Three Days and Three Nights

sparkman · Feb 6, 2016

The phrase "third day" means basically the day after tomorrow. The usage is consistent in the verses I presented, and the only exception to the "third day" issue relating to the crucifixion and resurrection that I see would be Matt 12:40.

Christ was resurrected the "day after tomorrow", assuming "today" is Friday he would have been resurrected Sunday.

There is a consistency with the way "the third day" was used in the above verses, and the Friday crucifixion and Sunday resurrection.

sparkman · Feb 6, 2016

rstrats said:

By the way, why do you indicate you are "not Christian" in your profile? If you are "not Christian" why do you care about this issue? And why would you have studied it?

Why should we accept the authority of a non-Christian on this issue? Are you a part of a group that contests evangelical, Sunday-observing Christians?

If you're atheist, I would have reason to scrutinize every claim you make. If you're part of a heretical group that hates Christianity, why would I listen to you?

rstrats · Feb 8, 2016

sparkman,
re: "Actually it is a slam dunk..."

My slam dunk comment was with regard to your statement that "...the Preparation Day...was synonymous with Friday..." I assumed you were implying that it can only refer to the 6th day of the week. I was merely trying to show that that didn't always have to be the case.

rstrats · Feb 8, 2016

sparkman,
re: "By the way, why do you indicate you are 'not Christian' in your profile?"

Because that is currently the case.

re: If you are 'not Christian' why do you care about this issue?"

For the purpose of this topic, my only interest is curiosity about anyone's assertion that Matthew 12:40 is using common idiomatic language.

re: "Why should we accept the authority of a non-Christian on this issue?"

I don't see what difference it makes whether a person is Christian or not with regard to saying that they are not aware of something - in the case of this topic that Matthew 12:40 is using common idiomatic language.

re: "Are you a part of a group that contests evangelical, Sunday-observing Christians?"
No.

sparkman · Feb 8, 2016

rstrats said:

Exodus 12:16 allowed the Israelites to prepare food on the first day of Unleavened Bread, which was the high day mentioned in John 19:31. I don't know what they would be preparing for, since cooking was allowed, assuming this day was a non-Sabbath(Saturday) but was a regular day of the week (Wednesday, for example).

In addition, the Expositor's Bible Commentary says this: "There is strong evidence to suggest that paraskeue (Preparation Day) had already become a technical name for Friday, since Friday was normally the day on which one prepared for the Sabbath, and we have no evidence that the term was used in the evangelist's time to refer to the eve of any festal day other than the Sabbath"

We also have to wonder why the ladies were going to the tomb to apply more spices to a 4 day old rotting corpse, if he was crucified late Wednesday. See Luke 23:50-24:2.

prove-all · Feb 10, 2016

yoninah said:

“In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week,
came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre” (Matthew 28:1).

The King James, along with just about every other Bible version, translates
the first part of this verse, “In the end of the sabbath” or “after the sabbath.”

But if you study the Greek text, you learn that the word for sabbath is
actually plural! “After the sabbaths,” it should read.

Jesus crucified on a Wednesday afternoon and buried later that evening,
before sunset. The next day, Thursday, was an annual sabbath. The day
after that, was preparation day for the regular weekly Sabbath.

The reason Matthew refers to sabbaths, plural, is because there were
two sabbaths that week! When Matthew says Mary came early Sunday morning,
before dawn, after one of the sabbaths, he is referring to the weekly Sabbath.

There is one more sequence of events that provides additional support for
the 72-hour time frame and the fact that there were two “sabbaths” this week.

Mark 16:1 says Mary Magdalene and her companions bought spices
“when the sabbath was past.” They were planning to prepare these
ointments and spices so that they might anoint the body of Jesus.

Yet Luke 23:56 says they prepared these spices and then rested on
the weekly Sabbath day. Compare these two texts carefully.

Christ inspired four different Gospel accounts to be written so that all the
important details of His life might be canonized. Mark said these women
bought the spices after the sabbath was past. Luke said they prepared
the spices before the Sabbath arrived.

Those who hold to the Good Friday-Easter belief must conclude that these
verses are a glaring contradiction. They are not! They complement each
other perfectly, if you understand that there were two sabbaths that week.

The women bought the spices on Friday, after the annual sabbath on Thursday.
They prepared the spices that same day, before the weekly Sabbath,
and then rested on the Sabbath according to God’s command.

When Mary approached the tomb early Sunday morning, [before sunrise],
an angel nearby exclaimed, “He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come,
see the place where the Lord lay” (Matthew 28:6).

There were no eyewitnesses to Christ’s resurrection,
and there is only one historical record: the Holy Bible.

Christ’s proof of His messiahship was singular:
the length of time He would be in the ground.

Friday is [not]the day of crucifixion in the NT,

the **combined** testimony of the Scriptures says there was 2 Sabbaths that week.

prove-all · Feb 10, 2016

The Roman Rite has been adapted over the centuries by
the Catholic Church, following the old Antiquity of the Roman Mass
a Liturgical_rite they adapted from times of old before Christ, it reads

"It is still redolent of that liturgy, of the days when Caesar ruled the world
and thought he could stamp out the faith of Christ, when our fathers met together
before dawn and sang a hymn to Christ as to a God."

rstrats · Feb 12, 2016

sparkman,
re: "Exodus 12:16 allowed the Israelites to prepare food on the first day of Unleavened Bread, which was the high day mentioned in John 19:31. I don't know what they would be preparing for, since cooking was allowed..."

Matthew 26:17 says "Now on the first day of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, Where wilt thou that we make ready for thee to eat the passover?". This couldn't have been any later than the 14th. Are you saying that the high day mentioned in 19:31 was referring to the 14th?

rstrats · May 7, 2016

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

sparkman · May 8, 2016

rstrats said:

The high day was Nisan 15, which was the first day of Unleavened Bread. It was also the weekly Sabbath.

A scenario to consider is as follows:

The Passover lamb was slain at twilight Wednesday, just as Thursday was beginning (Jewish days go from sunset to sunset).
Thursday was the preparation for the Passover and that evening (the beginning of Friday) the Passover was eaten-including the Passover meal eaten by Jesus and his disciples (initiating the Lord's Supper).
Later that night was Gethsemane, the arrest, and the trial by Annas and Caiphas, going very late into the night. The rooster crowed, indicating that it was early in the morning (John 19:27) and that was confirmed in John 19:28.
It was now Friday morning, still the day of Passover, and Jesus was taken by the chief priests and elders to Pilate (Matthew 27:1; John 19:28). Jesus was taken to be crucified, and was dead and buried before the weekly Sabbath began.
A guard was placed on the tomb for the Sabbath (Friday evening to Saturday sunset).
Early Sunday morning the tomb was discovered empty, because Jesus was risen.

This is from the Messianic Jew site "Chosen People Ministries". I think it's reasonable.

The only issue is the Matthew 12:40 Scripture which some say requires a 72 hour period. I don't base my theology on one verse whereas the common view fits together nicely. In addition, I provided Scriptures which proved that "the third day" was used in reference to "the day after tomorrow".

And, by the way, as a young man indoctrinated in Armstrongism, I held the alternate "three days and three nights" view. I find the traditional view more reasonable scripturally now.

In addition, Armstrongites are contentious and exhibit a prideful behavior. I find that some other professing Christians use this issue as a dividing line between them and others. Scripture speaks against this sort of contention. Quite commonly, the goal of many of these people is to assert that the rest of Christianity is pagan and their sect is orthodox.

Besides all of that, though, I find the "three days and three nights" view to require a lot of gymnastics to assert, as sabbaton is only used in reference to the weekly Sabbath, and within the same set of Scriptures, their view requires switching from weekly Sabbath to annual Sabbath without the author mentioning anything about it. In addition, sabbaton is used in a weekly context in the NT, not with regards to festivals. And, the fact that the women would be adding spices to a 4 day old corpse is suspect. Remember that Martha didn't want to open the tomb of Lazarus for the reason that the body would be rotting and stinking, so to claim it would be a normal practice to do this is in error.

garee · May 8, 2016

I would think the three day demonstration began in the garden as one of the two witnesses. The cross the other needed to make it altogether one complete work. Where the first witness the garden, the witness of the Spirit the unseen eternal. And the other the cross outward witness of the flesh as that which was seen, the temporal.

rstrats · May 8, 2016

sparkman,
re: "The high day was Nisan 15, which was the first day of Unleavened Bread."

Matthew 26:17 says "Now on the first day of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, Where wilt thou that we make ready for thee to eat the passover?". So you're saying that it was the 15th when the disciples asked the question?

As a 6th day of the week crucifixion advocate do you say that Matthew 12:40 is employing common Jewish idiomatic language - that it was common to say that a daytime or a night time would be involved with an event when no part of the daytime or no part of the night time could have occurred?

sparkman · May 9, 2016

rstrats said:

Here's the proposed chronology:

Christ ate the Passover with his disciples at the BEGINNING of Nisan 14 by Jewish reckoning (Thursday evening by our reckoning).

The crucifixion occurred on Nisan 14 prior to the end of the day by Jewish reckoning (Friday late afternoon by our reckoning).

He was buried by evening time, just before Nisan 15 began. He was in the grave a small part of Nisan 14.

Nisan 15 was both the Feast of Unleavened Bread and the weekly Sabbath. He was in the grave all of this day.

He was resurrected Sunday morning Nisan 16 by the time the women came to treat the body with oil and spices again.

So, he was in the grave part of Nisan 14, all of Nisan 15, and part of Nisan 16. This meets the "third day" criteria mentioned in the vast majority of the verses talking about this time interval ("on the third day").

I gave examples where this phrase "third day" is used for "the day after tomorrow" on a previous post.

The chronology makes sense to me.

The only Scripture which seems to be in opposition to this is Matthew 12:40. I would hold the position that it is an idiomatic way of saying "the third day" which means the day after tomorrow. The majority of Scriptural evidence lines up best with the position I proposed.

The Wednesday - Saturday view makes no sense to me as there is no explanation why they would come back to anoint a body 3-plus days afterwards. The body would be rotting.

In addition, the alternate view requires switching from a weekly Sabbath to an annual Sabbath within the same set of Scriptures, without making any mention regarding this change of Sabbaths.

Read Luke 23:50-24:12. Do you honestly think that this gospel allows for two different Sabbaths, spread apart by a day? Read all of them in fact. See if it is plain that there was a festival and a Sabbath, spaced apart by a day. The clearest explanation is that the weekly Sabbath and the First Day of Unleavened Bread (part of the Passover feast) were the same day.

The only issue with this view is the Matthew 12:40 rendering that the anti-holiday crowd imposes upon it, which will not acknowledge the possibility that it is an idiomatic expression. I don't base my theology on one verse that can be explained in this manner.

Besides the fact that sabbaton is used for the weekly Sabbath and not for annual festivals in the NT. I don't think you can find a SINGLE incidence where it is used in reference to festivals, and in fact sabbaton itself is translated "week" in 7 verses in the NT.

In short, the Friday - Sunday scenario makes most sense to me looking at ALL of the verses. I don't base my theology on one verse which can be reconciled with the idiom explanation.

As an additional support, the Feast of Firstfruits, which is widely acknowledged by Sabbath and festival observers to refer to Christ and his resurrection, occurs on Sunday. That is why many Sabbath and festival observers won't argue that Christ was resurrected on Saturday..even the Seventh Day Adventist church won't make that claim, and affirm the appropriateness of Easter observance on Sunday.

However, if you want to hold the three days and three nights view, I don't care. It doesn't affect my salvation one whit

The only disturbing thing is when cults, world religions like Islam or atheists use such things to cause doubt in believers, to sway them away from orthodox Christianity.

Already done my time in such a group..been there, done that, bought that T-shirt

I'd suggest the small booklet "Three Days And Three Nights" by Ralph Woodrow. Earlier in his ministry, he wrote several booklets that promoted the teachings of Alexander Hislop (Two Babylons) in regards to alleged pagan origins of Christmas and Easter, as well as some anti-Roman Catholic assertions. He later recanted much of these previous teachings as ill-informed. While there was a grain of truth in his earlier books, much of their content was based on poor reasoning and inaccuracies. Unfortunately some cults use the former writings to support their accusations against orthodox Christianity in this regard.

By the way, I am not pro-Roman Catholic, and hope they come to a better understanding of Christianity and the Bible. My discussions with them are centered on doctrinal issues like sacerdotalism, justification by faith alone, church tradition, and sola Scriptura, not unprovable connections between them and the worship of Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz. I am not a Hislopite

rstrats · May 10, 2016

sparkman,

Although I've gotten drawn off topic with side issues, the purpose of this topic is to see if Matthew 12:40 is using common idiomatic language - i.e., that it was common to say that a daytime or a night time would be involved with an event when no part of the daytime or no part of the night time could have occurred. There are some 6th day of the week crucifixion advocates who have said that it was. I am simply asking them for the examples that allow them to legitimately make the assertion that it was common.

sparkman · May 10, 2016

rstrats said:

OK. My point is that I only have to reconcile ONE verse with the idiomatic language explanation, while the other view (Wednesday - Saturday view) requires a lot more justification in my mind, including the points I mentioned in the previous posts (women anointing a 3 day plus old corpse, and the sudden switch from one annual "Sabbath" to the weekly Sabbath with no indication in the narratives, sabbaton having an inherent weekly context, etcetera).

And, this is coming from someone who was indoctrinated into the "Easter is Pagan" camp.

So, I'm quite content with the traditional view. I also don't see an argument (nothing notable) against it in church history. The discussion seemed to be oriented on the exact manner of determining the day rather than the Friday - Sunday scenario.

Each person needs to come to their own decision on this issue. I'm not very fond of cults, atheists or world religions who use this issue to attempt to derail Christianity by declaring it to be pagan, but as long as it's an intramural debate without Christians making pagan accusations toward other believers, no big deal either way with me

Herbert Armstrong, the leader of the organization I belonged to as a young man, tried to use this issue, amongst others, to make the claim that orthodox Christianity was in error and his version of Christianity was the real one. I chafe against that sort of mentality strongly.

rstrats · May 10, 2016

sparkman,
re: "OK. My point is..."

And that point would be an issue for another topic. Perhaps you could start one.

rstrats · Aug 10, 2016

Perhaps someone new looking in might know of examples.

Adstar · Aug 10, 2016

Jesus did spend 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb.. The truth is there was two Sabbaths in the week that Jesus was executed the High Sabbath which was the First day of unleavened bread and the second sabbath which was the normal weekly sabbath..

Jesus was not executed on a Friday.. He was executed on a Wednesday afternoon and was buried just as the sun set on Wednesday.. He was raised again at sundown Saturday which was the start of the first day of the week..

rstrats · Aug 10, 2016

Adstar,
re: "Jesus did spend 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb."

Not according to the 6th day of the week crucifixion advocates. Some of them say that the verse is using common Jewish idiomatic language. This topic is directed to them. I would simply like to see the examples that they are using to assert the commonality of the usage.

Adstar · Aug 10, 2016

rstrats said:

The reason that the catholic church came up with the Friday theory was because they did not have real knowledge of the fact that there are Sabbaths that are tied to dates in the year not tied to the saturday weekly Sabbath..

A Sabbath is a holy convocation where """"no manner of work shall be done in them""" The first day of unleavened bread and the 7th day of unleavened bread where both Sabbath days and the first day of unleavened bread happens after the day of Passover and this is called the High Sabbath in the Bible that differentiates it for the Normal weekly 7th day Sabbath. This High Sabbath was the reason that necessitated the quick burial of Jesus before the sun went down on the day of His execution..

Exodus 12: KJV
15 Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel.

16 And in the first day there shall be an holy convocation, and in the seventh day there shall be an holy convocation to you; no manner of work shall be done in them, save that which every man must eat, that only may be done of you.

17 And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread; for in this selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt: therefore shall ye observe this day in your generations by an ordinance for ever.

Three Days and Three Nights

sparkman

Guest

sparkman

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

sparkman

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

sparkman

Guest

Banned

Senior Member

sparkman

Guest

Senior Member

sparkman

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member