I was recently reading a book from around 1908 that was supposed to clear up some of the more obvious contradictions in the Bible. It had some intersting ideas (a pre-adamic race) and some loopy ones (that wine used in the New Testement was simple grape juice), but one that caught my attention was in regards to Good Friday.
You know the whole three days/three nights thing right? Obviously, can’t be reconciled between Friday evening and Sunday morning… that’s less than 48 hours.
If I remember correctly, he wrote that the reason people keep Good Friday is because of a passage in Mark about the death of Jesus:
Day before the Sabbath = Friday. Simple enough, right?
So this was a high Sabbath, a holy day. Probably refers to this:
Since it was a high day, it could fall on any day of the week. So, if you wanted, you could count back 72 hours from the time he rose and come up with the idea that he died on a Wednesday.
This made some sense to me.
I have read in recent years that scholars have said that “three days” or “three days/three nights” in the Hebrew usage didn’t necessarily mean 72 hours, but instead could have covered the time between Good Friday and Sunday morning. To me, however, this seems like an after-the-fact explanation (or whatever mistake it’s known as).
To use the Gospel that Skott used, Mark 16:9 says:
There are similar references to the first day of the week in Matthew and John, but I did not note a reference to “three days and three nights” in any of them. Skott, if you have a reference to this, please let me know. Thanks!
Scott, I read your post four times and I’m still confused. I have no idea what the book is trying to say. Jesus clearly rose from the dead on the first day of the week, Sunday. On this the Bible is unequivocably clear. From this, we can deduce when he was executed, which was clearly a Friday:
Lk. 23:54-24:1
It was Preparation Day, and the Sabbath was about to begin. The women who had come with Jesus from Galilee followed Joseph and saw the tomb and how his body was laid in it. Then they went home and prepared spices and perfumes. But they rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment. On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb.
This seems clear as day to me: Jesus was executed on Friday, right before the Sabbath was about to begin. The women wait a day, and then go the tomb on Sunday. How does anyone get Wednesday out of this?
This book’s argument seems to rest on the idea that “Sabbath” meant any day of rest, not just the normal, every-Saturday Sabbath. But Luke clearly dispels this. He mentions that it was Preparation Day, and the Sabbath was about to begin. Furthermore, the women rested on the Sabbath in accordance with the commandment, which only covers the Saturday Sabbath.
As far as reconciling the three days/three nights thing with the time frame, that’s a job for Biblical apologists.
My apologies if my initial post was confusing. Let me see if I can deal with the questions on a point by point basis :}
The three days/three nights did indeed come from Matthew as emarkp mentioned:
The fact that Jesus did rise from the dead on the first day of the week is not in question. Remember that the Hebrew day begins at sundown… so what we consider Saturday night would actually be considered part of Sunday, and certainly “early” on the first day of the week
Was he unequivocably instead raised Sunday morning at sunrise? Personally, I have my doubts, since when the stone was rolled away, the body of Jesus wasn’t in there.
It was the preperation day and the Sabbath was about to begin, as Opus1 pointed out; however, there’s more than one Sabbath… each of the holy days (Passover, Pentecost, etc.) are considered Sabbaths. As John mentioned, it was a high Sabbath that they were preparing for (as I quoted above).
It is true that the high Sabbath did fall on a Saturday around the time (33 AD), but it also fell on a Thursday around the same time (30 AD).
The guy gets Wednesday out of this by figuring if the women only waited a day, then it couldn’t have been the three days/three nights spoken of by Jesus and that the tradition is wrong.
The theory seems viable to me. But that’s just me… does that make me a Biblical apologist?