I had previously done a video responding to Shadid Lewis on the subject of the Sign of Jonah.
I want to start afresh and anew and I hope to provide a much better response than last time.
He first goes into the issue of what the sign of Jonah was, namely was it the time or the condition and quotes various references from the Gospels to show that the time itself was not important. In other words, if the three days and three nights was important, then he should of sure to stress it, as would the rest of the Gospels themselves.
The time factor is relevant, just because the Gospels omit certain details, that doesn't mean that the detail isn't important. Does the fact the I AM sayings appearing in the Gospel of John only negate that being important? No, Same applies to the Virgin Birth in the Gospel of Matthew. Omission in a particular Gospel doesn't mean the detail isn't important overall, it just means it wasn't relevant to the point that a particular writer was making to his audience. The time factor is still important regardless of how many times it is raised in the gospels and regardless of how many times Lewis wants appeal to the Gospels to back up, it shows that Jesus died and how the time factor relates to his death.
The supposed miracle that Shadid suggests is that Jonah survives his ordeal and that was the miracle. Now it is disputed among many as to whether or not Jonah was dead, or alive inside the whale. Regardless, this doesn't have an impact on Jesus' own death in the Gospels themselves, That never changes. A strong case be made from Jonah 2:1-7 that he died:
"Jonah 2:1 [a]From inside the fish Jonah prayed to the Lord his God. 2 He said:
“In my distress I called to the Lord,
and he answered me.
From deep in the realm of the dead I called for help,
and you listened to my cry.
3 You hurled me into the depths,
into the very heart of the seas,
and the currents swirled about me;
all your waves and breakers
swept over me.
4 I said, ‘I have been banished
from your sight;
yet I will look again
toward your holy temple.’
5 The engulfing waters threatened me,[b]
the deep surrounded me;
seaweed was wrapped around my head.
6 To the roots of the mountains I sank down;
the earth beneath barred me in forever.
But you, Lord my God,
brought my life up from the pit.
7 “When my life was ebbing away,
I remembered you, Lord,
and my prayer rose to you,
to your holy temple."
However again, it's the time factor, how long Jesus was in Sheol that is the factor.
Shadid then brings up the point of Jesus being buried in the tomb and that he wasn't buried for three days and nights in the tomb. However, when Jesus is referring is his time in the underworld, or Sheol or the grave, not to how long he was buried in the tomb. Please also note that he didn't go to hell at all, which is another point that needs to be abundantly clear. He went to the underworld, but not to hell. Feel free to check out Keith Thompson's response to Steven Anderson on Jesus being a burnt offering and where Jesus went: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzjapPSj8mQ.
Shadid then lays out what day Jesus was taken down and put in the tomb and tries to assert his point that Jesus wasn't buried for three days and three nights, denying to bappi that there was a special Sabbath.
However Shadid is incorrect, there are different kinds of Sabbath, not just the Sabbath that most are commonly familiar with. In John 19:31, we read the following:
"Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jewish leaders did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down."
He is incorrect to say that the Gospels do NOT speak of a special or high sabbath. John clearly mentions one and Shadid's accusation that bappi was lying is unfounded: Feel free to take a look at the following regarding the special sabbath: http://biblehub.com/john/19-31.htm
No Christian disputes that the Sabbath is the 7th day, but as said before, There are more than one Sabbath, Such as in Exodus 23:10-12:
"10 “For six years you are to sow your fields and harvest the crops, 11 but during the seventh year let the land lie unplowed and unused. Then the poor among your people may get food from it, and the wild animals may eat what is left. Do the same with your vineyard and your olive grove.
12 “Six days do your work, but on the seventh day do not work, so that your ox and your donkey may rest, and so that the slave born in your household and the foreigner living among you may be refreshed."
Not only is the regular sabbath in place, there is also a sabbath year for the field, namely allowing it to lie unused and unplowed once every 7 years. Even the 70 year exile itself allowed the land have it's sabbaths that it was deprived of.
You also have the following regarding the Sabbath year in Leviticus 25:
"25:1 The Lord said to Moses at Mount Sinai, 2 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘When you enter the land I am going to give you, the land itself must observe a sabbath to the Lord. 3 For six years sow your fields, and for six years prune your vineyards and gather their crops. 4 But in the seventh year the land is to have a year of sabbath rest, a sabbath to the Lord. Do not sow your fields or prune your vineyards. 5 Do not reap what grows of itself or harvest the grapes of your untended vines. The land is to have a year of rest. 6 Whatever the land yields during the sabbath year will be food for you—for yourself, your male and female servants, and the hired worker and temporary resident who live among you, 7 as well as for your livestock and the wild animals in your land. Whatever the land produces may be eaten."
Though it is merely listed as a sabbath in Mark's gospel, John elaborates on what Sabbath it is.
Shadid goes on to ask what other day was the Sabbath, then bappi provided a link to which Shadid chastised him and said "That website is not talking about your bible"
Here is the website I think he used: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/specialshabbat.html
It goes into a list showing what the varying sabbaths are. While the link doesn't refer to the New Testament itself, it is nevertheless a viable link to use when studying the New Testament, because the New Testament itself was written by Jews, With the exception of Luke and Acts.
While Shadid is correct that the website doesn't talk about the New Testament and he demands to know when Jesus died and what the particular Sabbath he died on was, Does this refute bappi? No.
The site itself mentions the Shabbat Parah:
"Shabbat Parah (Red Heifer) - Precedes the Shabbat ha-Hodesh leading up to Passover. The Torah reading, Num. 19:1-22, mentions the purification of the Red Heifer in the Temple, thus establishing the Shabbat of purification. It is the first indication of the preparation Jews make for the arrival of Passover. During the times of the Temple, Shabbat Parah was an indication for those Jews preparing to make the pilgrimage to Jerusalem to ritually cleanse their bodies. Today, this Shabbat is the time to clean one’s house and remove all hametz before Passover. This purification of oneself and belongings is a suggestion of Passover’s premise of liberation." http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/specialshabbat.html
It is possible that this is the particular Sabbath that was mentioned in the New Testament.
Shadid claims that Jesus' death didn't happen and even brings up the words of Pontius Pilate, trying to demonstrate that Jesus' death was uncertain. However Shadid fails to mention to his audience that JESUS WAS FLOGGED! Jesus would of lost a lot of blood and Mark 15 records how long Jesus was on the cross for. 6 hours and the very context of the NT says Jesus BREATHED HIS LAST. The Greek exepneusen used means such and indicates that Jesus died.
"Mark 15:25 It was nine in the morning when they crucified him. 26 The written notice of the charge against him read: the king of the jews.
27 They crucified two rebels with him, one on his right and one on his left.  [a] 29 Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, “So! You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, 30 come down from the cross and save yourself!” 31 In the same way the chief priests and the teachers of the law mocked him among themselves. “He saved others,” they said, “but he can’t save himself! 32 Let this Messiah, this king of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.” Those crucified with him also heaped insults on him.
33 At noon, darkness came over the whole land until three in the afternoon. 34 And at three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).[b]
35 When some of those standing near heard this, they said, “Listen, he’s calling Elijah.”
36 Someone ran, filled a sponge with wine vinegar, put it on a staff, and offered it to Jesus to drink. “Now leave him alone. Let’s see if Elijah comes to take him down,” he said.
37 With a loud cry, Jesus breathed his last."
The death of Jesus on the cross is NOT called into question, Even the centurion stabbed him to check that he was dead.
When you take into consideration Jesus' wounds when he was alive and the spear thrust into his side and the fact that his body had to be taken of the cross, there is no way you can be open to the idea Jesus survived or his death was doubtful.
Regarding the Three Days and Three Nights issue, Shadid tries to show that Jesus himself was not buried for three days and three nights, regardless of the time.
As demonstrated before, the time factor refers to Jesus' ordeal in Sheol, not how long he was buried for. For that matter, Jews do not count 24 hour periods when it comes to the subject of days, they count a day as sundown to sundown.
John Gilchrist has said the following in his paper on this subject the following:
"Unfortunately Deedat here overlooks the fact that there was a big difference between Hebrew speech in the first century and English speech in the twentieth century. We have found him inclined to this error again and again when he sets out to analyse Biblical subjects. He fails to make allowance for the fact that in those times, nearly two thousand years ago, the Jews counted any part of a day as a whole day when computing any consecutive periods of time. As Jesus was laid in the tomb on the Friday afternoon, was there throughout the Saturday, and only rose sometime before dawn on the Sunday (the Sunday having officially started at sunset on the Saturday according to the Jewish calendar), there can be no doubt that he was in the tomb for a period of three days.
Deedat's ignorance of the Jewish method of computing periods of days and nights and their contemporary colloquialisms leads him to make a serious mistake about Jesus' statement and he proceeds to make much the same mistake about his prophecy that he would be three nights in the tomb as well. The expression three days and three nights is the sort of expression that we never, speaking English in the twentieth century, use today. We must obviously therefore seek its meaning according to its use as a Hebrew colloquialism in the first century and are very likely to err if we judge or interpret it according to the language structure or figures of speech in a very different language in a much later age." John Gilchrist: What Indeed Was the Sign of Jonah? http://www.answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/jonah.html
To back up my point further, go to this link by Jacob Prasch where he talks about three days and three nights https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPJDqBNzvOI. Prasch also dicusses the point of "Oh it had to be a Wednesday, It had to be a Thursday point".
It's strange Shadid Lewis tells us not to go the Jewish website but tells us to go by the Jewish Calendar, this is inconsistent.
The three days and three nights issue I have covered now, so I don't need to repeat this point over and over.
chris_438 makes a similar point that I am making here in the discussion with Shadid, to which Shadid Lewis pretty much dismisses with the same points that he made earlier.
I have pretty much addressed Shadid's arguments here. No matter how he wants to cut it, Jesus was in Sheol for Three Days AND Three Nights.
Gomer's point on the sign of Jonah
This conversation actually occurred recently on the 24th of January 2015 on Paltalk.
Gomerozdubar claimed that the sign of Jonah was not the three days and three nights, but was actually a reference to the Queen of the south, basing it on the fact that this comes up more than in the other gospels.
However, the Queen of the South is NOT the sign of Jonah, she was dead before the time of Jonah.
Let's read the contexts:
"Matthew 12:38 Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from you.”
39 He answered, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. 40 For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. 41 The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now something greater than Jonah is here. 42 The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom, and now something greater than Solomon is here."
"Matthew 16: The Pharisees and Sadducees came to Jesus and tested him by asking him to show them a sign from heaven.
Matthew 16:2 He replied, “When evening comes, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red,’ 3 and in the morning, ‘Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.[a] 4 A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah.” Jesus then left them and went away."
"Luke 11:29 As the crowds increased, Jesus said, “This is a wicked generation. It asks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah. 30 For as Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, so also will the Son of Man be to this generation. 31 The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with the people of this generation and condemn them, for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom; and now something greater than Solomon is here. 32 The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and now something greater than Jonah is here."
As stated before with Shadid, just because the Gospels omit certain details, that doesn't mean that the detail isn't important. The only reason Jesus mentions the Queen of the South is that she was in a more noble position than those who rejected the preaching of Jonah, not that she is the sign of Jonah.
Matthew 12 tells us what the sign of Jonah is and the other gospels themselves, while they don't say what the sign is, you still know that the sign he is referring to is the one found in Matthew 12. What the sign is in Matthew 12 is obviously found also in Matthew 16, even if the details are skipped. The audience should know what the sign is since Matthew told them and also the enemies of Jesus should know what the sign of Jonah was, hence why Jesus doesn't repeat what it is in Matthew 16, that would of been redundant if he did.
The conversation on this matter between Gomerozdubar was cut short however due to the fact that the voice server for the room had been knocked down but this was as far as well got before the room started going on the fritz.
I hope I have responded adequately to the objections raised and I thank you for taking the time to read.