bible-truths.com/forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Need Account Help?  Email bibletruths.forum@gmail.com   

Forgotten password reminders does not work. Contact the email above and state what you want your password changed to. (it must be at least 8 characters)

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Your opinion on Matt.12:40  (Read 2975 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Craig

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4282
  • There are two kinds of cops.The quick and the dead
Your opinion on Matt.12:40
« on: May 09, 2008, 09:00:18 AM »

Dear Morgan:  I will make some COMMENTS  in your email:


    > Ray, I read the e-mail question from "Urban" about the passage in Mt.12:40,
    > where you are saying that that passage is NOT speaking of the length of the time
    > Jesus was buried. (Wrong!) Furthermore, in your response to "Urban", you say
    > that you "changed your view" because you realized you were teaching "heresy".
    > Then you go on bringing up all your questions, about how "it does not fit" for
    > Christ to be crucified on Friday, and rise "early on Sunday morning", (as you
    > put it) and be three days and nights in the grave, (Duh ? that's second grade
    > math,but it has nothing to do with understanding the Bible)

    COMMENT:  It may be "second grade math," but it IS that the Church has taught for hundreds of years, and I was merely showing how originally I couldn't fit the "three days AND three nights" into a Good-Friday-Easter-Sunday-Morning scenario, and it has everything to do with "understanding the Bible." Later in your email we will take a look at YOUR failure to comprehend "second grade math."

    > Then you go on to say that you "calculated it every conceivable way", and you
    > supposedly prayed about it and walla,

    COMMENT:  No, Morgan, I did NOT "supposedly pray about it," I actually DID pray about it.

     when you went to the kitchen and got
    > something to drink ,(God ?) turned on a light bulb,etc.,etc.. (really ? Then how
    > did you still end up with an un-biblical and erroneous answer?)

    COMMENT:  I did not end up with "an unbiblical and erroneous answer." Your interpretation of these Scriptures is "un-biblical and erroneous," as we shall see.
    >
    > I shall give you the correct biblical answer to this your dilemma, but first
    > let me point out that all your "calculating", and your trying to "make the
    > scripture fit", your trying to make the scripture "say something other" than it
    > declares, as in your attributing the three days/nights to supposedly be
    > beginning with the "preparation" of the Passover, (speculative nonsense) all
    > this and your supposed response to
    > one called, "Michael", with your un-biblical,(and stupid) answer, clearly
    > indicates that you are not only a false teacher, but absolutely inept in the
    > scriptures. Having said that, here is the correct biblical answer to your
    > "spiritual third grade" dilemma.

    COMMENT:  Well at least I must be making progress, as we have now graduated from "second grade math" to "spiritual third grade."
    >
    > First of all, Matt.12:40, in the KJV, is an accurate prophecy by Christ, of how
    > long he was to remain in the grave,

    COMMENT:  You have not one Scripture to back up that unscriptural statement. Let's read Matt. 12:40--

    For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

    I see "whale's belly," and I see "heart of the earth."  I do not see where it says "So shall the Son of man be three days and three nights IN THE GRAVE."  Do you? No, of course you don't. YOU CHANGED THE WORDS.  First you state that this is an "accurate prophecy by Christ," and then you CHANGE THE WORDS OF CHRIST.  So how are we to trust an interpretation when one CHANGES THE WORDS from what Christ said to totally DIFFERENT WORDS?

    Morgan, your slandering comments against me are a little over-the-top, don't' you think, when you attribute to me the following:  "stupid," on the level of "second grade math," and on the spiritual level of a "third grader,"  "wrong," one who only "supposedly" prays,  gives "un-biblical and erroneous answers," is in a "dilemma,"  "trying to make the scripture say something other than it declares," "speculative nonsense," "your un-biblical, (and stupid) answer," "a false teacher ... absolutely inept in the scriptures," "lack of understanding this, stems from 'carnal minds' (like you)," "how wrong your supposition has been on this singular subject," "you are likewise wrong, on every point," "your heresies are affecting and contaminating my spirit," "You are certainly, and absolutely,a FALSE teacher, and a very confused individual."  But so far, we have only determined one fact, and that is that YOU CHANGED THE WORDS of our Lord.


     and it was to be a "sign" to the disciples.

    COMMENT:  Oh really?   And do you have a chapter and verse on that statement? I think not.  Once more, let's read the Scriptures: "Mat 12:38 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. Mat 12:39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:

    Now I see "Scribes and Pharisees" asking for a sign, and I see "an evil and adulterous generating seeking after a sign," but I do NOT see, "it was to be a sign to the disciples," do you, Morgan?  Well, do you?  And so again, YOU HAVE CHANGED THE WORDS "Scribes and Pharisees," and "an evil and aulterous generation" into the "DISCIPLES" of Jesus Christ.  The sign that the disciples remembered with Jesus rose from the dead was:

    Luk 24:6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,

    Luk 24:7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again. [Not a word about the "sign of Jonah."]

    Luk 24:8 And they remembered his words..."

    No, Morgan, they did not remember the "sign of Jonah," which was a "parable" to the evil and adulterous generation, not a sign to "His disciples" as you falsely contend. Jesus always taught to the crowd, masses, multitudes, and gatherings of Scribes and Pharisees in parables, and in parables ONLY (Matt. 13:34). Therefore, the sign of Jonah was a parable, and a parable that you do not understand.


    And the passage of Lk.24:21, is likewise accurate,and confirming of fact.

    COMMENT:  What Luke 24:21 "confirms," is that your whole theory on this subject is totally unscriptural. We will come back to this verse a little later.
    >
    > Secondly, there is No suggestion in the scriptures that Christ was crucified on
    > a Friday ! The lack of understanding this, stems from "carnal minds", (like
    > you) trying to teach spiritual things.

    COMMENT:  Actually there is Scripture showing that Jesus was crucified on a Friday.  Later........
    >
    > The Passover, according to Exod.12, and Lev.23, was to be commemorated on the
    > 14th of Abib.

    COMMENT:  No, that statement is not correct either, Morgan.  They kept the Lamb until the 14th when it was killed at the going down of the sun, in the evening, and was then eaten, celebrated, THAT NIGHT, which is then the 15th of Nisan, not the 14th:

    Exo 12:6 And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it IN THE EVENING.

    Exo 12:7 And they shall take of the blood, and strike it on the two side posts and on the upper door post of the houses, wherein they shall eat it.

    Exo 12:8 And they shall eat the flesh IN THAT NIGHT..."  That night being the 15th of Nisan, not the 14th as you falsely state.



    > The second feast, the feast of "Unleavened bread",(a seven day feast) was to
    > commence on the 15th of Abib, (the day after the Passover) and the first and the
    > last day, were to be a "High Sabbath".

    COMMENT:  NO, Morgan, they did not eat leavened bread at Passover. They already put the leaven out BEFORE Passover, not after Passover.  When will Christians come to understand that Passover WAS the first day of unleavened bread, and was therefore a Holy Day.

    The third feast,the feast of "first fruits",was to be held four days AFTER the
    > PASSOVER. (on the 18th of Abib)
    >
    > Thus we see Jesus was crucified on a WEDNESDAY,

    COMMENT:  Excuse me, but just where did you make that quantum leap? WHERE do we "see Jesus was crucified on a WEDNESDAY?"  I don't see that anywhere?  Where does it say they ate the Passover on a Wednesday? You made that up.

     and died between the 9th and
    > the 12th hour, just as prescribed in the O.T., (hence Paul's testimony about
    > Christs death and Resurrection "according to the scriptures", in 1.Cor. 15:3-4)
    > The Next day, (Thursday) was the feast of "unleavened bread".(the 15th of
    > Abib, Exod.12) this was the "High Sabbath", spoken of in John.19:31.
    > The next day,(Friday) was a regular working day, on which the two Mary's
    > went and purchased ointments to embalm Christ.
    > The third day,(Saturday) was the regular Sabbath. and Christ arose sometime
    > after "sunset" on Saturday, or before "the dawn" of Sunday.

    COMMENT:  Wow! Could take hours to sort all those unscriptural statements out. "The next day..." was NOT Thursday.  And, NO, Thursday was NOT "the 'High Sabbath' spoken of in John 19:31.  Once again, if all else fails, let's read the Scripture:

    Joh 19:31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

    Now then, do you see in this Scripture: "(for that THURSDAY was an high day)?" NO.  Do you see in this Scripture:  "(for that SABBATH day was a SABBATH day)?"  NO.  Do you see in this Scripture: "(for that HIGH DAY was an HIGH DAY)?"  NO.  You don't like to pay close attention to the Scriptures, do you Morgan?  Let's read it once more:  "For THAT sabbath day was an high day."


    Why would John tell us that THAT SABBATH was a certain day?  John doesn't say "for THAT DAY was an high day," does he?  No he doesn't. John doesn't say that "Thursday was an high day."  No,  John says "For that SABBATH [not just that "day," but that "sabbath"--it was ALREADY a sabbath day, not just any day of the week, like "Wednesday." No, that weekly SABBATH DAY, was ALSO AN HIGH DAY] was [in ADDITION to being a Sabbath day] was [also] AN HIGH DAY."
    >
    > And so we see, that the biblical account, as given in the KJV, is absolutely
    > correct,and Lk.24:2 confirms it. (Three days and three nights)

    COMMENT:  It doesn't "confirm" anything YOU had to say about it! Now back to Luke and the verse that you think confirms all your unscriptural statements regarding the Passover:  Luke 24:1--"Now upon the FIRST day of the week..." That would be SUNDAY.  Late Sunday AFTERNOON as it was coming toward evening, two disciples went toward Emmaus when Jesus met them on the road. One of them explains to Jesus what had happened the past few days. Being downcast, he states that:

    Luk 24:21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this,  TODAY  I-S  THE THIRD DAY since these things were done.

    WHAT "things" were done?

    THESE things:

    Luk 24:19 And he said unto them, WHAT things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:

    Luk 24:20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered  him to be  [1] condemned to death, AND have [2] crucified him.

    Those two things ONLY are the "THESE things" mentioned in verse 21. And so, late Sunday afternoon was "the THIRD day" since, "the chief priests and our rulers delivered  him to be  [1] condemned to death, AND have [2] crucified him."

    What does that do to your unscriptural Wednesday crucifixion, Morgan? The Scriptures count beginning with the day OF the Crucifixion, so Wednesday is the FIRST day, Thursday is the SECOND day; Friday is the THIRD day; Saturday is the FOURTH day; and Sunday would be the FIFTH DAY.  But the Scriptures clearly state that late Sunday afternoon was "the THIRD day" since Jesus was condemned and crucified, not the FIFTH day which it would have to be if your explanation had an once of truth to it. Am I going too fast for, Morgan? I will write a paper on this one day and explain ALL the Scriptures on this subject, proving that "heart of the earth" does not mean "dead in the tomb."

    >
    > Furthermore, on the question, if Christ should have eaten the "Passover" with
    > his disciples the night before (Tuesday night) Christ was in "his full right" as
    > the Passover as well as Sabbaths, begin at sunset the day before. >
    > I have written this to you, not so much to enlighten you, as to show you how
    > wrong your supposition has been on this singular subject. I submit to you,sir
    > that you are likewise wrong, on every point of the little bit that I have
    > examined of your writing so far. Not that I intend to read any more,as your
    > heresies are "affecting" and contaminating my spirit.
    >
    > You are certainly, and absolutely,a FALSE teacher, and a very confused
    > individual. (I am the same missionary, that sent you an e-mail of rebuke
    > yesterday)
    >
    > Morgan Sorensen.

    COMMENT:  Do you really want me likewise go through all of the unscriptural nonsense you sent to me the other day and post it along with this email on our site for the whole world to see?  Give it up, Morgan. You don't understand the truth of anything you have written me about.  You are only making a fool out of yourself.
    Sincerely,

    Ray
« Last Edit: May 09, 2008, 10:22:56 AM by hillsbororiver »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.048 seconds with 26 queries.