lee_merrill

Hope you are feeling better soon, David!

I still have to do my taxes, and then an appointment tomorrow evening, and then laundry on Friday (no washing machine in my house), so it may be a day or two before I can put together a reply...

Blessings,
Lee

lee_merrill

Hi David,

Well, he's off on the wrong foot here, though, the Hebrews started their day at sunset, not sunrise! They still do…

Daniel 8:14 He said to me, "It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings"…
Psalm 55:17 Evening and morning and at noon I will pray…

Now maybe the first Roman hour was at sunrise, but then there is still a difference.

But the man in 1 Sam. 30:12ff referred to the Hebrew description of "three days and three nights" as simply "three days," not "three days and nights," indicating that partial days counted as whole days, too.

Regards,
Lee

David Mooney

Hi Lee,

Quote:
Ray: He is claiming here that the authors of the synoptics use a “Hebrew
time� in which the 1st hour is sunrise…

LEE
Well, he's off on the wrong foot here, though, the Hebrews started their day at sunset, not sunrise! They still do…

DAVID
Yes, Ray knows the Jews began their days at sunrise and the Romans began theirs at midnight, but they counted their daytime hours from sunrise. The nights were divided into watches.

LEE
Daniel 8:14 He said to me, "It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings"…
Psalm 55:17 Evening and morning and at noon I will pray…

Now maybe the first Roman hour was at sunrise, but then there is still a difference.

DAVID
Yes, the first Roman hours were at sunrise, as were the Jews. The calendar days, however, began at different times for each.

LEE
Quote:
David: Three days and three nights had at least a portion of three days and three nights and not one night or one day less.

But the man in 1 Sam. 30:12ff referred to the Hebrew description of "three days and three nights" as simply "three days," not "three days and nights," indicating that partial days counted as whole days, too.

DAVID
Yes, part of a day could count as a day and part of a night could count as a night. However, no matter how you slice it, any part of a day could NOT be counted as both a day and a night.

I should be feeling well enough within a day or so to be more active, but for now that is all. Hope all is well with you,

Regards,
David

David Mooney

CORRECTION

Hi Lee,

Quote:
Ray: He is claiming here that the authors of the synoptics use a “Hebrew
time� in which the 1st hour is sunrise…

LEE
Well, he's off on the wrong foot here, though, the Hebrews started their day at sunset, not sunrise! They still do…

DAVID
Yes, Ray knows the Jews began their days at sunset and the Romans began theirs at midnight, but they counted their daytime hours from sunrise. The nights were divided into watches.

LEE
Daniel 8:14 He said to me, "It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings"…
Psalm 55:17 Evening and morning and at noon I will pray…

Now maybe the first Roman hour was at sunrise, but then there is still a difference.

DAVID
Yes, the first Roman hours were at sunrise, as were the Jews. The calendar days, however, began at different times for each.

LEE
Quote:
David: Three days and three nights had at least a portion of three days and three nights and not one night or one day less.

But the man in 1 Sam. 30:12ff referred to the Hebrew description of "three days and three nights" as simply "three days," not "three days and nights," indicating that partial days counted as whole days, too.

DAVID
Yes, part of a day could count as a day and part of a night could count as a night. However, no matter how you slice it, any part of a day could NOT be counted as both a day and a night.

I should be feeling well enough within a day or so to be more active, but for now that is all. Hope all is well with you,

Regards,
David

lee_merrill

Hi David,

Sorry to hear you're still under the weather, hope you're back to good health soon...

Actually, their day started at sunset, though, in the evening, that was the start of the Jewish day.

Could part of a 24-hour day be considered part of a day and a night, though? If a day and a night meant a whole day, as distinguished from day as in daylight, then wouldn't that be possible?

Gen. 33:13 If they are driven hard just one day, all the animals will die.

Which must include a time less than a full day, thus part of a whole day, it seems, could possibly be referred to as "one day," and then a time span of several such "days" (the first and last of which might be partial), could be referred to as "three days and three nights," if the standard way of speaking of days as opposed to daylight was "a day and a night."

Regards,
Lee

David Mooney

Hi Lee,

LEE
Sorry to hear you're still under the weather, hope you're back to good health soon...

DAVID
Thanks.

LEE
Quote:
David: Ray knows the Jews began their days at sunrise...

Actually, their day started at sunset, though, in the evening, that was the start of the Jewish day.

DAVID
Yes, I corrected my misstatement in a later post. The Jews began their days at sunset. Sorry for the error.

LEE
Quote:
David: Yes, part of a day could count as a day and part of a night could count as a night. However, no matter how you slice it, any part of a day could NOT be counted as both a day and a night.

LEE
Could part of a 24-hour day be considered part of a day and a night, though? If a day and a night meant a whole day, as distinguished from day as in daylight, then wouldn't that be possible?

DAVID
There is no evidence that part of a day could be a day AND a night unless part of the day had a portion of the night with it.

LEE
Gen. 33:13 If they are driven hard just one day, all the animals will die.

Which must include a time less than a full day, thus part of a whole day, it seems, could possibly be referred to as "one day," and then a time span of several such "days" (the first and last of which might be partial), could be referred to as "three days and three nights," if the standard way of speaking of days as opposed to daylight was "a day and a night."

DAVID
A part of a day could be reckoned as a day and part of a night could be reckoned as a night. There is no evidence the Jews ever counted part of a day(time) as both a day and a night unless part of a night was included. Friday afternoon would be reckoned as a day, Friday night and Saturday daytime would be day two and Sunday evening and early Sunday morning would be day three. if one counted nights with the days, then it would be three days and two nights, at the most. Actually, there is question that Jesus would have been in the tomb even that long, although his soul would have been in Hades from the moment of death according to the first century view of Hades. See Josephus' ~An Extract from Hades~ or some title to that effect.

LEE
Regards,
Lee

DAVID
I am getting better ever day but I still have a nasty cough. I'll be glad when that us past. In any case, I will become more active as I improve.

lee_merrill

Hi again, David,

Hope the virus clears out soon for you!

Isn't the verse in Gen. 33 evidence of that, though?

Gen. 33:13 If they are driven hard just one day, all the animals will die.

Which must not mean just driven during daylight hours, or just driven after sunset.

It does appear that way to us! But is it possible that "X days and X nights" was a way of referring to full days, could it have been an idiom?

Like "take a walk," then where are you taking it? Well, it's not meant so literally.

Or when we say "I was there three whole days," that's not meant strictly literally, either, we might have left on the afternoon of the third day, and thus the time was not literally three whole days...

Regards,
Lee

David Mooney

Hi again, David,

Hope the virus clears out soon for you!

DAVID
Thanks again...

LEE

Quote:
David: There is no evidence the Jews ever counted part of a day(time) as both a day and a night unless part of a night was included.

LEE
Isn't the verse in Gen. 33 evidence of that, though?

Gen. 33:13 If they are driven hard just one day, all the animals will die.

DAVID
I don't see how part of a day is reckoned as a whole day and night here. If it means a 24-hour day, then at least part of a day and part of a night must be included to have a day AND a night.

LEE
Which must not mean just driven during daylight hours, or just driven after sunset.

DAVID
I don't see why night hours would be included here. The sun rose (Genesis 32:31) and Jacob and Esau had their conversation (Gen. 33:4-15) and Esau returned that same day (Gen 33:16) on his way to Seir. There is no evidence here that any part of a day could be counted as a day AND a night, certainly not in this passage.

LEE
Quote:
David: if one counted nights with the days, then it would be three days and two nights, at the most.

LEE
It does appear that way to us! But is it possible that "X days and X nights" was a way of referring to full days, could it have been an idiom?

DAVID
X days and X nights was a way to refer to X days and X nights. Throughout scripture whenever nights was included it would be X days and X nights (usually three, seven, or forty). If just a common day or a 24-hour day was meant, then just "day" was used. In that case we must rely on context to determine which is meant. X days and X nights could be rendered X days as sometimes the Jews ignored nights but in every case where X nights is referred to there is no reason to assume it meant (X-1) nights.

LEE
Like "take a walk," then where are you taking it? Well, it's not meant so literally.

DAVID
There is no evidence that X nights could mean (X-1) nights in Hebrew scripture. The only reason there is a controversy is when Jesus said he would be in the heart of the earth X days and X nights he contradicted the gospel record of three days and two nights. If no contradiction occurred, there would be no one trying to claim X nights could mean (X-1) nights.

LEE
Or when we say "I was there three whole days," that's not meant strictly literally, either, we might have left on the afternoon of the third day, and thus the time was not literally three whole days...

DAVID
no, but if i say "I was there three days and three nights" we know that I was there at least part of three nights, although I would not have to be there exactly three 12-hour nights. Once night and day are contrasted in such a "X days and X nights" phrase we know the writer is calling attention to more than just the days but the nights as well. For example, one might claim to have fasted 40 days but some might question the fast and say, "Okay, but did you fast during the nights?" If the writer claimed he fasted 40 days and 40 nights then such questions would be redundant. The Muslims, for example, fast during one of their holy months. But they are allowed to eat at nights. So, a 30 day fast is not as explanatory as a "30 day and 30 night fast".

You can have 3 days and 3 nights and "on the third day" but the phrase "on the third day" does not necessarily mean three nights. If I began a journey on Monday at nine AM and traveled to California and arrived Wednesday at 5pm then it can be said I traveled three days although only parts of two days and one full day was meant but I could not say I had traveled three days and three nights because it wouldn't be true. However, if I left the east coast at 3 am on Monday morning and arrived in California Wednesday night at 11pm I could say I had traveled three days and three nights because at least a portion of each was counted,

The Jews, according to their Talmuds, reckoned part of a day as a whole day and part of a night as a whole night. When reckoning periods of consecutive time, such as three or more days, a day was referred to as an Onah and a night was referred to as an Onah. A part of an Onah was reckoned as the whole. A "part" of an Onah was a small portion of time, about 1,080 of them in an hour. In other words, 3.5 seconds was reckoned as a part of time. And all it took was a part to be reckoned as either a day AND a night.

This is a little hard to imagine them having measuring instruments that precise at the time the Talmud was written so a part was probably like saying three "blinks of an eye".

In any case, I don't argue with the "on the third day" references even though only a small part of Friday and Sunday were involved. Yet it is disputed about the third night.

Anyway, that's all for now,

take Care,
David

John A. Broussard

I guess I got lost in the shuffle. I'd still like to know how we can determine whether or not a given passage in the KJV is simply a mistranslation. For the moment, let's assume there was only one KJV produced for good king James.

Is there anyone there who can give me a rule I can go by?

lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

Well, it could mean either part of the hours of daylight, or some part of the evening hours, or these animals being driven from before sunrise until noon, so wouldn't that imply any part of a day is being called "one day" here?

Well, how about here?

Daniel 8:14 He said to me, "It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be reconsecrated."

Now this almost certainly means 2,300 days or parts of full days, but not specifically a period of time starting on an evening, and ending exactly 2,300 24-hour days later.

Yes, it would mean that in English, but what I meant was that we have a figure of speech that doesn't mean what it means literally, "three whole days" doesn't mean three whole days. Thus "three days and nights" might be a figure of speech in Hebrew, though not in English.

Yes, so then maybe part of a 24-hour day could be considered a whole day, and "a day and a night" could have been a way to refer specifically to a whole day? Such as in "there was evening, and there was morning, one day," in Genesis 1.

I would check the difference in our knowledge of Hebrew! We have found out more about ancient Hebrew since 1611 and King James, but I'm not a scholar, so I have to follow along with their decisions, for the most part, assuming they are not conspiring to hide stuff! Though the Dead Sea Scrolls logjam was a bit scandalous...

Regards,
Lee