How come good Friday is only two days from Easter Sunday?

ImAHebrew

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 30, 2003
553
38
St. Louis, MO
Visit site
✟67,313.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Timothy was circumcised by Paul because Paul wanted to please/appease the Jews.

There was no Christian legal reason that Timothy needed to be circumcised. Timothy's mother was not a practicing Jew when he was born. His mother and father were Christians. Paul circumcised Timothy in order for him to be able to be allowed in the company of the Jews who were not Christians.

1 Corinthians 7:18
Was any one at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was any one at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision. rsv
Perhaps we will "talk" again on another thread in the future. :)
Shalom Jan001, but that reasoning falls flat, as Paul did not circumcise Titus. The reason why Titus wasn't, and the reason why Timothy was deals with one being considered a Gentile and the other a Jew. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
 
Upvote 0

Jan001

Striving to win the prize...
Supporter
Oct 17, 2013
2,079
310
Midwest
✟101,789.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Shalom Jan001, but that reasoning falls flat, as Paul did not circumcise Titus. The reason why Titus wasn't, and the reason why Timothy was deals with one being considered a Gentile and the other a Jew. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

Paul would not have circumcised Timothy if the Jews had not known that his father was a Greek. Jews who practiced Judaism and Gentiles who did not practice Judaism did not associate with each other.

If Timothy had truly and legally been born a Jew, he would have had to have been circumcised eight days after his birth in accordance with the Old Covenant Law of Moses. Genesis 17:14

Acts 16:1
And he came also to Derbe and to Lystra. A disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer; but his father was a Greek. rsv

Acts 16:3
Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him; and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews that were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. rsv
The only reason that Paul circumcised Timothy was so that Timothy could accompany him among the Jews who knew that Timothy's father was an uncircumcised Greek. These Jews knew that Timothy was not a practicing Jew. Jews who practice Judaism do not associate with uncircumcised men.

We disagree, but that is okay. :)
 
Upvote 0

Gerhard Ebersoehn

Junior Member
Aug 22, 2008
1,409
63
✟14,946.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Derek

#364 Of course not, but He was using exactly the same figure of speech as was used in Jonah 1:17. And that it is a figure of speech is made clear beyond all doubt from the testimony of the disciples met by Christ on the road to Emmaus in Luke 24. Christ met them on the road on Sunday, and referring to His crucifixion they state, "it is now the third day since this happened".

Sunday = 3rd day

Sabbath = 2nd day

Friday = 1st day

Jews count inclusively.

GE

Rejected! Referring to his Crucifixion they stated, "it is now the third day SINCE this happened".

Sunday = 3rd day SINCE

Sabbath = 2nd day SINCE

Friday = 1st day SINCE

Thursday = the day OF his Crucifixion, counted arithmetically.

#372 This post is manipulation. This post would not be manipulation, read it,

...the testimony of the disciples met by Christ on the road to Emmaus in Luke 24. Christ met them on the road on Sunday, and referring to His crucifixion they state, "it is now the third day since this happened".

Sunday = 3rd day SINCE his Crucifixion

Sabbath = 2nd day SINCE his Crucifixion

Friday = 1st day SINCE his Crucifixion

Thursday = the day OF his Crucifixion

Those Jews counted exclusively; they said so!

Prodromos

#374 No, that is how we would interpret such a statement in English culture today. That is not how Jews interpreted it. Their counting of days was inclusive of the day they were counting from.

Derek

#386 LOL, who is manipulating??? There is no day 0...

GE

Where have you seen <<day 0...>> in what I wrote? Read, “the day _OF_ his Crucifixion”, not <<day 0...>>, Einstein! John wrote “it was”, not <<day O…>>, but “it was The Preparation DAY OF The Passover”—“The Passover-of-YAHWEH”, The Law is written of that “it SHALL BE This That Selfsame Whole Day of Substance-BONE-DAY” you have never heard of and never in your heart has come up, which DAY you never could, have had an idea of or never could, have thought EXISTED, and if you knew it existed, would with your whole being have DENIED AND CURSED AND ANATHEMATIZED!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ImAHebrew

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 30, 2003
553
38
St. Louis, MO
Visit site
✟67,313.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Derek

#364 Of course not, but He was using exactly the same figure of speech as was used in Jonah 1:17. And that it is a figure of speech is made clear beyond all doubt from the testimony of the disciples met by Christ on the road to Emmaus in Luke 24. Christ met them on the road on Sunday, and referring to His crucifixion they state, "it is now the third day since this happened".

Sunday = 3rd day

Sabbath = 2nd day

Friday = 1st day

Jews count inclusively.

GE

Rejected! Referring to his Crucifixion they stated, "it is now the third day SINCE this happened".

Sunday = 3rd day SINCE

Sabbath = 2nd day SINCE

Friday = 1st day SINCE

Thursday = the day OF his Crucifixion, counted arithmetically.

#372 This post is manipulation. This post would not be manipulation, read it,

...the testimony of the disciples met by Christ on the road to Emmaus in Luke 24. Christ met them on the road on Sunday, and referring to His crucifixion they state, "it is now the third day since this happened".

Sunday = 3rd day SINCE his Crucifixion

Sabbath = 2nd day SINCE his Crucifixion

Friday = 1st day SINCE his Crucifixion

Thursday = the day OF his Crucifixion

Those Jews counted exclusively; they said so!

Prodromos

#374 No, that is how we would interpret such a statement in English culture today. That is not how Jews interpreted it. Their counting of days was inclusive of the day they were counting from.

Derek

#386 LOL, who is manipulating??? There is no day 0...

GE

Where have you seen <<day 0...>> in what I wrote? Read, “the day _OF_ his Crucifixion”, not <<day 0...>>, Einstein! John wrote “it was”, not <<day O…>>, but “it was The Preparation DAY OF The Passover”—“The Passover-of-YAHWEH”, The Law is written of that “it SHALL BE This That Selfsame Whole Day of Substance-BONE-DAY” you have never heard of and never in your heart has come up, which DAY you never could, have had an idea of or never could, have thought EXISTED, and if you knew it existed, would with your whole being have DENIED AND CURSED AND ANATHEMATIZED!
Shabbat Shalom Gerhard Ebersoehn, you can take this to the bank, deposit it, and start drawing some interest..."Today, LEADS the third day AWAY FROM when these things occurred." In Luke 24:21, the TODAY is NOT the third day, as TODAY leads the third day away from those things. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Shabbat Shalom Gerhard Ebersoehn, you can take this to the bank, deposit it, and start drawing some interest..."Today, LEADS the third day AWAY FROM when these things occurred." In Luke 24:21, the TODAY is NOT the third day, as TODAY leads the third day away from those things. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
This is a contrived interpretation which has no scholastic support. If this interpretation is correct there must be a credible scholar somewhere who agrees with it. A day can be "before" or "after" another day but a day cannot "lead" anything. The Greek word for "after" is ὄπίσω/opiso and it does not occur in this verse.
....."Today, leads the third day away from when these things occurred." The Greek word for "when" does not occur in this verse. It must be interpolated to make the verse fit a preconception.
.....So your interpretation should read "Today, leads the third day away from these things occurred." Or we could interpret the verse correctly as the NET, NIV, ISV, ASV, and KJV translate it.

NET Luk 24:21
(21) But we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. Not only this, but it is now the third day since these things happened.
NIV Luk 24:21
(21) but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place.
ISV Luk 24:21
(21) But we kept hoping that he would be the one to redeem Israel. What is more, this is now the third day since these things occurred.
ASV Luk 24:21
(21) But we hoped that it was he who should redeem Israel. Yea and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things came to pass.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Latuwr

Member
May 11, 2017
16
0
77
Ellisville
✟9,796.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Hi Der Alter,

Blessings to you through Messiah Yahushua, My YAHWEH and My ELOHIM!

Shabbat Shalom!

Your emphasis upon scholarship is exactly the same objection that the scholars at the time of Messiah charged Yahushua HIMSELF and HIS Apostles concerning their teaching. Throughout HIS earthly ministry, the religious authorities were always challenging Messiah Yahushua concerning HIS practice and HIS teaching. This same challenge continued with the teaching of HIS Apostles after the resurrection of Messiah Yahushua. I mean who were Messiah and HIS Apostles to tell the religious scholars what is what?

I will tell you again that "ἄγει" in Luke 24:21 is not the verb "ἐστιν", and I will tell you again that "τρίτην ταύτην ἡμέραν" is not the subject of "ἄγει", rather they are the object of "ἄγει" because these words are in the accusative case. "ἀφ᾽ οὗ ταῦτα ἐγένετο" literally is "from which it happened these things". You are correct in saying that "when" is not in the phrase so what do you really have? Nothing! Try as you might, you and your scholars have not disproved the true teaching of this verse. [Staff edit].

Thanking you in advance should you be moved to reply, I am,

Sincerely, Latuwr
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,110
19,005
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,143.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
red-strawberry-hat-wool-beret-girls-winter-wear20667.jpg

MOD HAT ON
This thread is closed for review
MOD HAT OFF
 
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,110
19,005
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,143.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
red-strawberry-hat-wool-beret-girls-winter-wear20667.jpg

MOD HAT ON
This thread has had a stringent clean.
Please cut out the flaming, goading and petty comments towards one another.
Also, please don't assume mods are stupid. Breaking the rules in a a language other than English doesn't mean we don't realise what you're doing.

VREDEMAKERHOED AF
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Hi Der Alter,
Blessings to you through Messiah Yahushua, My YAHWEH and My ELOHIM!
Shabbat Shalom!
Your emphasis upon scholarship is exactly the same objection that the scholars at the time of Messiah charged Yahushua HIMSELF and HIS Apostles concerning their teaching. Throughout HIS earthly ministry, the religious authorities were always challenging Messiah Yahushua concerning HIS practice and HIS teaching. This same challenge continued with the teaching of HIS Apostles after the resurrection of Messiah Yahushua. I mean who were Messiah and HIS Apostles to tell the religious scholars what is what?
Your argument is invalid unless you are completely fluent in both Hebrew and Greek. And I doubt very seriously that you are, therefore anything you say about the Bible relies on some other person's scholarship e.g. the translators and the scholars who have written the lexicons and grammars. I have not seen any scholarly evidence which supports your private interpretation
I will tell you again that "ἄγει" in Luke 24:21 is not the verb "ἐστιν", and I will tell you again that "τρίτην ταύτην ἡμέραν" is not the subject of "ἄγει", rather they are the object of "ἄγει" because these words are in the accusative case. "ἀφ᾽ οὗ ταῦτα ἐγένετο" literally is "from which it happened these things". You are correct in saying that "when" is not in the phrase so what do you really have? Nothing! Try as you might, you and your scholars have not disproved the true teaching of this verse. [Staff edit].
Again your argument is invalid since αγω/ago has other meanings. See BAG lexicon, below.
.....How many post graduate hours of Greek do you have? Just perusing a Strong's and a Greek grammar does not make one a scholar. Not only does your interpretation not make sense how can a day "lead" another day? And you have to insert a word, i.e. "when", to the text to make it say what you want it to.
αγω 4. of time spend ( Eur. , Hdt. +; Aberciusinschr. 18; LXX ) aj. tén émeran tén ogdoén eis eufrosunén, celebrate the eighth day as a festival of joy B 15:9 ( cf. Dit., Or. 90, 47 [196 BC ] a[gein ta;" hJmevra" tauvta" eJortav" ; PGoodspeed 3, 18 [III BC ] hJmevran kalh;n h[gagon). Perh. impers. τριτην ταυτην ημεραν αγει this is the third day Lk 24:21 ; but, since this expr. cannot be found elsewhere, it is prob. better to supply Iesous as subj. ( Bl-D. §129 app. ) lit. Jesus is spending the third day (cf. Galen XIII 581 Kühn tetavrthn hJmevran a[gwn ajnwvduno" h\n, XI 65 K. povshn a[gei th;n ajpo; tou` nosei`n hJmevran oJ a[nqrwpo"). Of festivals celebrate, observe ( Hdt. +; Aesop , Fab. 389 P. genevqlion a[gein ; Jos. , Ant. 11, 77=IEsdr 4:50) genevsia Mt 14:6 v.l .; to; savbbaton PK 2 p. 14, 28; neomhnivan ibid. 1. 29. Of meetings (like Lat. agere ) sumboulion agein hold a meeting IPol 7:2. Pass. ajgorai`oi a[gontai ( s. ajgorai`o" 2) Ac 19:38 .
A Greek-English Lexicon Gingrich & Danker
Although the authors of BAG, quoted above, say "since this expr. cannot be found elsewhere, it is prob. better to supply Iesous as subj." their conclusion is based on decades of scholarship and historical sources highlighted in blue above.
.....I will trust in the scholars who have acquired the necessary education to make credible translations of the NT.
Luke 24:1
(1) On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb....
Luke 24:13
(13) Now that same day [1st day of the week, vs. 1] two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem.
NET Luk 24:21
(21) But we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. Not only this, but it is now the third day since these things happened.
NIV Luk 24:21
(21) but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place.
ISV Luk 24:21
(21) But we kept hoping that he would be the one to redeem Israel. What is more, this is now the third day since these things occurred.
ASV Luk 24:21
(21) But we hoped that it was he who should redeem Israel. Yea and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things came to pass.
ESV Luk 24:21
(21) But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel. Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things happened.
See quote from the Diatessaron of Tatian.
The Diatessaron of Tatian Section LIII [ca. 373]
And during the time of their talking and inquiring with one another, Jesus came and reached them, and walked with them. But their eyes were veiled that they should not know him. And he said unto them, What are these sayings which ye address the one of you to the other, as ye walk and are sad? One of them, whose name was Cleopas, answered and said unto him, Art thou perchance alone a stranger to Jerusalem, since thou knowest not what was in it in these days? He said unto them, What was? They said unto him, Concerning Jesus, he who was from Nazareth, a man who was a prophet, and powerful in speech and deeds before God and before all the people: and the chief priests and the elders delivered him up to the sentence of death, and crucified him. But we supposed that he was the one who was to deliver Israel. And since all these things happened there have passed three days.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums