‘On The Third Day’

Synopsis

The problem addressed stems from 1 Cor 15:4b. To which Scriptures is Paul referring when he says that the Christ ‘was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures’? Our focus is on the ‘third day’.

It is established that scholarship does not provide a satisfactory answer. We follow Karl Lehmann, who attempted to show that there was a theme in the ‘third day’ references within the OT. Lehmann’s suggested theme was the day of salvation. We nuance his theme, and suggest the ‘day of resurrection’. This theme is derived from the fourteen narrative and the one prophetic reference which speak of ‘the third day’. Within the narrative examples, the first element of the pattern is the recurrence of a climactic reversal on the third day. The second element is the prominence of reversals from death to life. The third, less prominent element is the pattern of reversals from life to death. The fourth, speculative element is the hint of a judicial nature to such deaths.

We consider separately the twenty-four references to ‘three days’ which do not also speak of ‘the third day’. The time margin ‘three days’ is seen to convey the idea of ‘sufficient time for certainty’.

From these findings, we argue that it is fitting that the Christ should be raised on the third day, since it is the day of resurrection in the OT. We also find that Christ’s ‘three-day’ period ‘in the heart of the earth’ represents sufficient time to be sure that he was dead, and underlines the amazing nature of his escape. Our major conclusion in 1 Cor 15:4b is that Paul has the Scriptures in general in mind, with a special focus on Hosea 6:2. Implications from this study are drawn for apologetics, for the book of Esther, and for our understanding of the relevant OT passages.
How might we explain Paul’s contention that Christ was ‘raised on the third day according to the Scriptures’? (1 Cor 15:4b) To which Scriptures might he be referring, regarding the ‘third day’?

The Nicene Creed says that ‘on the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures’. Millions of Christians affirm this about Jesus, and have done so for centuries. But perhaps we do it without much thought. What does it mean?

The reference of course is 1 Cor 15:4b. At this point in 1 Corinthians, Paul is coming to the end of his argument. He gives a summary of his gospel (1 Cor 15:3-11), which leads to a climactic argument concerning the resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-58). Our text comes in the midst of the gospel summary, and is of note for at least three reasons. First, it is important because of its location. It stands as part of Paul’s nine-verse summary of Christianity’s core – Christianity’s ‘things of first importance’[1] (1 Cor 15:3). Second, it is the earliest detailed statement about the resurrection of Jesus (mid 50s).[2] From these first two points then, our text is a most significant one. As such, the question we now raise deserves serious consideration.

The question at hand

For our third point is that this text is the subject of difficulty for scholars. The difficulty lies in finding the referent of ‘according to the Scriptures’. It is an obvious difficulty. How can Paul claim that Christ rose on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures?’ To which Scriptures is he referring? This is the big question which our project will seek to address, our focus being directed toward ‘the third day’.

It is a question which despite its difficulty has received relatively little scholarly attention. The commentaries on 1 Corinthians and Luke[3] are forced to say something, but have added little for many years. This dearth of material explains our sparse and somewhat dated bibliography. It would be an understandable dearth if a convincing consensus had been reached, but the reality is that there is no real consensus, and no suggestions which are without difficulty. Thus our present project seems overdue, especially since no one has attempted an exhaustive survey of the relevant OT data.

We will enter the discussion with the help of Gordon Fee, who surveys five approaches regarding ‘according to the Scriptures’ in 1 Cor 15:4b: (a) that it modifies ‘on the third day’, and not ‘he was raised’,[4] and it refers to some specific OT texts, most frequently Hosea 6:2;

(b) that it refers either to early Christian attempts to write passion and resurrection narratives or to Testimony Books containing OT citations that were interpreted prophetically as referring to the third day; (c) that it reflects a popular Jewish belief that corruption set in only after the third day, so that Jesus was raised on the third day to fulfil Ps. 16:9-11 (LXX) that his body would not suffer “corruption”; (d) that it modifies only the verb “he was raised” and does not include “on the third day”; and (e) that it has the same force here that it did in 1 Cor 15:3, asserting that the OT as a whole bears witness to the resurrection on the third day.[5]

Regarding (a), this position raises the question as to which OT Scriptures speak of the ‘third day’. This is the major question for the present project.

Regarding (b), Fee correctly writes that ‘even if such books existed, this scarcely removes the difficulty, since one must still find appropriate OT texts that might have been included.’[6] This position suggests that Paul means something other than the OT, when he speaks of the ‘Scriptures’ in 1 Cor 15:4b. But even if this is the case, Jesus himself sees his resurrection on the third day predicted in the Scriptures (Luke 24:46-47), by which he must mean the OT. So there is still the difficulty of which OT Scriptures attest to a third day resurrection.

Regarding (c), this view can explain why Jesus had to rise ‘at least by the third day’ – the argument here shows that if Jesus were still dead on the fourth day, he would have ‘seen decay’ (Ps 16:9). But this view can’t explain why Jesus had to rise precisely on the third day. For the first or the second days can’t be ruled out by reference to Psalm 16. But in the sayings of Jesus which almost certainly produced the 1 Cor 15:4b tradition[7] (e.g. Matt 16:21, 17:23, 20:19, Luke 9:22, 18:33, 24:7, 24:46), Jesus predicted that he would rise on the third day precisely. So while the argument behind this view helps us a lot, we need to say more.

Regarding (d), B. Metzger provides the alternative translation: ‘and that he was raised in accordance with Scriptures, on the third day’[8] But the view that ‘according to the Scriptures’ modifies the entire preceding phrase is more consistent than Metzger’s alternative. Verse 3 tells us o[ti Cristo.j avpe,qanen u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n kata. ta.j grafa.j, ‘that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures’. So in verse 3, ‘according to the Scriptures’ clearly modifies all that has gone before. The grammatical construction is identical in 4b o[ti evgh,gertai th/| h`me,ra| th/| tri,th| kata. ta.j grafa.j ‘that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures’. Thus consistency argues that ‘according to the Scriptures’ in 15:4b modifies ‘on the third day’, the phrase which immediately precedes it.

Further, while Metzger’s translation is grammatically possible,[9] it is not preferable. Paul chose to directly connect the two phrases ‘according to the Scriptures’ (kata. ta.j grafa.j) and ‘on the third day’ (th/| h`me,ra| th/| tri,th|), when he could have separated them. For example the Greek could have been ordered thus: ‘he was raised, according to the Scriptures, on the third day’, or thus: ‘according to the Scriptures, he was raised, on the third day’. Both of these would separate ‘on the third day’ from ‘according to the Scriptures’, and lean a little towards Metzger’s translation. But Paul chose neither of these possibilities. So if Paul is careful in his grammatical construction, then we should lean away from Metzger’s view.

What is more, if there were a teaching in the OT about a ‘third day’ resurrection, this would be very significant in defending the Christian claim. This would explain why Paul would consider a resurrection on the third day so important.[10] However, Metzger’s view appears to be that the day of Jesus’ resurrection is not of particular importance, even though Jesus himself prophesied that he would rise on the third day. In Metzger’s understanding, the emphasis is not so much on the day it occurs, but on the event itself. The date on which it happened contains no particular biblical or theological weight. But why then did Paul bother inserting the phrase ‘on the third day’ in this seminal section, if it is not important? It becomes a footnote which has strayed onto the contents page. Metzger’s translation cannot well answer the question as to why ‘on the third day’ appears at all.

Even if Metzger is accepted, this still begs the question of Paul’s inclusion of the phrase. If we can find a stream of OT tradition that lends weight to positions (a) or (e), we should set aside Metzger’s proposal as unnecessary.

Regarding (e), the position holds that ‘according to the Scriptures’ modifies ‘he rose from the dead’ and ‘on the third day’. As with position (a), ‘according to the Scriptures’ modifies ‘on the third day’. Our discussion of positions (b) through (d) should have made it clear that this is the preferable grammatical position. But this conclusion has historically presented exegetical problems. Broadly speaking, commentators have struggled to determine the Scriptures to which Paul is referring.

Of those who seek to find biblical support for the assertion that Christ was raised on the third day, many turn to Hosea 6:2 as the sole Scripture in mind: ‘After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will restore us, that we may live in his presence’.[11] Confronted with the reality of an apostate Israel, Hosea promises that one day Yahweh will renew his people. However the people at this point are Israel, and not the Christ. So in isolation from the completed OT canon, it is not clear how the Messiah might be in view as the one who will be raised on the third day. Nevertheless, C. Evans points to this verse as Paul’s sole source. He dismisses Jonah 1:17 on the basis that the three-day sojourn of Jonah is probably a late addition, and Matthew’s use of the story is ‘ad hoc’ (Matt 12:40).[12] C. H. Dodd is also dismissive of Jonah as possible background.[13] He attempts to identify the Christ with the people of God, thus linking the Christ to the prophecy of Hos 6:2.[14] Whether he is successful is beyond the scope of this project. But in brief, the question can be raised as to whether an identity can be forged that makes predictive prophecies about Israel by necessity also predictive prophecies about the Christ. That aside, the fact that neither Dodd nor Evans embrace Matthew 12:40 is grounds enough to look for a more complete answer.

Other scholars suggest 2 Kgs 20:5 (the promise of healing to Hezekiah, ‘on the third day you shall go up to the house of the Lord.’)[15] But this and the Jonah reference are less convincing than Hos 6:2, since both occur in historical narratives, rather than in predictive prophecy. As such, the human authors do not look to be predicting a future event at all, much less the resurrection of the Messiah. It is only when one considers the narratives in the context of the OT in which they sit that these verses gain greater persuasive power for our ends.

With this in mind, it is Karl Lehmann who has the most persuasive approach. He sees a pattern of divine action on the third day in such passages as Exod 19:11, 16 (cf. also Gen 22:4; 2 Kgs 20:5, 8; Esth 5:1; Hos 6:2), and argues that this pattern is the substance of Paul’s thinking in 1 Cor 15:4b.[16] His suggestion for the pattern follows certain rabbinic writers who treat Hosea 6:2 and other passages (e.g. Gen 22:4, 42:18, Esth 5:1, Jonah 2:1) as teaching that ‘The Holy One […] never leaves the righteous in distress more than three days’.[17] The third day is thus the day of salvation for the righteous in this view. This strand of rabbinic teaching has been traced by H. McArthur to at least the second century AD.[18] However, for its strengths, the theme suggested by Lehmann and the rabbinic writers has the problem that the examples cited are arbitrarily chosen, and ‘others can be found where the third day is the day of disaster, or where God’s intervention comes after a longer or shorter time.’[19] Under the weight of this critique, most scholars reject Lehmann’s position.

But where does that leave us? C. K. Barrett writes,

Hos vi. 2 is not very convincing; Jonah ii 1 f. is used in Matt. xii. 40, but no other New Testament writer shows a similar interest in Jonah and the whale; 2 Kgs xx. 5; Lev. xxiii. 11 are not more helpful […] The story of the resurrection of Jesus has no exact parallel or explicit forecast in the Old Testament, but early Christian writers found some passages (e.g. Ps. xvi. 10; Isa liv. 7) relevant. It is probably best here too to suppose that the resurrection experience and faith came first; then the conviction that the resurrection must have been foretold; then the documentation.[20]

That is, Barrett, like many NT scholars,[21] finds no convincing OT prediction or set of OT predictions which demonstrate an awareness of the Messiah’s resurrection on the third day.

All told, the scholarly world is in disarray on this subject.[22] H. Richards shows wisdom when he includes this question in a list of ‘Difficulties Remaining’.[23] What is more, because of the placement of Paul’s ‘third day’ claim within his ‘things of first importance’, this problem is of a high order in current Christian thought. Even if the reader is unpersuaded of our attempt to solve the problem (which will follow below), we hope that the need for more work to be done on this subject has been successfully conveyed.

Towards a Solution: Bolstering Lehmann’s Approach

Can we find a way through this mess? We believe that Lehmann’s approach can be harnessed to find a solution. First, we will defend the approach of looking for a ‘theme’ in the ‘third day’ narratives, as Lehmann did. Second, we will question whether Lehmann chose the right theme.

So first, to defend Lehmann’s method, consider a science experiment, repeated twenty times. If the conditions of the experiment are the same each time, and the result is the same, then given similar conditions, one can predict, with a degree of accuracy, what the result will be. In the same way, should an expression appear with considerable regularity in the OT, in circumstances which bear numerous common characteristics, after a while, the term itself carries those characteristics with it. The thesis of this paper is that this very thing is the case with ‘the third day’.

Second, we need to perform an exhaustive survey to assess and perhaps improve on Lehmann’s theme. We therefore intend to survey all the passages which mention ‘three days’ or ‘the third day’ in the OT. The data will be divided into two categories. First, those passages which involve the time margin ‘three days’. Second, those passages which involve the time margin ‘third day’.

Other themes suggested for ‘the third day’ or ‘three days’

There is no one consensus theme in the scholarship for an event on the ‘third day’ or for a period of ‘three days’. Rather, there are numerous views, often supported with no more than a pure assertion. They are found in both the NT and OT scholarship, and as such they rarely interact with each other. In fact, even those suggested in OT scholarship rarely interact by means of debate. We will survey six such views, before progressing to argue for a particular conclusion.

Considering the three day duration, J. B. Bauer drew conclusions from his 1958 study of the temporal implications of the words ‘three days’, as they are used throughout the OT. His conclusion was that the phrase ‘three days’ implies either a longer (Josh 2:16, 1 Sam 20:5, 19, Jonah 3:3, 2 Chron 20:25), or shorter (Josh 1:11, 2 Sam 20:4, 2 Kgs 20:8, Hos 6:2, Ezra 8:32, Neh 2:11) time span, depending on the particular circumstances in the context.[24]

G. M. Landes’ 1967 study ‘The “Three Days and Three Nights” Motif in Jonah 2:1’ emphasizes the journey motif behind the ‘three days’ theme. The Scriptures he presents are Exod 3:18, 5:3, 8:27, 15:22, Num 10:33, Gen 22:4, Josh 9:17, 1 Sam 30:1, Josh 2:16, 2 Sam 20:4, 2Ki 2:17, Ezra 10:7-9 and Jonah 3:3.[25] After identifying this motif, he discusses the Numerian myth, “The Descent of Inanna to the Nether World”, where the words ‘three days and three nights’ are intended to denote the time taken to travel the ‘chthonic depths to the underworld.’[26]

His introduction (presumably based on this evidence, although this is not stated), contends that ‘the expression “three days and three nights” reflects the conception that death is permanent only after a body has shown no signs of animation for a period of three days, the idea being that until that time had elapsed, the soul was conceived as still lingering near the individual, encouraging the hope of revival.’[27]

G. Wenham gives a third view, with the following comment on Gen 22:4: ‘Three days is a typical period of preparation for something important.’[28] He cites Gen 31:22, 40:20, 42:18, Exod 3:18 and Exod 19:11, 16 as evidence. V. Hamilton comments on the same verse, and associates the phrase ‘the third day’ with ‘some ominous event’[29]. He cites Gen 34:25, 40:20, 42:18 and Exod 19:11, 16 for his evidence. J. Durham says of the phrase ‘on the third day’, that it is ‘nearly always […] used with a sense of rising anticipation.’[30] He gives no evidence for this assertion. We saw above the suggestion of rabbinic writers that the third day represented the day of salvation for the righteous. Evidence for this view included Hosea 6:2, Gen 22:4, 42:18, Esth 5:1, and Jonah 2:1.

Our problem with these suggestions is that they have not considered all the OT data. Wenham and Hamilton confine themselves to Genesis and one passage in Exodus. For their purposes (commentaries on Genesis), this is understandable, although having included Exodus, they might have gone further. For our purposes, we want to consider the whole OT, so we need to consider additional data. Durham gives us a pure assertion. Landes’ position is argued in more depth than these first three, but he is still not broad enough in covering the biblical data. Landes’ link to the Sumerian myth is highly speculative. Therefore an exhaustive survey may provide a more persuasive synthesis of possible ‘third day’ and ‘three days’ themes.

Survey of OT References to ‘Third day’ and ‘Three days’

Our first survey will consider the OT references which involve the time margin ‘three days’. This will be followed by a survey of references which involve the time margin, ‘third day’. Some controls will then be introduced by surveying references to ‘second day’, ‘fourth day’, and finally ‘next day’.

There are 69 verses in the OT which speak of the third day, or of three days.[31] (Gen 1:13, 22:4, 30:36, 31:22, 34:25, 40:12, 13, 18, 19, 20, 42:17, 18; Exod 3:18, 5:3, 8:27, 10:22, 23, 15:22, 19:11, 15, 16; Lev 7:17, 18, 19:6, 7; Num 7:24, 10:33, 19:12, 19, 29:20, 31:19, 33:8; Josh 1:11, 2:16, 2:22, 3:2, 9:16, 17; Judg 14:14, 19:4, 20:30; 1Sam 9:20, 30:1, 30:12, 13; 2 Sam 1:2, 20:4, 24:13; 1 Kgs 3:18, 12:5, 12:12; 2 Kgs 2:17, 20:5, 8; 1 Chron 12:39, 21:12; 2 Chron 10:5, 12, 20:25; Ezra 8:15, 32, 10:8, 9; Neh 2:11; Esth 4:16, 5:1; Hos 6:2; Jonah 1:17, 3:3).

These verses may be divided into forty-three separate units or passages. Twenty-four of these involve the time margin, ‘three days’.

Passages which involve the time margin ‘three days’

1. In Gen 30:36, Laban puts a ~ymiêy" tv,l{åv. %r<D< ‘three-day journey’ between himself and Jacob after making the deal regarding speckled and spotted lambs (30:32).

2. Exod 3:18, 5:3, and 8:27 speak of the coming Israelite three-day journey into the desert, where the Israelites desire to ‘sacrifice to the LORD our God’ (3:18). All of these verses use the phrase %r<D< ~ymiêy" tv,l{åv. ‘three-day journey’ to describe the desired excursion.

3. In Exod 10:22 and 23, Moses brings the plague of darkness on Egypt for three days. The phrase used in both 10:22 and 10:23 is tv,l{ïv. ~ymi(y" ‘for three days’.

4. In Exod 15:22, Israel ‘traveled in the desert without finding water’ for three days. The phrase used is ~ymi²y"-tv,l{)v. ‘(for) three days’. It seems that their lives were in danger, so that they ‘grumbled against Moses, saying “what are we to drink?”’ (15:24) Moses cried out to Yahweh, and God answered by showing him a way to make the water sweet. Note also that Num 33:8 recalls this same story.

5. Lev 7:17 and 18 are a little different in that the genre is law rather than historical narrative. The law in question regards the fellowship offering. In 7:17, if any meat of the sacrifice is left yviêyliV.h; ‘~AYB; ‘on the third day’, it must be burned up. In 7:18, if any meat is eaten yviyliV.h; ~AYæB; ‘on the third day’, it will not be accepted. ‘The person who eats any of it will be responsible’ (7:18). In Lev 19:6-7, we find out that the punishment for this crime includes expulsion from the people.

6. In Num 10:33, the ark of Yahweh is searching out a resting place for the people by means of a ~ymi_y" tv,l{åv. %r<D<Þ ‘three-day journey’.

7. In Josh 1:11, the Israelites are preparing to cross the Jordan River into the promised land. The phrase used is ~ymiªy" tv,l{åv. dA[åB. ‘yet three days’. The preparatory aspect of the three days is seen in the instruction to ‘get’ the ‘supplies ready’ (1:11). The end of the three days is promised to be the time when the Israelites will ‘cross the Jordan here to go in and take possession of the land the LORD your God is giving you for your own’ (1:12).

8. In Josh 3:2, an event is recounted three days after the Israelites arrived at the banks of the Jordan. The phrase used is ~ymi_y" tv,l{åv. hceÞq.mi ‘at the end of three days’. The event is that ‘the officers went throughout the camp’, telling the people to follow the ark of the covenant when they see it. The people are told to ‘consecrate’ themselves, ‘for tomorrow the LORD will do amazing things among you’ (3:5).

9. In Josh 2:16 and 2:22, the two spies are trying to escape from Jericho. They were told by Rahab the prostitute to hide for three days, until their pursuers return, and only then to go on their way. In both 2:16 and 2:22, the phrase used is ~ymiªy" tv,l{åv. ‘(for) three days’. The spies heed Rahab’s advice, and they escape. The conclusion is that ‘they stayed […] until the pursuers had searched all along the road and returned without finding them’ (2:21).

10. In Josh 9:16, it is three days after the Israelites made a treaty with the Gibeonites, that the Israelites find out the Gibeonites are neighbours. The phrase used is ~ymiêy" tv,l{åv. ‘hceq.mi ‘after three days’.

11.

Major Project for the BD (Hons), Moore Theological College

‘The Third Day According to the Scriptures’