Did Jesus Fulfill His Prophecy of How Long He Would Be Entombed?

You are here

Did Jesus Fulfill His Prophecy of How Long He Would Be Entombed?

Login or Create an Account

With a UCG.org account you will be able to save items to read and study later!

Sign In | Sign Up

×

In Matthew 12:38, some of the scribes and Pharisees asked Jesus for a sign to prove He was the Messiah. "Teacher, we want to see a miraculous sign from you," they told Him (New International Version).

Jesus responded that the only sign He would give was that of the prophet Jonah: "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" (Matthew 12:40, NIV).

But how can we fit "three days and three nights" between a Friday afternoon crucifixion and entombment just before sundown and a Sunday morning resurrection at sunrise? This traditional view allows for Jesus to have been in the tomb for only a day and a half—or half the time Jesus foretold!

Traditional view doesn't fit

Some believe that Christ's statement that He would be "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" does not require a literal span of 72 hours. They reason that any part of a day can be reckoned as a whole day.

Thus, since Jesus died in the afternoon and was entombed just before sunset, they think the closing few minutes of that Friday constituted the first day, Friday night was the first night, Saturday was the second day, Saturday night was the second night, and a few minutes at dawn on Sunday morning made up the third day.

But where, then, is the third night? Even if a few minutes of daylight late on Friday and another few on Sunday morning constitute "days," this interpretation fails to explain how only two nights—Friday night and Saturday night—can somehow be the three nights of which Jesus spoke.

In fact, Scripture is plain that Jesus had already risen before Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early Sunday morning, arriving "while it was still dark" (John 20:1-2). So in reality, no parts of Sunday could be counted as a day, as Jesus was already resurrected well before the break of dawn.

Jonah 1:17, to which Jesus referred, states specifically that "Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights." We have no biblical basis for thinking that Jesus meant only two nights and one day, plus part of another day.

If Jesus were in the tomb only from late Friday afternoon to early Sunday morning, then the sign He gave that He was the prophesied Messiah was not fulfilled.

So which is it? Is something wrong with Christ's words, or is something wrong with the traditional view of when and how long He was in the tomb?

Let's carefully examine the details from the Gospels. When we do, we uncover the real story of how Jesus' words were fulfilled precisely.

Two Sabbaths mentioned

Notice the sequence of events outlined in Luke 23. Jesus' moment of death, as well as His hasty burial because of the oncoming Sabbath that began at sundown, is narrated in Luke 23:46-53. Luke 23:54 then states, "That day was the Preparation, and the Sabbath drew near."

In Jewish society of that time, heavy cooking and housecleaning were done on the day before a Sabbath in preparation for it. Thus the day before the Sabbath came to be called "the preparation day" or simply "the preparation." The biblical Sabbath falls on Saturday, the seventh day of the week. According to Bible reckoning, days begin at sunset (Leviticus 23:32; compare Genesis 1:5, Genesis 1:8, Genesis 1:13), so all weekly Sabbaths start Friday evening at sundown.

Based on these facts, many people have assumed that it is the weekly Sabbath mentioned here, and that Jesus was therefore crucified on a Friday. But two types of "Sabbaths" are mentioned in the Scriptures—the regular weekly Sabbath day, which fell on the seventh day of the week, and seven annual Holy Days (listed in Leviticus 23), Sabbaths that could—and usually did—fall on days of the week other than the regular weekly Sabbath day.

Was the day after Jesus was crucified a weekly Sabbath, or one of these annual Holy Days?

John 19:31 clearly states that this approaching Sabbath "was a high day." This term does not refer to the weekly Sabbath (Friday sunset to Saturday sunset), but in this context to the first day of Unleavened Bread, one of God's annual Holy Days (Exodus 12:16-17; Leviticus 23:6-7). A number of Bible commentaries, encyclopedias and dictionaries will confirm that John is not referring to the weekly Sabbath here, but rather to one of the annual Sabbaths.

According to the biblical evidence, in that year this high-day Sabbath fell on a Thursday (meaning it began on Wednesday night at sunset). This becomes especially clear from details in the Gospel accounts showing us that two separate Sabbath days are mentioned.

Luke 23:55-56 tells us that the women, after seeing Christ's body being laid in the tomb just before sundown, "returned and prepared spices and fragrant oils" for the final preparation of the body.

They would not have done such work on a Sabbath day, weekly or annual, since it would have been considered a Sabbath violation. This is verified by Mark's account, which states, "Now when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices [which they could not have purchased on a Sabbath day], that they might come and anoint Him" (Mark 16:1).

The women had to wait until this Sabbath was over before they could buy and prepare the spices to be used for anointing Jesus' body. Then, Luke 23:56 tells us that, after purchasing and preparing the spices and oils on Friday, "they rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment"—which means they had to have acquired the spices before that Sabbath on which they rested. This second Sabbath mentioned in the Gospel accounts is the regular weekly Sabbath, observed from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset.

By comparing details in both Gospels— where Mark tells us the women bought spices after the Sabbath and Luke relates that they prepared the spices before resting on the Sabbath—we can clearly see that two different Sabbaths are being discussed here.

The original Greek of Matthew 28:1 even tells us the women went to the tomb "after the Sabbaths" (plural), as some Bible translations show.

The first, as John 19:31 tells us, was a "high day"—the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread—which in this year fell on a Thursday. The second was the weekly seventh-day Sabbath. (To see these events spelled out day by day, see "The Chronology of Jesus Christ's Crucifixion and Resurrection".)

Sign of the Messiah

After the women rested on the regular weekly Sabbath, they went to Jesus' tomb early on the first day of the week (Sunday), "while it was still dark" (John 20:1), and found that He had already been resurrected (Matthew 28:1-6; Mark 16:2-6; Luke 24:1-3). Jesus was not resurrected at sunrise on Sunday morning. When Mary Magdalene arrived "while it was still dark," she found the stone rolled away and the tomb already empty!

When we consider the details in all four Gospel accounts, the picture is clear. Jesus was crucified and entombed late on Wednesday afternoon, just before a Sabbath began at sunset. However, that was a high-day Sabbath, lasting from Wednesday sunset to Thursday sunset that week, rather than the regular weekly Sabbath that lasted from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset.

Since Jesus was entombed in the late afternoon just before sundown, according to His own words He would have been resurrected at around the same time three days and nights later. He remained in the tomb from Wednesday at sunset until Saturday at sunset, when He rose from the dead. While no one witnessed His resurrection (which took place inside a sealed tomb), to fit His words and the biblical evidence it had to have happened three days and three nights later, near sunset on Saturday.

This time line perfectly accommodates three full nights (Wednesday night, Thursday night and Friday night) and three full daylight periods (Thursday, Friday and Saturday). This is the only time that fits Jesus' own prophecy of how long He would be in the tomb. And, as we have seen, it fits perfectly with all the details recorded in the Gospels.

We can be assured that the entombment period Jesus gave as proof He was the Messiah was exactly the duration He foretold. Because most people do not understand the biblical Holy Days Jesus Christ and His followers kept, they fail to understand the chronological details so accurately preserved for us in the Gospels.

You might also be interested in...

Comments

  • H.G. Hennis
    Rachel, (part 2) Regarding your assertion that "Cleopas was Greek, not Jewish...," do you have strong evidence to back that up? Although it's certainly possible that his NAME was of Greek origin and related to the name Kleopatros; it is also possible that it was related to the name Clopas (cf. John 19:25), which Bauer suggests is probably Semitic (קלופא) - though it is not certain. The Aramaic Peshitta NT actually has the same name for both Cleopas in Luke 24:18 and Clopas/Cleophas in John 19:25 (קליופא). As you know, name and ETHNICITY can differ. As noted in John 1:42 and Matthew 10:2, Simon (שמעון) was also called Peter (Πετρος in Greek) and Cephas (כאפא in Aramaic), but he was ethnically Israelite (Gal 2:14-15a). Hadassah was better known by the Gentile name Esther, but she identified the Jews as her people (Esther 8:3-6, 2:7). Hanaiah, Mishael & Azariah are better known by their Babylonian names: Shadrach, Mesach & Abed-nego (Daniel 1:7), but they were also Israelites. If you have done significant research beyond his name, it would probably be interesting to read. I personally believe the context doesn't require a different timing system.
  • H.G. Hennis
    Rachel, Thanks for the polite reply & clarification of your primary intent. I'm sorry that I misunderstood some of your points, but I'm happy that your statement, "On the surface there appears a contradiction in the scriptures..." does not apply to you personally. Good for you! It is true that in certain contexts, WHO is speaking can make a big difference, and the untrustworthy testimony of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-11 would fall into that category. Yes, Cleopas & the other disciple were experiencing doubts as evidenced by their words, "But we had hoped..." (Luke 24:21a, NRSV), and Christ's comment to them about being "slow of heart to believe..." (Luke 24:25b). However, I *personally* don't think Cleopas was referring to a different "third day" in Luke 24:21 than was mentioned in Luke 24:7, 24:46, 9:22 or 18:33 – nor do I think he was using a different method of counting/timing than the apostles he was acquainted with (cf. Luke 24:33-35). As noted in the post on Lk 24:21's Greek text, the third day had already passed & that was a likely contributor to the fading hopes of Cleopas. Like you, I think Jesus fulfilled His promise near sunset (Matthew 12:40, Luke 23:52-54).
  • RachelSmith
    Thanks for your detailed response, H.G. However, your reply was based on the incorrect inference that I was saying there are scriptural contradictions. That wasn't my point at all. My point was that we have to consider WHO is speaking in the context, not just what is being said. Just because a person is quoted doesn't mean what they say is correct. And if they contradict with Jesus' words, His will overrule. First, Luke 24:13-35 is a passage about quickly dwindling faith after not yet seeing. Cleopas was sad he hadn't seen Jesus although others said they had. Second, Cleopas was Greek, not Jewish, and his definition of a day would be different from that of Jews. Jesus' words overrule (He would be entombed three days and three nights). Also, Cleopas wasn't even present at Jesus' burial in order to accurately determine when and how long He was buried. (Only Joseph of Arimathea and some women were there.) So, it's just silly to base an entire argument on one verse that was a quote of a minor Bible figure not definitively seen elsewhere in scripture, who wasn't Jewish and was simply saddened he hadn't seen Jesus. It's obvious he was distraught and confused. ~Rachel
  • H.G. Hennis
    Rachel Smith, (part 3) According to the chart at members.ucg.org/papers/hebcal_apx.pdf, there was not a Nisan 14th Passover day that fell on a Thursday during the years 28-33 CE (by the common methods of determining the Hebrew calendar mentioned with the chart). Another HebCal site's pre-Gregorian approximations applied retroactively do not yield a Nisan 14th Passover on a Thursday during those years either. It is unlikely that Jesus Christ was crucified outside of this year range based on the following Biblical criteria: 1 - Jesus Christ was born
  • H.G. Hennis
    Rachel Smith, (part 2) Regarding Luke 24:21b, many English versions inadequately translate the Greek verb αγει as "__ is" in this part of the verse (like εστιν, a different verb). In this temporal context other Greek scholars have translated αγει as: "__ passes" (Brown), "__ is passing" (Young), "__ has been" (Brooks), "___ has already allowed... to pass" (Turner), "___ have already passed" (Verkuyl), etc. Greek manuscripts from Egyptian sources omit σημερον ("today"), so some translations do not include it. The misleading translation of "today [is the] third day" is more literally translatable as: "today it passes it, [the] third day..." This was a promised "third day" (Luke 24:7-8), which these two disciples have already been partially informed of after the discovery of the empty tomb and the explanation by angels (Luke 24:22-24, Luke 24:4-9). As Turner, Verkuyl, and Brooks independently suggest, the third day has already passed. A translation of "__ has passed" could be understood as a Greek "perfective present... [which] emphasizes the present reality of something which came into being in the past... [and] the perfective idea of existing results…" (Brooks 89-90).
  • H.G. Hennis
    Rachel Smith, What may seem like a surface "contradiction" to you can be understood as being in perfect agreement with the other Scriptures when the Greek texts of Mark 16:9 and Luke 24:21 are examined. In Mark 16:9, the first Greek word is the aorist participle αναστας ("after rising," "after having risen," "after [He] arose," etc.). This participle helps determine that the resurrection had already taken place before the time of the controlling verb εφανη ("He was seen," "He was manifested," "He appeared," etc.). The context of Mark 16:6, Mark 16:14, and the collective Gospel accounts rule out a simultaneous resurrection and appearance to Mary Magdalene, since the tomb was ALREADY EMPTY and Jesus Christ HAD ALREADY RISEN some time BEFORE He visibly appeared to her (cf. Matthew 28:6, Luke 24:6, John 20:1-2, John 20:10-18). The HCSB 2009 translation of Mark 16:9 reads: "Early on the first day of the week, after He had risen, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom He had driven seven demons."
  • RachelSmith
    Intriguing conversation! I see great points in everyone's arguments. On the surface there appears a contradiction in the scriptures: 1) A full 3 nights and 3 days from Wednesday would have Jesus rising at about sunset on Saturday yet 2) Cleopas and the other disciple, as they talk to Jesus on their way to Emmaus on a Sunday, seem to say in Luke 24:21 that it was 3 days ago (Thursday) that Jesus was crucified. Either way, I don't see how anyone can get a Friday crucifixion out of this, so I won't even go there. This isn't a firm assertion, but I wonder if the intended recipient(s) of the main scripture in question (both in Luke 24 and Mark 16) has something to do with this? The scriptures give details of the last week of Jesus's life in Jewish terms, giving information about the Passover, Feast of UB, Preparation Day, and Sabbath(s). Yet, the audience of both Mark and Luke is primarily Roman and Gentile. Is it possible that we're all correct here? That Jesus actually rose at sunset on Saturday (the last moment of the Sabbath), but that the writers explained the timing in terms with which the Roman/Gentile audience would have been more familiar?
  • Ivan Veller
    Here's our recent Beyond Today broadcast on the topic: http://www.ucg.org/beyond-today-program/doctrinal-beliefs/three-days-and-three-nights
  • Ivan Veller
    (concluded) • “‘Pero ya hace tres días’” (Traducción en Lenguaje Actual 2000, Sociedades Bíblicas Unidas). • “‘all these things since days (have passed) three’” (Younan 2001, “Peshitta Aramaic/English Interlinear NT”). • “‘с тех пор прошло три дня’” (Russian ERV 2007, World Bible Translation Center). • “‘Nosotros teníamos la esperanza de que él iba a ser el libertador de Israel, pero ya han pasado tres días desde que sucedió todo esto’” (La Palabra 2010 [versiónes española y hispanoamericana], Sociedad Bíblica de España). • “‘不但如此,而且這事成就,現在已經三天了’” (Chinese Union Version M.P. 2011 [simplified and traditional versions], Asia Bible Society) • “‘những việc ấy đã xảy ra ba ngày rồi’” (Bản Dịch 2011, Bau Dang) • [Footnote: “Codex does not have ‘today’”] “a.路加福音 24:21 有古抄本没有“今天” (Chinese Standard Bible 2011 [simplified and traditional versions], Asia Bible Society) • “‘Nosotros teníamos la esperanza de que él habría de redimir a Israel. Sin embargo, ya van tres días de que todo esto pasó’” [Updated from: “‘hoy es ya el tercer día’” (Reina-Valera 1995)] (Reina Valera Contemporánea 2011, Sociedades Bíblicas Unidas).
  • Ivan Veller
    @Mike Exton, Re: “just about every other translator in the entire world” Luke 24:21b: • “‘three days (have passed) since all these things were done’” (Etheridge 1849, Aramaic [Eastern] Peshitta NT). • “‘three days have passed since all these things have occurred’” (Murdock 1852, Syriac [Western] Peshitto NT) • “‘việc xảy ra đã được ba ngày rồi’” (Vietnamese Bible 1934). • “‘Moreover, three days have already passed, since all these events occurred’” (Verkugl 1959, New Berkeley Version in Modern English) • “‘con tutto ciò son passati tre giorni da quando queste cose sono accadute’” (Conferenza Episcopale Italiana 1971). • “‘Pero ya hace tres días que pasó todo eso’” (Dios Habla Hoy 1996, Sociedades Bíblicas Unidas). • “‘Till allt detta kommer att han redan har låtit den tredje dagen gå, sedan detta skedde’” (Svenska Folkbibeln 1998, Stiftelsen Svenska Folkbibeln). • “‘Voilà déjà trois jours que tout cela est arrivé’” (La Bible du Semeur 1999, Biblica). • “‘já faz três dias que essas coisas aconteceram’” (Portuguese ERV 1999, World Bible Translation Center). • “‘ya hace tres días que sucedió todo esto’” (Nueva Versión Internacional 1999, Biblica). (continued below)
  • Andlu Macar
    Thank you Ivan Veller. That puts it in summary as best as one can put it. People can get so hung up on one view that "scotoma" takes place and prevents the mind from seeing what is before one's eyes. Those disciples were indeed sad and forlorn for an excellent reason. I think only one as loving as our Master/kinsman Redeemer/King would take the time to address those two and their very broken hearts in order to mend them. People today can't quite understand the depth of their anguish and loss as they contemplated the past years following this young Jewish Rabbi only to see it all end so "tragically" and now, three full days having passed, totally in their eyes...
  • Ivan Veller
    @ Mike Exton, “‘[He was] condemned to death and crucified’” (Luke 24:21b NKJV). “‘But [1] we were hoping [2] that he was [3] the one who was going [4] to redeem Israel. But in addition [5] to all these things, this is the third day [since] these things took place’” (Luke 24:19-21 LEB 2010). [1] “moreover” (Biblos Interlinear: Westcott-Hort 1881); “yet” (Scripture4All Interlinear: Scrivener Textus Receptus 1894) [2] “were hoping”—imperfect indicative active tense (WH); “expected” (TR)] [3] “is”—present indicative (WH); “is” (TR) [the Messiah] [4] “is about”—present participle active (WH); “one being about” (TR) [5] Translating the word ‘alla’ (S235) can be “difficult, Luke 24:21…‘but then there is this,’ ‘in spite of all this,’ ‘too,’ ‘into the bargain,’ ‘this, at any rate, has taken place’” (Darby, “Greek Participles and Prepositions”); “Indeed” (NKJV), “And” (ERV 2008), “Besides” (HCSB 2009), “But” (LEB 2010), “Yes” (ESV 2011), “Anyway” (Voice 2012); “otherwise, on the other hand, but” (Luke 24:21, Biblos Bible Lexicon). A positive rendering breathlessly anticipates the possibility of present fulfillment. A negative one highlights hopes dashed because the days have passed.
  • Norbert Z
    Mike Exton, I stated that translator bias exists and provided evidence as proof; that people read different things into other peoples words. Similar to suggesting my comment could imply that the translators were specifically biased towards a Thursday crucifixion. I assume you understand the difference between inclusive and exclusive passage of days. And what that does with a verse like Luke 24:21. Besides if the precedent of having a majority view is always the correct and valid one, then the verses quoting Jesus' statement about the sign of Jonah should be blotted out from the Bible. Seeing most people believe Easter provides a valid timeline. People trying figure out where to stand on the question of "How Long He Would Be Entombed?", need to examine all arguments made for those events. Not only here on the UCG website, but investigate plenty of others with an opposing argument. Then come to their own conclusion. The way I see it, Hosea 4:6 is NOT relevant to this discussion, there's plenty of knowledge freely available online. However 1 Tim 1:7 is appropriate, "desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor the things which they affirm"
  • Mike Exton
    To Norbert Z, So you’re saying that the translators of the KJV, NKJV, RSV, NIV, PME, NLT, GNT, ASV, CEB, CJB, RHE, GW, HNV, CSB, LEB, NAS, NCV, NIRV, NRS, DBY, MSG, WBT, TMB, TNIV, WNT, WEB, WYC, YLT, and just about every other translator in the entire world translated Luke 24:20-21 the way they did because they were biased towards a THURSDAY crucifixion???!!! As I stated in an earlier comment, please do not forget what God tells in Hosea 4:6 (NKJV): “…Because you have rejected knowledge, I also will reject you…” Rejecting what God clearly says in His Word is not something that should be taken lightly.
  • Lily
    To Mike Exton- Thank you for walking us through what God is telling us really happened, and when, the year Jesus was crucified!
  • Norbert Z
    @ Mike Exton, What Luke 24:20 clearly points out is a good example of translator bias going on with the original manuscripts. It occurs with other verses as well. The New Berkeley Version in Modern English-- Gerrit Verkugl "Moreover, three days have already passed, since all these events occurred." The Syriac New Testament Translated Into English From The Peshitto Version -- James Murdock "...and lo, three days have passed since all these things have occurred." When a person understands that during Christ's time, the Bible supports the knowledge that those people talked of days inclusively rather than exclusively as we do now. Seems to me, there are two basic views of Luke 24:20 and one of them is translator bias. The argument for a Wed crucifixion is solid and people will make conclusions according to their own bias too. @ Ivan, Imo a person would have to do too many mental cartwheels to land at the conclusion that somehow the resurrection of Jesus adds credence to the weekly Sabbath. I believe that follows a similar kind of reasoning that somehow Sunday is now the authoritative day of worship for Christians. Nether of them have much to stand on in my view.
  • Mike Exton
    Mark 16:9 emphatically states that Jesus Christ was resurrected on a Sunday: KJ- "Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week..." NKJ- "Now when He rose early on the first day of the week..." NLT- "After Jesus rose from the dead early on Sunday morning..." LB- "It was early on Sunday morning when Jesus came back to life..." PME- "When Jesus rose early on that first day of the week..." RSV- "Now when He rose early on the first day of the week..." NIV- "When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week..." JB- "Having risen in the morning on the first day of the week..." NEB- "When He had risen from the dead early on Sunday morning..." So as you can plainly see, Jesus was resurrected on a SUNDAY. Please do not reject this simple truth. Remember what God tells us in Hosea 4:6—“...Because you have rejected knowledge, I also will reject you...” And don't forget, as Luke 24:20-21 clearly points out, Christ was crucified on a THURSDAY.
  • Mike Exton
    Luke 24:13-14 (NLT)— “That same day [SUNDAY] two of Jesus’ followers were walking to the village of Emmaus, seven miles from Jerusalem. As they walked along they were talking…” Luke 24:20-21 (NLT)— “…But our leading priests and other religious leaders handed Him over to be CONDEMNED TO DEATH, AND THEY CRUCIFIED HIM…. THIS [THE CONDEMNING AND CRUCIFYING OF JESUS] ALL HAPPENED THREE DAYS AGO [THURSDAY!!!].” But how do other translations render Luke 24:20-21? Do they also clearly state that Jesus was crucified on a THURSDAY? KJ — “...CONDEMNED to death... CRUCIFIED him... today is the THIRD day since THESE things were done.” PME — “...HANDED HIM OVER FOR EXECUTION, and had him CRUCIFIED... it’s THREE days since all THIS happened...” RSV — “...CONDEMNED to death, and CRUCIFIED him... it is now the THIRD day since THIS happened.” NIV — “...handed him over to be SENTENCED to death, and they CRUCIFIED him... it is the THIRD day since all THIS took place.” So, as you can plainly see, other translations give the same meaning as the NLT. They ALL show beyond any doubt whatsoever that Jesus was crucified three days prior to Sunday—THURSDAY! And resurrected on Sunday (Mark 16:9).
  • Ivan Veller
    Hi Norbert, Re: "the possibility that the resurrection adds extra credence to the weekly Sabbath" "[T]he reaping of the [wave] sheaf" (on Saturday at dusk) "symbolizes Israel giving the firstfruits, the very best of their produce, to God, and this is exactly the symbolism that Jesus fulfilled [1 Cor 15:20-23]. Christians are also called the firstfruits of God. 'So as the weekly Sabbath was ending...God resurrected His Son...reap[ing] the best and the first of His spiritual harvest. 'One might wonder why this happened on the Sabbath. What is the significance of this being done on the Sabbath? It is the Sabbath that commemorates God as Creator" (Rightenbaugh, "Wave Sheaf," Forerunner Commentary). "Christ's apostles and their converts...[observed the Sabbath] with a renewed emphasis on the 'new' person God is in the process of creating": http://www.ucg.org/booklet/ten-commandments/fourth-commandment-key-relationship-our-creator/ In the Millennial Sabbath rest "[following] Christ's return, He will bring the creation in its entirety into harmony with God": http://www.ucg.org/booklet/gods-holy-day-plan-promise-hope-all-mankind/feast-tabernacles-jesus-christ-reigns-over-all-e/
  • Jake
    Greetings Lily, Could "If we count 72 hrs this is a whole 3 days and 3 nights, in which case Jesus rising at the END of that time frame would be the start of a 4th day.", be very close to what did happen? In the very chapter where you have picked two verses to support the understanding that the 1st day of the week was the 3rd day in the grave, is there another verse that "clearly" states another understanding? What day was He crucified, killed and put in the grave? Did Jesus define exactly how much time is in a day and, by extension, a night? If so, then would He consider His statement of three days and three nights to be a "time frame", or would His sign be fulfilled in the way He defined a day and, by extension, a night? Does He always do precisely as He says He will do? Could it be that the time of day they put Him in the grave be the exact time He rose from the grave? About Mark 16:9, may we discuss this more later? Shalav, Jake
  • Join the conversation!

    Log in or register to post comments