On Which Day of the Week Did Christ Die?

The “Parts of Days” Theory

The traditionally accepted day of Jesus’ crucifixion is Good Friday. But did Jesus really die on Friday? Consider Matthew 12:40. Many commentaries say that in the Jewish way of reckoning time, a part of a day could be included as one in whole numbers of days. This is reasonable, but if Jesus were crucified and buried during the day on Friday, then even if one would counts parts as whole, there would only be two nights in between the time of the crucifixion and Sunday morning, the traditional time at which it is believed that the resurrection occurred. This would clearly contradict Matthew 12:40.

In contrast, the “whole days and whole nights” theory would require that Jesus would be in the heart of the earth 3 full days and 3 full nights.

There are many other places in the Bible where the phrase “(number) days and (number) nights” is used, but in none of them is there any conclusive proof that I can see of either theory being right. In most of them the number is forty. There is one passage other than the one in Jonah where the number is three. This is I Samuel 30:12. In Job there is one where the number is seven.

Christ Really was Resurrected on Sunday Morning

Suppose that Jesus was resurrected on Monday or Tuesday. First, it is clear that the women arrived at the tomb on the first day of the week (Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1,2, Luke 24:1, John 20:1). It is also clear from these accounts that at this point Jesus had already been resurrected. It clearly could not have been that women came to the tomb the following Sunday after a Monday or Tuesday resurrection, because that day was the third day since the crucifixion (Luke 24:13, 21).

Day Ordinals

One interpretation of ordinal time periods is that the first begins as the event occurred. So, in this case, everything that happened within 24 hours after the crucifixion would be on the first day, from 24 to 48 hours the second day, and from 48 to 72 hours the third day. Another interpretation is that everything that happened on the same day as an event happened on the first day, everything that happened on the next day would be considered a second day event, and so on. The Jewish day begins when day becomes night. If Jesus was crucified and buried during the day on Friday, this would fit with Luke 24:46 and the second interpretation, but there is still the problem with Matthew 12:40. Both interpretations agree with the way that this terminology is used in Genesis 1. Other third day references include Hosea 6:2, Matthew 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; Luke 9:22; 24:7.

Esther 4:16 uses the expression “for three days, night or day” to describe a period of fasting, which according to 5:1 and following apparently ended on the third day or shortly thereafter. This passage does not shed much light on the subject, because the phrase “three days and three nights” is much stronger. That is, it is not necessary that there be any more than 2 full nights, not even an additional fraction of night is necessary, unless a day means a whole cycle of light and dark. In that case, in order for the 4:16 expression to strictly agree with either third day ordinal expression, the fast had to have ended at a precise instant in time, exactly 72 hours later and at exactly sundown. However, the fast could have ended shortly after the end of the third day.

Other 3 Day Expressions

Mark 8:31 uses the expression “after 3 days”. Mk 10:34 says, in modern versions, “3 days later”. John 2:19 says, “I will destroy this temple and rebuild it in three days.” We will return to these expressions later.

Why Friday?

The Gospels clearly indicate that when Jesus was buried, it was Preparation Day, or the day before the Sabbath (Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54, John 19:42). The Sabbath began at sunset Friday evening, of course.

Wednesday and Thursday Dates--The “Special Sabbath” Theory

What if the Sabbath spoken of in the above passages was not the usual Sabbath, but a special Sabbath? (Deuteronomy 16:8, John 19:31) Since the Passover sacrifice and the first of the two special Sabbaths (Exodus 12:16) occur on the first of the seven days of the feast, this means that Jesus and his apostles ate the Passover meal a day or two early, which is confirmed by John 18:28. (The second special Sabbath occurs on the seventh day of the feast.) For the Wednesday crucifixion date, the “whole days and whole nights” theory is employed. In this case, the resurrection would have to have occurred strictly before the Sunday sunrise, or else it there would be four full nights. This theory, however, clearly contradicts Luke 24:21. By the first day ordinal interpretation, the resurrection would have happened on the fourth day, and by the second interpretation it would have been on the fifth day! By no stretch of the imagination could it have been on the third day. Also, if this were true, then why did the women wait until Sunday to go the tomb, when they could have gone on Friday? The Thursday date would agree with both the “parts of days” theory and the first interpretation of ordinal days. But do Jews have two Sabbaths in a row, or is there an exception made when the first day of the feast falls on a Friday? (This would be the preparation day for the regular Sabbath.) I’m not sure, but there is an explanation that is more likely than Thursday crucifixion “Special Sabbath” theory, one which I prefer.

The Darkening of the Sun

Look at Matthew 27:45, Mark 15:33, 34, Luke 23:44, 45. Note the different wordings of Luke 23:45 in the different versions. The NIV version says that the “sun stopped shining.” Other versions say that the sun was obscured or darkened. The Greek word that is used here is e`klei‘pw. Strong’s concordance says that it means to leave out, leave off, or by implication, to cease. It comes from two words meaning “to leave” and “out of”. The word is used in another passage that clearly means to run out of (money). This meaning applied to the sun implies that the entire sun did not necessarily leave at once, but it is possible that it left portions at a time until it was darkened.

Note that the beginning of the period of darkness began at about the sixth hour and ended at about the ninth hour, which was when Jesus’ death occurred. The commentaries say that this 3 hour period was from noon to 3 P.M. (compare Amos 8:9). Genesis 1 defines a day as being “an evening and a morning”, or a cycle of light and darkness. A whole day and a whole night does not necessarily have to be 24 hours. Consider Joshua’s long day (Joshua 10:1-15) and Hezekiah’s sign (2 Kings 20:9-11). The period of darkness which occurred from the sixth hour to the ninth hour could constitute an extra night (in the “parts of days” theory) and the following period of daylight before sundown could constitute an extra day. Note that the darkness “came over the whole earth (or land)”. This was not a local event. Looking at the second verse of Psalm 22, a psalm noted for its many prophecies about the crucifixion, note that it mentions day first, then (the extra) night, in the same order as happened during the crucifixion. A Friday date for the moment of death would now work with the “parts of days” theory and either of the two interpretations of ordinal days, assuming that He died before the period of darkness was over and rose with the rising of the sun on Sunday. (In the first interpretation, the first day would only be about 6 hours instead of 24.)

The Eight-Day Week Theory

One objection to this is that if the crucifixion began on Friday, and if the period of darkness constitutes an extra night, then wouldn’t this be the beginning of the real Sabbath, instead of what I’m calling the next day? The Scriptures make it clear that it was Preparation Day and that the Sabbath was beginning at sundown. It wasn’t just that the Jews thought that the Sabbath was about to begin (recall the above Scriptures under the paragraph “Why Friday?”). An explanation for this would be that the crucifixion began on Thursday, which became Friday with the noon darkness, and then the Sabbath began with the later sunset. But if this were the case, it is unlikely that the Jews would think to count an extra day in this way and feel the need to bury the body before sunset. Similarly, it is unlikely that the two on the road to Emmaus would have counted the extra day in their conversation in Luke 24:21, but it still would be reasonable for them to have used the term “third day” if second interpretation of day ordinals is correct.

I have a different explanation which I prefer, and that is that the extra day did not count as an extra day of the week. This idea depends on several things, some of which I’m not sure of. First is that the NIV or KJV translations of Luke 23:45 are correct and not the NASV. That is, the Sun was darkened or actually stopped shinning--it was not a sunset. Second is that while a new day always begins when light becomes darkness, the Sabbath can only begin at sunset. There is no verse that that I know of that specifically says this, at least not of a regular Sabbath, but consider how well Deuteronomy 16:6 fits in with all of this (note also the different renderings of this verse). This would mean that for this week, and this week only, there was extra day of the week, making an eight day week. So, if this is all true, the answer to the original question would be that it is a day that has no name. Amos 8:9 could be explained by saying that though the Sun was “brought down”, it did not actually set, but the real reason for the darkness was either that the Sun actually stopped shinning or that it was obstructed by something else besides the horizon. But it seems unlikely that an obstruction other than the horizon itself would constitute an extra day, since this happens all the time with clouds and eclipses and so forth. Again, this was definitely not just a local event. So this idea is probably incompatible with the NASV rendering of Luke 23:45. It could be that Amos 8:9 isn’t even talking about the darkness at the crucifixion at all, but rather some future apocalyptic event.

Other possible explanations involving an extra day could work in conjunction with the “Special Sabbath” theory.

The Heart of the Earth

Another objection to extra day theories is that Jesus’ burial did not happen until after the period of darkness was over, so therefore, the “parts of days” theory fails. But Jesus’ tomb was hardly “in heart of the earth” as Matthew 12:40 says. When taken literally, the heart of the earth clearly means the solid inner core of the earth, which is believed to be composed of nickel and iron. So it is obvious that Jesus was speaking of His Spirit, and not His physical body when He was talking about being “in the heart of the earth” (compare Ephesians 4:9, Romans 10:7, I Peter 3:19). I do not believe that there are any verses in the Bible that count days from Christ’s burial.

The “After Three Days” Objection

The expression “after three days” used in Mark 8:31 and “three days later” in Mark 10:34 would seem to indicate that at least three full daytime periods occurred between the death and resurrection. Even if this were true, this can be explained by saying that these passages are referring to the time of the beginning of Christ’s crucifixion because these refer to when he was killed, not when he died. When Jesus was put on the cross, nothing else had to be done to Him physically in order for Him to have died. In other words, the act of killing Him had already taken place. The third day passages also count from the time that He was killed or crucified or suffered. Applying this interpretation of killing to these passages does not affect the “Eight-Day Week” theory. John 2:19 uses the phrase “in three days” which implies that it would be less than or equal to 3 days. I believe that Matthew 12:40 is the only verse in the Bible that definitively counts days from the moment of death with a lower limit.

Further Significance of the Sun and its Darkening

From beginning to end, the Bible is so rich with symbols referring to Jesus, and one of the most important is that of the Sun. Consider how the Messiah is refereed to as being “the Sun of Righteousness” in Malachi 4:2. It is so appropriate that the Sun would be brought down and/or darkened at His death. More importantly, the Sun rose when the Son rose! There are so many passages in the OT which make symbolic reference to the resurrection in this way (see why Hosea 6:3 follows Hosea 6:2, for example).

Consider also the context of Matthew 12:40. The Pharisees and the teachers of the law were looking for sign. Luke 11 records the same occasion, and get this, verse 16 even records that they were specifically looking for a sign from heaven! How ironic! They got the sign that they wanted, but they still mocked Jesus even while it was happening!

Finally consider Revelation 6:12. The darkening of the Sun can symbolize not only the death of the Savior, but also the removal of his presence from the earth during the end times. Passages such as this should be taken as both literal events that will take place and symbolic of Christ.

I have some Christian apologists say that there were historians who recorded the event of the darkening of the Sun during the Passover 32 A.D.

Conclusion

My point in writing this is not to split hairs about times and dates so much as to point out that the Bible should be taken for what it says, even if it seems contradictory. The literal meaning of passages should not be ignored just because they are poetic or because they symbolize something. The Scripture is full of passages that have double or even triple meanings, each of which have equal validity. I thought of the “Eight-Day Week” theory on my own. If anyone reading this finds a commentary with this or similar extra day theories in it, I’d like to see it. I don’t know Greek, so if anyone has knowledge of what the best literal translation of Luke 23:45 is, I’d like to know this. Also if anyone can clarify exactly when the Passover sacrifice and meal are in relation to the first “Special Sabbath”, and if there are any irregularities such as possible cases where two consecutive Sabbaths are not allowed. I’d like to know this too. Also one could theoretically determine when this special Sabbath was in relation to the nearest regular Sabbath in 30 A.D. or in a range of a few years on either side of it (is the exact year of the crucifixion known?) I would appreciate this to help me with further development, modification, verification, or possible abandonment of this theory.