On the Third Day

I have rewritten an earlier Hillschurch post about some of the controversy over the Good Friday - Easter Sunday conundrum that some people have in regards to three days and three nights mentioned in Scripture. I got some help from Keith Schooley here. I actually lean towards a Thursday crucifixion because it seems to incoporate all the expressions used to describe the third day/three day issues.

The four expressions used in Scripture to refer to the time period between Jesus' death and his resurrection are "on the third day," "after three days," "in three days," and "three days and three nights." (There are a few more Greek constructions, but they boil down to these four meanings.) It seems clear that (at least on the surface) there is a conflict between these four expressions. If indeed Jesus rose from the dead "on the third day" after his crucifixion, it is impossible that he spent "three days and three nights" in the tomb; conversely, if he did spend "three days and three nights" in the tomb, it would seem necessary that he rose on the fourth day, not the third. While "in three days" could be reasonably accommodated to either scheme, "after three days" would seem to support the idea of three full days and nights in the tomb.


These slightly different wordings either all mean the same thing (which I think is true) or they all mean different things. If they each mean different things that would also make both Jesus and the Gospel writers somewhat unclear on their facts and possibly even liars - which is why people have difficulty with this concept.


Just to summarize the Scriptures, we have at least five readings with slightly different wordings (but unlikely to have different meanings):

- in three days (6 times) 
(Mt 26:61 ;27:40; Mk 14:58; 15:29; Jn 2:19,20)

- after three days (4 times) 
(Mt:27:63; Mk 8:31; 9:31; Lk 2:46;)

- three days later (1 time) 
(Mk 10:34)

- three days and three nights (1 time) 
(Mt 12:40)

- on the third day (9 times) 
(Mt 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; Lk 9:22; 18:33; 
24:7, 46; Ac 10:40; 1Cor 15:4)


And possibly a sixth from the road to Emmaus

- this is the third day since all this took place 
(Lk 24:21)



Another interesting passage is the one where the chief priests command that the tomb be guarded "until" the third day in Matthew 27:64 
So give the order for the tomb to be made secure until the third day. Otherwise, his disciples may come and steal the body and tell the people that he has been raised from the dead. This last deception will be worse than the first.

As I mentioned above, for most of the passages in the Bible, this issue is not really a problem because Sunday is the third day after Friday (including Friday and Sunday). However the problem comes with passages like Matthew 12:40

 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.



The simplest explanation is that all these terms essentially mean the same thing and cover the same period of time.
In Matthew 27:62-64, the chief priests and Pharisees ask for "the tomb to be made secure until the third day," because they remember his claim that "after three days I will rise again." The formulation "after three days," occurs immediately in context with the formulation "until the third day"; i.e., we seem to have here an explicit equating of the two expressions, "after three days" and "until the third day," which would reconfirm the idea that according to Jewish inclusive reckoning, "after three days" would mean "until the third day," and not "until the fourth day," as it would naturally mean in modern English.

I don't think the context, the culture of the time nor the text "requires" or specifies an exact 72-hour period. Neither does it absolutely rule it out. However, the phrases "on the third day" and “this is the third day since all this took place” would seem to indicate that it was somewhat less than 72 hours.



Because the text(s) doesn't make it absolutely clear one way or the other, the reasons to affirm one position or another rely mostly on people’s personal theological preferences (i.e. what do they want to try and prove) rather than historical grounds. It also doesn’t really make a whole lot of difference to our faith or the accuracy of Scripture to adopt one theory or another.

This is the simple answer and pretty much settles the matter. However ...

If you want to continue reading and continuing studying …

John’s gospel mentions a High Sabbath, which might mean the actual day of Passover (which would have been a special Sabbath and gives us a number of interpretation options). John 19:31 says



Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jews 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. 



It also says in Mark 15 that Jesus died on the Preparation Day.

 42 It was Preparation Day (that is, the day before the Sabbath). So as evening approached, 43Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. 44Pilate was surprised to hear that he was already dead.



and in 16:1

 When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body.



and Matthew 28:1

 After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.



So the information that we have is that Jesus died on the Preparation day and rose again after the Sabbath on the first day of the week (or at least the women discovered the empty tomb on Sunday morning). It also talks about being raised on the third day like in Luke 24

 6 He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 7'The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.'"




However we might also be able to explain three days and three nights with a more unusual explanation. This is where this concept of the “double Sabbath” comes in. The Passover meal (seder) is usually celebrated on “Erev Pesach” or the evening before the Passover. Jesus ate the Passover meal with his disciples. But given that he was arrested later that night it is possible (even probable) that he did not eat it on Erev Pesach, but that he actually ate it with them two nights before Passover because the trial never would have happened on a Sabbath and it says he died on the "Preparation Day." Every Sabbath has a preparation day – but it may be significant that there were special preparation days for the feast Sabbath days (like Passover where they needed to sweep clean the house to remove all leaven). So Jesus had supper with his disciples on the eve (which was Wednesday evening - keep reading) of the Preparation Day before Passover.

That same evening he was arrested, tried and the next morning brought before Pilate, beaten, made to carry the cross and then crucified. He was placed in the tomb later that afternoon or evening perhaps after Passover began (at Thursday sundown - the start of the special Sabbath) and then was in the tomb on Passover (a High Sabbath - Friday) then also on the Saturday Sabbath and then on the third day (Sunday) he rose from the dead. That gives you three days (Friday, Saturday and Sunday) and three nights (Thursday night, Friday night and Saturday night). It also allows Sunday to be “the third day” (Friday, Saturday and Sunday – even though he was crucified on a Thursday). Although Scripture does not specifically mention two back to back Sabbaths in that week, I know of no Scriptures that would explicitly eliminate that possibility.



The Jewish community would never move the celebration of Passover to the Saturday so as to only have one Sabbath. Also the women would not have come with the spices on a Sabbath (ie they would not have been allowed to do the work of carrying them and preparing the body - also touching a body and defiling themselves on a Sabbath). So Jesus must have risen on the Sunday morning - and the Scriptures also say it was the first day of the week (the Sabbath is the seventh - the day God rested) that he rose.

Do You Believe?

This is too funny not to post.

This mock ad was originally posted on Michael Liccione's blog Sacramentum Vitae It is a response to an interview in 2006 found in the New York Times with the very liberal and tolerant Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church, Katherine Jefferts Schori, where she explains why her church is small and shrinking compared with certain others. The bottom line of the ad offers free birth control products to Catholics and Mormons.

NYT: How many members of the Episcopal Church are there in this country?

"About 2.2 million. It used to be larger percentagewise, but Episcopalians tend to be better-educated and tend to reproduce at lower rates than some other denominations. Roman Catholics and Mormons both have theological reasons for producing lots of children."

NYT: Episcopalians aren’t interested in replenishing their ranks by having children?

"No. It’s probably the opposite. We encourage people to pay attention to the stewardship of the earth and not use more than their portion."


NYT: You’re actually Catholic by birth; your parents joined the Episcopal Church when you were 9. What led them to convert?

"It was before Vatican II had any influence in local parishes, and I think my parents were looking for a place where wrestling with questions was encouraged rather than discouraged. So, you see, it's a sign of their ignorance and heedlessness that Catholics and Mormons wax as Episcopalians wane. It's only to be expected that people who really know and care what life is about will refuse to replace themselves, and that people who neither know nor care will more than replace themselves. It's only natural that, in the end, the barbarians will have the field. And those who will have abandoned it should be proud of why they did."

Hmmm ... Barbarian evangelism through reproduction. These comments by Bishop Schori remind me of what a previous Episcopal Bishop, John Shelby Spong, has said about the church that I happened to quote in my thesis.

“The only churches that grow today [Evangelical, Catholic, etc] are those that do not, in fact, understand the issues and can therefore traffic in certainty … The churches that do attempt to interact with the emerging world [like the Episcopalian, United Church, etc] are … almost by definition, fuzzy, imprecise and relatively unappealing. They might claim to be honest but for the most part they have no real message.”

The certainty that I traffic in is the reality of the living Christ. I guess I do not really understand the issues [which is true enough], and am poorly educated [I continue to realize how little I know] and because I have children who still go to church now even though they are out of high school, I must a barbarian.

Movements

I’m reading Steve Addison’s Movements that Change the World. There’s lots of good stuff in here and I’m being reminded of some of the teaching I received as I was ministering on campus in my university days. I remember talking about a movement that would capture the hearts of students to follow Jesus and disciple others. I didn’t fully get it in those days and I’m not sure I fully get it now. It’s just that there are moments in the history of humanity that change everything that follows and creates a way of thinking that seemed impossible before that moment happened. Those moments are when movements are started. The following is a brief quote from his chapter on “Why Movements Matter.”

“Mission has a threefold reality. First there is a message: mission assumes a distinct view of truth concerning the nature of God and the nature of salvation. Second mission involves the communication of both truth and a new way of life. Third the purpose of mission is conversion. People accept the message, are integrated into the community of faith and begin to practice a new way of life – a new life committed to following Jesus and sharing the truth about him with others.

“As a missionary movement our message centers on Jesus Christ the son of God who was crucified for our sins and is the only source of salvation for a lost world. Second as a missionary movement we have an agenda for change. Jesus calls all who would follow him to a new life of obedience to his will. Third mission involves the conversion of individuals and their inclusion into the body of Christ, which is the church, the people of God. There is no mission without the church and there is no discipleship without the community of faith.

“If this is what it means to be the missionary people of God what do "missionaries" do? Eckhard Schnabel explains: “Missionaries establish contact with non-Christians, they proclaim good news of Jesus the Messiah and Savior (proclamation, preaching teaching, instruction), they lead people to faith in Jesus Christ (conversion, baptism), and integrate the new believers into the local community of the followers of Jesus (Lord's supper, transformation of social and moral behavior, charity).” We have the message of the cross. We have new life in Christ. We have a mandate to make disciples and multiply churches everywhere. We are a missionary people.”

Theology 101

I looking through some old posts on my hillschurch blog and came across this one and decided to repost it because it's actually pretty good. There are some good core Christian theological foundations to mull over here.

We have in the Old Testament revelation from God about ... His nature (who He is), man’s nature (who we are), how He wants us to live as a community (the nation Israel) and where we came from (creation). In the New Testament we have the revelation of Jesus Christ (the Word and I Am), salvation (our new nature), how to live individually (personal holiness) and the future (Revelation and the new heaven and earth).

Key principles from Genesis
1. God is
2. God created the material world by His Word
3. Man is made in God’s image
4. Sin is a reality (everything is fallen)

Values arising from those principles
1. Life is sacred (we are His image bearers)
2. The material world is good (He made it as our dwelling place - our holy of holies so to speak)
3. Words have value (because God created by speaking)
4. Anything that moves us away from God destroys us (idolatry is destructive)
5. Everything is redeemable (God is making all things new)

Each of these points can be elaborated on and I may actually do so sometime over the next while. But just to set up where I'm going with this I put down the following points.

The Purpose
We want to see Jesus lifted high. We want to see God’s Kingdom come and His will be done on earth as it is in heaven. We want to see our communities transformed. We want to see our nations be righteous, pass righteous laws and act with justice, compassion and righteousness.

The Problem
We see people get saved but they still act like the devil – or at least still acting like the culture we live in. The Church still acts like the world and still has the attitudes and characteristics of the world. That is mostly because we allow our media to disciple us. We have adopted the prevalent values of the culture instead of the counter-cultural values of the Kingdom. Although we preach salvation, we often still act selfishly, we still consume our resources on ourselves, our divorce rate is still as high as the world’s and we still live with bitterness and unforgiveness resulting in church fights and church splits. Brothers (and sisters) this ought not to be.

The Result
The world see the church with all its mistakes and problems and think they know what Jesus (and Christianity) is all about. They have not been taught about the transforming power of the Gospel throughout history. They have actually been misled because Christianity is being blamed for all the problems of the world (wars, environmental crisis, racism, hatred, intolerance, etc.). So the Church is being judged as irrelevant before it even has a chance to speak. Some people are even saying, “Christianity has had its chance but has failed. It is time to reject it and try something else.”

Our Response
The Church has become intimidated into silence and ineffectiveness by the strong media bias and the culture of humanism and political correctness. However we cannot simply respond to the immorality around us and to the accusations against us by merely getting politicians saved, by passing Christian laws or by saying “the Bible says it’s wrong.” We must be discipling individuals and discipling nations. We must be speaking truth in ways that communicate to our culture. We do that by understanding and communicating principles like the ones mentioned above. We also do that by living according to what the Spirit of God says, by the power of the Spirit and by being Jesus’ hands extended.

For example, we cannot simply say “sex before marriage is wrong.” We need to be showing that it is wrong because of how God set up the world. How would we do that? Explain that life is sacred. That means that we want to protect and sustain life. The sexual revolution has caused millions of unwanted pregnancies, abortions, rape, incest, sexually transmitted diseases (AIDS), divorce, single parents and the death or marginalization of millions of children. A recent study reported in the National Post reveals that children raised without fathers creates a remarkably higher percentage of sociopathic children than families with a father present. If we continue on this path we reveal that we do not honour life or consider it sacred. However, merely by keeping the seventh commandment (do not commit adultery) all those problems would be eliminated.

Not Living by the Law of Sin and Death

I was reading Romans 5-8 this past week and began to see some things a bit differently. Paul says that we have died to sin. The sin nature is what what all of us have. We are born with it. We were all formerly living as slaves to sin. It is the “natural” or unredeemed way of living. This way of living is called the Law of sin and death. Because we have this sin nature (this way of living) we are always trying to obey the Law or obey the rules. We are measuring ourselves against the set of rules we consider important to obey (which seem to change over time). Their foundations are in the Law – the Torah and more specifically the Ten Commandments. But this set of rules that we try to obey has a broader outward expression which is based on what is currently important in our society. It used to be in Christian circles a number of years ago that you weren’t allowed to drink or smoke or dance or go to movies. All of these things now seem to be ok – even in many Christian circles. Today’s taboos seem to focus more on tolerance and the environment.

But whatever they are, even if these rules are based on Scripture, they are still rules. They are still based on following a list and checking it twice. It leads to comparisons (i.e. I did more right than wrong, I’m trying to live a good life, I’m better than the guy down the street). This Law does not lead to life – the commandments bring condemnation. This way of comparison and counting leads to death. Those caught up in this way of living, instead of changing themselves, they try to change the law – calling evil good, and good evil. They try to escape condemnation by denying that the Law is good (which Paul also condemns). Living together used to be called “living in sin” but now the legal name is “common law.” The result is that lawlessness abounds in our society and no one is allowed to call wrongdoing a sin.

But that is the world’s way – denying the authority of the Law to get away from having to obey the Law. Yet the Law still shows us that we are sinful. Unfortunately Christians also try to get around the Law of sin and death by being good and obeying the Law – just as the Pharisees did. If we’re good at it we become self-righteous or holier than thou. If we’re bad at it we begin to think we are failures and rejects. It makes us think that God can’t forgive me again for that. It makes us think we can’t be saved if we do that. And so if we can’t be saved we become like the world denying that there is sin and dive into the deep end (like the Prodigal).

This whole way of living is the accounting method, the comparing method. It counts how well we did or how poorly we have failed. This way of living is called the Law of sin and death.

We however live by the Spirit. The Spirit sets us free from the law of sin and death – He made us righteous. The Spirit sets us free from the accounting method. He sets us free from comparisons. He sets us free from the fairness trap (i.e. that’s not fair!). He sets us free from having to judge others.

The Law is actually the world’s system given to draw boundaries, and define the nature of sin so that people know that wrong is actually wrong. It measures everything by fairness and blame. It must find a scapegoat when one has already been provided. It becomes the judge determining guilt and innocence. It rarely finds guilt in oneself (except when alone at night) because to find guilt in oneself means we are guilty and worth of death and punishment and condemnation.

But there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. Living by the Spirit means that we don’t count, and compare, and judge anymore. The only measurement is: “Are we in Christ Jesus?” So when sin happens we don’t deny the sin, or justify the sin, or shift blame for the sin, or even bemoan the sin. We turn to Jesus – not to ask forgiveness (because Jesus has already died for that sin and granted forgiveness for it) but to make sure that the relationship is right – to make things right – to be in right relationship with Him.

Not living this way (by the law of sin and death, by constantly accounting for our sin) is dangerous. Because who then will be the law keepers? Who will be the judges to say this is wrong and that is right? Who will be the moral arbitrators? God will.

And how about us? How do we then live?
“What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning, so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!”
We live as sons and daughters – we live as heirs “because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.” We get all the benefits of being children of the most high. We also live by the family reputation. What Jesus suffered, we suffer – Jesus died and we died to (were released from) sin/Law. Jesus rose – we are risen with him.

The reputation Jesus has, we also have.
But it is glorious.