rstrats

JosephM, re: " It appears from first impressions and reading your identical posts and your dialog on at least 5 different forums..." Actually, it's probably more like 40 different sites. re: "...that your intent may not be simply to request some writing." I assure you that for the purpose of this topic that that is my only intent. re: "added - PS If it is indeed just documentation you are requesting rather than a debate, a single note to limit your bandwidth use for such things in the Cafe area would suffice." I'm not sure what you're telling me. Could you elaborate?

JosephM, re: "Just what is the point you are trying to make here in this thread?" For the purpose of this topic I'm not trying to make any point. I simply would like to see some writing as requested in the OP. re: "No one here is disagreeing with you..." I don't know what I have said that could call for agreement or disagreement. re: "...and i see you have posted the same question and comments on a number of different internet sites under the username rstrats.." Any particular reason for feeling the need to point that out?

jorgenji, re: "Sorry I don't have any documentation..." OK, perhaps someone new looking in will know of some.

JosephM, re: "I think ----> HERE is the explanation you are speaking of." Thanks for the link but it doesn't show a phrase that states a specific number of days as well as a specific number of nights when it absolutely doesn't include 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.

Since it has again been awhile, hopefully someone new looking in will know of an author.

Below is a change to the OP to make it a bit more clear. Whenever the three days and three nights of Matthew 12:40 is brought up in a "discussion" with 6th day crucifixion folks, they frequently argue that it is a Jewish idiom for counting any part of a day as a whole day. I wonder if anyone has documentation that shows that a phrase stating a specific number of days as well as a specific number of nights was ever used in the first century or before when it absolutely didn’t include 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?

glintofpewter, 　 re: "I must be missing something." 　 What is it that you think you may be missing?

Vidar, re: "... the tradition that his resurrection occurred on the first day of the week (Sunday; cf. Matt. 28:1)..." I'm afraid I don't see where Matthew 28:1 says that the resurrection took place on the first of the week. What do you have in mind?

Since it has been awhile, perhaps someone new looking in will know of an author.

Since it's been awhile, perhaps someone new looking in will know of some documentation.

A poster on another board, the topic of which was questioning the authenticity of the last 12 verses in the book of Mark, wrote that it doesn’t really matter because there is no doctrinal teaching in Mark 16:9-20 that cannot be proved elsewhere in agreed Scripture. 　 I made the mistake of sticking my nose into the discussion by pointing out that actually there is a statement in verse 9, as the KJV and similar versions have it, that is to be found nowhere else in Scripture that is used to support a doctrinal teaching. As the KJV translates it, it is the only place that puts the resurrection on the first day of the week. I then suggested that whenever the discussion of seventh day observance versus first day observance comes up, it has generally been my experience that first day proponents many times use the idea of a first day resurrection to justify the change of observance from the seventh day to the first day, and when questioned about the day of resurrection, frequently quote Mark 16:9. The poster came back with: "Quote a published author who has done that." - I have not yet been able to come up with one. Does anyone here know of one?

Whenever the three days and three nights of Matthew 12:40 is brought up in a "discussion" with 6th day crucifixion folks, they frequently argue that it is a Jewish idiom for counting any part of a day as a whole day. I wonder if anyone has documentation that shows that the phrase "x" days and "x"nights was ever used in the first century or before when it absolutely didn’t include at least parts of the "x" days and at least parts of the "x" nights?