the week crucifixion/1st day of the week resurrection.




re: "All you have done is sit in the corner with your arms crossed like a petulant 4 year old whining, 'BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT I ASKED FOR!!!!'"

Because it isn't. However, someone new looking in may know of examples.

Since it's been awhile, someone new looking in may know of examples.

Perhaps a further wording of the OP will make it more clear.

1. The Messiah said that He would be three days and three nights in the "heart of the earth"

2. There are those who think that the crucifixion took place on the 6th day of the week with the resurrection taking place on the 1st day of the week.

3. Of those, there are some who think that the "heart of the earth" is referring to the tomb.

4. A 6th day of the week crucifixion/1st day of the week resurrection allows for only 2 nights to be involved.

5. To account for the lack of a 3rd night, some of those mentioned above say that the Messiah was employing common figure of speech/colloquial language.

6. I am simply asking anyone who thinks it was common usage of the period, to provide examples to support that belief; i.e., instances where a daytime or a night time was forecast or said to be involved with an event when no part of the daytime and/or no part of the night time could have occurred.

LOL - It's not for lack of clarity that you're not getting any responses.

"I'm simply asking for a person in a particular subset of people that hold a particular belief to produce written evidence of an extremely specific type of statement from over 2000 years ago, and it's so specific as to likely not exist. And I refuse to accept other types of evidence that support your argument. I want exactly one this one thing and not something else."

Aaron W..
re: " It's not for lack of clarity..."

Apparently it is, since you still don't seem to understand the gist of this topic.

I'm pretty certain I understand it. Unless you've changed perspectives since affirming the issue in post #63.

Also, consider that you've been chasing this for 4.5 years and have not received a satisfactory answer. Do you really think that the problem is that your request is unclear the whole time?

Also, since these are pretty much your only posts in this forum, it's not an unreasonable conjecture that you've posted this question elsewhere. If you have been posting elsewhere, then the fact that you return here suggests that you haven't found a satisfactory answer elsewhere.

And if you haven't posted elsewhere, you're really not trying that hard to find the answer.

Either way, it's *far* more reasonable to conclude that the issue is not for a lack of clarity than it is that you are seeking a piece of evidence for something that does not presently exist, and may never have existed in the first place.

Why conjecture when I can google?

https://www.worthychristianforums.co...45530-rstrats/

http://christianforums.net/Fellowshi...s/rstrats.144/

http://www.religionforums.org/Thread-Matthew-12-40

http://www.onlinebaptist.com/home/to...-matthew-1240/

In four years of posing your question on numerous message boards, has ANYONE understood the "gist of this topic?" if not, the problem is probably on your end.

Aaron W.
re: "I'm pretty certain I understand it."

In your own words, what do you think this topic is about?



re: "...you've been chasing this for 4.5 years and have not received a satisfactory answer. Do you really think that the problem is that your request is unclear the whole time?"

If the intent of the topic has been clear, then the folks that have responded have ignored it and have gone off with their own issues.



re: "Also, since these are pretty much your only posts in this forum, it's not an unreasonable conjecture that you've posted this question elsewhere."

Correct. It's probably been asked in over 40 different forums during the last 10 years.



BTW, as I said in an earlier post, this topic is not directed to you since you're not a believer in a 6th day of the week crucifixion.

lagtight,
re: "In four years of posing your question on numerous message boards, has ANYONE understood the 'gist of this topic?'"

A few apparently have since they replied that they didn't know of any examples.

Thank you for your response.

So, in four years posting on forty message boards, not a single person can give you a single example? At what point are you going to consider the possibility that there are no examples, and that perhaps your time and mental energy might be better spent pursuing a topic that might bear more fruit?

lagtight,
re: "So, in four years posting on forty message boards, not a single person can give you a single example?"

Yes, that has been the case so far.


re: "At what point are you going to consider the possibility that there are no examples..."

Actually, it was just before I started this topic. I had read or heard that some believers in a 6th day of the week crucifixion/1st day of the week resurrection had tried to explain the lack of a third night by saying that the Messiah was employing common figure of speech/colloquial language of the period. Since I wasn't aware of any such common usage I thought I'd ask around on some message boards to see if the assertion of commonality might be true.



re: "At what point are you going to consider the possibility ... that perhaps your time and mental energy might be better spent pursuing a topic that might bear more fruit?"

I don't know.