The OP specifically asked that no one give smart-alecky answers. He (she?) was look for a factual answer.
What? Of course there is. That is a ridiculous statement.
Life-long Lutheran here. I’m certainly no Biblical scholar, but as far as I know, the prophecy stated that the Messiah would rise again after three says, and I think at the Last Supper Jesus himself said he would rise again after three days. As mentioned before, three is a significant number in the Bible. That’s about as good an answer as I can give.
From this site: Mark 8: 29 And he asked them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter answered him, “You are the Christ.”
30 And he charged them to tell no one about him.
31 And he began to teach them that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.
32 And he said this plainly. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him.
IIRC, Mithras also arose after three days underground in the cult of Mithraism.
After I did my book on Medusa, I noted the thgree-day period of the variable star Algol (Beta Persei), which has minima spaced about 70 hours apart. The star remains second magnitude for most of the 70 hours, dimming out over about a six-hour period, then re-appared over anoith six hour period as the darker companion eclipses the brighter one. I’ve wondered if this might have contributed to the frequent three-day burials in the world’s stories. (Not only did Jonah spend three days in the belly of the “great fish”, so did Hercules spend three days in the belly of the sea moinster Ketos.)
It could also have something to do with the timing of events. According to tradition, Christ was crucified on a Friday, and his preparation and burial were hurried so that he could be entombed before sunset, the start of the Sabbath.
Assuming that for whatever reason, he didn’t want to come back during the Sabbath (or his reservations required a Saturday night stay - dammit, I was going to try to get through this without a smart-aleck comment, my apologies), then after sunset on Saturday would’ve been the first available opportunity.
biker, I took umbrage with what was clearly a cheap shot. You said
What I was responding to was what **HubZilla **said here
So, let’s be reeeeally clear about it. I thought he was out of line, I said something. Having the “balls” or not is irrelevant. I asked for someone to provide me with some factual information on why the IDEA of Three Days holds water. A lot of Dopers have, and I thank them for it.
Throwing out the concept of Jihad in this thread is useless. You want to debate religious war? Dandy. Go and start your own thread in the Pit, or in Great Debates.
The reasons why certain numbers have gained significance is not a matter of a Great Debate, it’s pure scholarly fact.
It is those facts I sought, and those facts I am now reading, and learning from. ** Why A Duck, CalMeacham, BibliCat, AbbySthrnAccent, Chrome Spot** and others have all offered very thoughtful answers.
I’m sorry that you find the process irritating. People go to the BBQ Pit to pick fights. I know, I’ve had some dandy ones there. I’d invite you to vent in the proper Forum, and leave this one to the more scholarly queries at hand.
It’s not that the OP didn’t LIKE the answers; it’s that they didn’t answer the question. If I go back to my Santa Claus question, and your answer is “plum pudding,” it’s not merely a matter of my not liking your answer, it’s that your answer does not address the topic. Your statement that there is no such thing as a legitimate question on religion was, is, and shall continue to be preposterous.
Your claim about my debating skills was a hoot too. Since the thread started, you have committed fallacy after fallacy. Let’s see…you attacked religion as a diversionary tactic, bringing your own beliefs into a factual question. Hmm…then you attacked my debating skills rather than address the topic. Yep, you’re right on the ball.
Oh, I have a relgious question. Where does the Pope live? Hold it a second; I believe that does have a factual answer, doesn’t it? And saying “Neptune” wouldn’t merely not be an answer I didn’t “like.” It would, in fact, be an irrelevant one. Can you follow my analogy?
This is the explanation I’ve heard, too. There is also the emphasis on “three days dead” in the story of Lazarus. So “3 days” means “really really dead”.
[…takes a deep breath and resists inserting Monty Python ripoff here…]
biker,
You have yet to contribute anything constructive towards this thread, instead choosing to vent your spleen while ignoring everything that has been posted. If you decide to actually contribute something, feel free; otherwise, take to the Pit.
RR
This is not Great Debates and it’s not the Pit. Please refrain from insults against other posters and religious debates in this forum. If you can’t respond appropriately to the OP’s question, please don’t respond in this thread at all. Thank you. - Jill
See also: Jesus Christ raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-45). In this account Lazarus had been dead four days before being restored to health. This is typically not listed as resurrection which Jesus would later undergo but rather as an example of Christ’s power over death. This is usually used as a strong proof of the power of Jesus since no one else could have pulled this off.
biker nice chip, keep it up and you will attain BANNED status. Too bad, I like your username.
He’s not only merely dead, he’s really quite sincerely dead.
Everything I’ve ever come across related to this question had to do with the fear of premature burial that early civilizations had. As has been posted, if you were declared dead and stayed dead for a set number of days you could safely assume to really be dead. I don’t know why the general populace would assume that you may faking it.
Isn’t three days the length of time that a person has to be dead before they can come back as a zombie? Given the connection between voodoo and the Catholic church I can see where the connection could be made.
Just for the record, exactly where in the Old Testament or elsewhere is any or all of the birth/life/death/resurrection of the Saviour prohesized? It seems that a lot of the readings in (Roman Catholic, anyhow) church services refer to fulfillment or prohecy, but I don’t recall ever hearing about the prophecies themselves.
bobk2, the site I mentioned, Bible Gateway is a good place for looking up specific passages in various books of the Bible, either using key words or by known passages, and also using your choice of Bible versions, but I can’t find anything like what you are looking for. Maybe someone more Bible-literate than me will have more luck.
I’m at work and those are the only old testament ones I can think of without checking. I didn’t bother with the ones from the Book of Mormon, but there are prophecies of his birth there too. If you’re interested feel free to email me rather than continue to hijack Toon’s thread. (Although I’m sure he won’t get mad at me. )
Apart from the fact that it was just about 36 hours from Friday sunset to Sunday sunrise, which makes three days quite a stretch…
Does it say he was there until Sunday morning? When the women go to the tomb on Sunday morning, the angel doesn’t say, “Hey! You just missed him! He was here like, 2 minutes ago!” He just says that Christ is risen.
I recall that early Arthurian legend is totally obsessed with the number three as well. In fact, it’s kind of annoying to read Geoffrey of Monmouth once you’re onto the trick, sort of like our buddy Cervaise and his “goddamn curtain wipe” in Battlefield Earth. Here, do a ctrl+f for “three” on this page and you’ll see what I mean.
This page points out that three points creates the first geometric figure which encloses space, which is somehow divine. Things sorta go into outer space from there, but in another spot it mentions that in Genesis, the Big Guy raised the earth out of the seas on the third day, a sort of symbolic resurrection. Hey, I’m just pointing it out.
I don’t have anything to back this up, but I think the divinity of the number three may have something to do with dice, which have been used for gambling pretty much as far back as you can go. Three shows up in the possible two-dice combinations from four to nine, in the gentle, benevolent part of the probability curve. But if you’re regularly betting on an ace chasing a deuce, well, you’d better be prepared to face God’s vengeance.
)