Is the phrase "three days and three nights" in Matthew 12 to be taken literally and understood as 72-hours? We look at sources inside and outside the Bible to get some clues.
Here, David's men were tracking some Amalekites when they happened upon a young Egyptian man in a field somewhere in the Levant. He fell ill while raiding for slaves with the Amalekites and was left behind to starve to death.
Also, notice the time of day in this scene. David found the Egyptian while pursuing the Amalekites, and then continued his pursuit. This scene was clearly not at the beginning or ending of a day. If we insist on three complete days and three complete nights, how does that work in a scene that takes place in the middle of the day? This must also be explained.
In the previous post, we looked at the phrase "three days" and other similar phrases. We learned that the Bible counts days differently than the modern Western mind, using inclusive reckoning. "Three days" means three consecutive days, whether they are complete or fractions of a day. The phrase "third day" could mean "day after tomorrow" or "day before yesterday". We saw how that fits into five different descriptions of the entombment of Jesus.
We needed that so we would be ready to look at description number six: “three days and three nights”.
We have important questions to answer. Must this phrase be interpreted literally as 72-hours? Does adding "and nights" force the difference? Does the Bible offer help on how we should understand it? Is there any evidence outside of the Bible that might shed some light? Is "three days and three nights" the one phrase out of six that we must use to interpret the length of Jesus' entombment?
We are going to let the Bible interpret the Bible.
SAMUEL
Let's spend some time on Samuel 30, because this is going to be arguably the most important selection of all. There are only three places in the entire Bible where “three days and three nights” appears. One is in Jonah 1: 17. Another is in Matthew 12: 40. The last is in Samuel 30: 12.
Here, David's men were tracking some Amalekites when they happened upon a young Egyptian man in a field somewhere in the Levant. He fell ill while raiding for slaves with the Amalekites and was left behind to starve to death.
(I SAM. 30: 11-13) 11 Then they found an Egyptian in the field, and brought him to David; and they gave him bread and he ate, and they let him drink water. 12 And they gave him a piece of a cake of figs and two clusters of raisins. So when he had eaten, his strength came back to him; for he had eaten no bread nor drunk water for three days and three nights. 13 Then David said to him, “To whom do you belong, and where are you from?” And he said, “I am a young man from Egypt, servant of an Amalekite; and my master left me behind, because three days ago I fell sick.
There is that phrase - three days and three nights. Notice it's not the Egyptian who says this, but the narrator of the story. This selection is quite special. It is the only instance of "three days and three nights" in the Bible that has another time reference nearby to give us a clue about how to understand it. The Egyptian had not eaten for “three days and three nights”, yet he had only fallen sick “three days ago”. There is the clue.
Using what we learned in the last post about how counting days works in the Bible, we know "three days ago" means day before yesterday.
We now have but three options:
1) The Egyptian had not eaten for upwards of a day before he fell ill.
2) The Egyptian misspoke and fell ill four days ago.
3) “Three days and three nights” is a figure of speech not meant to be understood as 72 literal, exact hours, and means the same thing as "three days".
#2 is the least reasonable. If we try to press for #1 and its literal interpretation, we must ask how anyone knew it was exactly 72 hours (not 71.5 or 73) since the last time the Egyptian ate? In that time period, how did a slave on a raid in the Levant, so unimportant that he was left for dead, have the means to know exactly what hour it was?
What luck! They interrogated him exactly 72 hours to the minute after he last put food in his mouth.
What luck! They interrogated him exactly 72 hours to the minute after he last put food in his mouth.
Also, notice the time of day in this scene. David found the Egyptian while pursuing the Amalekites, and then continued his pursuit. This scene was clearly not at the beginning or ending of a day. If we insist on three complete days and three complete nights, how does that work in a scene that takes place in the middle of the day? This must also be explained.
I prefer #3. It simply makes more sense.
The text gives us nothing to support an exact 72-hour chronology. It does give us reasons to discount this, however, by also using "three days." The most reasonable explanation is that it was never meant to be taken literally.
JONAH
We have two more instances of this phrase to review. Matthew refers to Jonah. Many claim that Matthew 12 is definitely 72-hours because Jonah is definitely 72-hours. But is it?
I am not going to explore Jonah deeply because I want you to do that yourself. Go ahead. Should you go to verify that claim, you will come away from Jonah unable to prove anything about the exact timing. (I know because I tried for days.) All you will see is the phrase "three days and three nights" with no other time markers to help demonstrate whether it is literal or figurative. Isn't that odd now?
If Jonah does not give any way to prove 72-hours, then Matthew cannot rely on Jonah as proof of 72-hours. Matthew refers to Jonah, no doubt, but not for an exact timing.
MATTHEW AND LUKE
Matthew is one of the synoptic Gospels. It has a parallel in Luke.
(LUK. 11: 29-30) 29 And while the crowds were thickly gathered together, He began to say, “This is an evil generation. It seeks a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah the prophet. 30 For as Jonah became a sign to the Ninevites, so also the Son of Man will be to this generation."
What is missing here? Timing. There is no mention of timing at all. How can it be that the entire point about the sign of Jonah is its chronological precision when Luke doesn't mention time?
Answer: it isn't. A literal 72-hours is not taken from the Gospels, it's read into the Gospels.
Add in that example from Samuel and we see none of the three mentions are meant to be taken literally.
One might say, "But Jesus referred to the example of Jonah, not David." So, what then, this reference of the exact same phrase from Samuel doesn't count? Are we to understand that this one phrase means two completely different things depending on where it is? Should we not expect it to always mean the same thing, if indeed it is so exact a phrase? If it doesn't mean the same thing in each place then the phrase is nigh useless. Who can say what it means?
With Matthew relying on Jonah, and Jonah saying nothing about timing, we must rely on Samuel, and Samuel is clearly not literal. Therefore there is no legitimacy to the claim that the phrase "three days and three nights" must be taken literally.
ESTHER
Esther does not say "three days and three nights" but it does say something quite similar.
(EST. 4: 15-16) 15 Then Esther told them to reply to Mordecai: 16 “Go, gather all the Jews who are present in Shushan, and fast for me; neither eat nor drink for three days, night or day. My maids and I will fast likewise. And so I will go to the king, which is against the law; and if I perish, I perish!”(EST. 5: 1) Now it happened on the third day that Esther put on her royal robes and stood in the inner court of the king’s palace, across from the king’s house, while the king sat on his royal throne in the royal house, facing the entrance of the house.
Here is another three days and three nights, only it’s worded “three days, night or day”. Esther told Mordecai to fast for three days and nights before she went in to see King Xerxes, but "on the third day" she went in. This means the conversation happened on day 1, therefore the first day was partial, and she went in on the third day, so the third day was also partial. There was no third night.
Once again, not to be understood as 72-hours.
How can the ancient Israelites get away with this? Because that's simply how they counted time. That's inclusive reckoning. Onah! They are using idiomatic expressions. They don't have to be literal. You might just as well obsess over how there can be an apple in your eye, skin on your teeth, or a heart in the earth.
A DISSENT
Now, let's consider those who disagree with my conclusions. Many sources inside and outside of Armstrongism assert, “Adding ‘nights’ makes the phrase strictly literal.”
Oh? Based on what evidence?
Outside the Bible, this phrase is surprisingly more difficult to find than I anticipated. I used AI to locate a few examples:
- Inanna/Ishtar’s Descent to the Netherworld (Sumerian): After Inanna is killed and hung as a corpse in the underworld, "after three days and three nights had passed," her minister Ninshubur carries out the instructions Inanna had given her before descending into the netherworld.
- The Contendings of Horus and Set (Egyptian): Horus and Set fight, transform into two bears (or hippopotamuses in variants), and “pass three days and three nights” in that form.
- Setna Khamwas and Naneferkaptah (Demotic Egyptian): Setna and the priests of Isis “spend three days and three nights searching in all the tombs on the desert of Coptos,” turning over stelae in search of a hidden tomb.
- Setna Khamwas and Si-Osire (Demotic Egyptian): A Nubian magician threatens to cast sorcery so the people of Egypt “spend three days and three nights seeing no light, only darkness.”
- Tale of the Shipwrecked Sailor (Middle Kingdom Egyptian): A sailor is stranded on an island and lies helplessly for three days (some renderings add “and nights”) before encountering a divine serpent.
- Rare mentions in magical papyri: Rituals or preparations that take “three days and three nights.”
That is a very short list. None of these are meant to be chronologically precise.
In each case, “three days and three nights” is a figure of speech indicating a significant but inexact period of time. This means that in every instance outside the Bible, the phrase is not meant to be taken as a literal 72 hours.
In each case, “three days and three nights” is a figure of speech indicating a significant but inexact period of time. This means that in every instance outside the Bible, the phrase is not meant to be taken as a literal 72 hours.
Inside the Bible, the phrase “three days and three nights” appears in three verses. Only Samuel includes any additional clue nearby. Esther's phrase, although not exactly the same, has an additional time clue. Neither Samuel nor Esther are 72-hours. That leaves two verses, but they have no additional time indicator close by. They are ambiguous.
But if you think about it, Matthew does have supporting evidence, we just have to hunt for it.
As we saw in the last post, there are twenty one verses which describe the length of Jesus' entombment. Six different phrases are used. All describe one event that happened in one way. Luke does not mention time at all. Now, add the evidence of Cleopas' words on the road to Emmaus, where he said Sunday was three days since the trial and crucifixion. Counting inclusively as the Bible does - Friday was three days before Sunday. There is not enough time between Friday and Sunday for "three days and three nights" to be literal. By using these other clues, we can be confident "three days and three nights" in Matthew is not a literally 72 hours.
Matthew and Samuel and Esther are not literal. That leaves us with Jonah, which has no additional time indicator close by.
But if you think about it, Matthew ties to Jonah, which means Jonah ties to Matthew. What we see in Matthew should also apply to Jonah. Either it does, and the time is not meant to be taken literally, or it doesn't, and Jonah is completely ambiguous. Take your pick. In neither case does it support a literal interpretation.
This means every instance in the Bible comes with contextual clues, and in every case the phrase is not meant to be taken as a literal 72 hours.
Someone will say, "But it's the natural reading of the phrase." To our modern minds, perhaps it is. But that is entirely irrelevant. What matters is what it meant to the ancient mind. Proper Bible study is not getting the Bible to think like us, but getting us to think like it.
Not a single biblical example gives us a reason to treat the phrase as exactly 72 hours.
Not a single extra-biblical example gives us a reason to treat the phrase as exactly 72 hours.
So, the claim that adding “nights” makes the phrase strictly literal is based on what, exactly? Opinions and guesses. My disagreement is based on what, exactly? All the evidence I could find.
ONE TRUE PHRASE
As I've said multiple times, there are five other phrases used to describe the length of Jesus' entombment. Why is it that we must choose "three days and three nights" over the others?
I'll tell you why: personal preference.
I'll tell you why: personal preference.
The entire Wednesday crucifixion scenario hinges on literality of "three days and three nights." It needs it. All the beautiful charts like the one below absolutely require it.
But if that phrase is not literal, then all we have left is "third day" and inclusive reckoning. And as we've seen, that only works in a Friday scenario. Wednesday is cleanly eliminated.
Is the phrase literal? As we saw, no. It is not. This insistence is based on a misunderstanding of Hebrew.
Ergo, we have no reason in or out of the Bible to demand "three days and three nights" is the one true phrase that a proper understanding of Jesus' entombment hinges upon. We have no reason to insist inclusive reckoning is a creation of those wicked Pharisees. We have no reason to believe the Catholics swapped the proper timeline with another. We have no reason to dismiss five other phrases from twenty other verses, because they all mean the same thing. And we have no support for the Wednesday crucifixion timeline.
Ergo, we have no reason in or out of the Bible to demand "three days and three nights" is the one true phrase that a proper understanding of Jesus' entombment hinges upon. We have no reason to insist inclusive reckoning is a creation of those wicked Pharisees. We have no reason to believe the Catholics swapped the proper timeline with another. We have no reason to dismiss five other phrases from twenty other verses, because they all mean the same thing. And we have no support for the Wednesday crucifixion timeline.
I cannot agree that, "It has to be literal against all odds because I really want it to be," is a convincing argument.
Whether you hear it from a Minister, a publication, a video, social media, a meme, or otherwise - whether you hear it one time or a thousand times - if you have 700 people on social media all saying "Yeah yeah, that chart makes sense to me," - the claim has no independent support, therefore it must be rejected.
CONCLUSION
Today, we had important questions to answer.
- Is a plain reading the best way to understand this phrase? If plain means literal, then no.
- Does any source treat "three days and three nights" literally? No.
- Does adding "nights" force it to be literal? No.
- Do we, then, have compelling reason to continue insisting the phrase is literal? No.
- Can we find evidence in the Bible for how best to understand "three days and three nights"? Yes.
All four passages that we explored today point in the same direction: none of them were meant to be taken as a literal 72 hours. Extra-biblical references only confirm it.
"Three days and three nights" is an idiomatic expression, not a precise chronological statement. It is paired with "three days", which we learned in the last post has clear meaning. These phrases describe one thing, so they must be speaking the same thing. Six phrases to describe Jesus' entombment and they all tell the same story. What story? Not a Wednesday crucifixion.
Trying to force "three days and three nights" to be a literal 72 hours just to support a Wednesday crucifixion scenario only ignores what the overwhelming weight of evidence is telling us.
Trying to force "three days and three nights" to be a literal 72 hours just to support a Wednesday crucifixion scenario only ignores what the overwhelming weight of evidence is telling us.
The Wednesday crucifixion timeline does not work.
For more, read our post "Three Days and Three Nights" and "Two Sabbaths of Matthew 28".
************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )
Acts 17:11
************
