Was Benjamin born before or after Joseph was sold into slavery?

Someone asked me this question one day. I thought I knew the answer. I was not so sure after reading the relevant passages in Genesis. If you liked On Which Day of the Week Did Christ Die?, you will like this Bible timeline brain twister.

I had always assumed that Benjamin was born (Genesis 35:16-20) first because it appears in the text before the account of Joseph being sold into slavery (Genesis 37:12-28). One must be cautious about making such assumptions, however, as the following example demonstrates.

The death of Isaac (Genesis 35:27-29), which appears just a few verses after the birth of Benjamin, definitely happened long after Joseph was sold into slavery. Isaac was 60 years old when Jacob was born (Genesis 25:26). This would put Jacob at 120 years old when Isaac died at 180 (Genesis 35:28). But Jacob lived in Egypt for 17 years and lived to be 147 years old (Genesis 47:28). This puts him at 130 when came down to Egypt. But Joseph was in Egypt for more than 20 years before Jacob came. He entered the Pharaoh’s service at age 30 (Genesis 41:46). This was before the 7 years of plenty (Genesis 41:47). Assuming that Joseph was seventeen when he was sold into slavery (Genesis 37:2) and that Jacob came to Egypt (Genesis 46:5-7) well after the seven years of plenty, this puts Isaac’s death at least ten years after Joseph was sold into slavery.

Notice that (Genesis 37:2) says, “This is the account of Jacob.” This seems to indicate that this part of the story is being told from Jacob’s point of view (as he heard it from Joseph after being reunited with him), and may therefore not be in chronologically in order with immediately preceding passages. Notice that this phrase “This is the account of” is used several other times in the book of Genesis (2:4, 5:1, 6:9, 10:1, 11:10, 11:27, 25:12, 25:19, 36:1).

One can examine the geographic references with respect to the events after Jacob left Padan Aram to look for clues to answer this question we are considering. Jacob settled in Shechem, which is in northern Canaan, after leaving Laban (Genesis 33:18, 19). After the unfortunate incident that happened there, he moved on to Bethel (Genesis 35:1), which is much farther south. Then while on the move to Ephrath (Genesis 35:16), which is Bethlehem (Genesis 35:19), Benjamin was born as his mother Rachel was dying (Genesis 35:18). Bethlehem is even further south. They then moved on again to Migdal Eder (I don’t know where that is), where Reuben slept with Bilhah, one of Jacob’s concubines (Genesis 35:21-22a). Notice that Benjamin is listed in the family table (Genesis 35:22b-26a), but is an apparent exception to the phrase “…were born to him in Padan Aram.” (Genesis 35:26b) Jacob then moved on to Hebron, which is even farther south than Bethlehem, which Isaac was (Genesis 35:27). When Jacob went down to Egypt, it only says that he was in Canaan (Genesis 45:25), and that he passed through Beersheba (Genesis 46:1) on the way (it is even further south than Hebron). But Joseph’s brothers were grazing their flocks near Shechem (Genesis 37:12) and Dothan (Genesis 37:17) at the time that Joseph was sold into slavery. This is far from Bethlehem, but it is possible that they could have moved back north near there after Benjamin was born.
The Bible says that “Israel loved Joseph more than any of his other sons, because he had been born to him in his old age…” (Genesis 37:3) This statement could be a hint that Benjamin hadn’t been born yet. But Joseph said of his dream, “the sun and the moon and eleven stars bowed down to me.” (Genesis 37:9) It seems from the text that, though this sounds boastful, it was what Joseph had actually dreamed. However, this does not necessarily mean that Benjamin had already been born. The dream was prophetic. Jacob did, however, perceive that the eleven stars represented Joseph’s brothers (Genesis 37:10). It seems like this wouldn’t have made sense to him if Benjamin hadn’t been born (or wasn’t about to be born). Jacob also interpreted the dream to mean that sun and moon represented “your mother and I” (Genesis 37:10). If Benjamin had already been born, then Rachel (Joseph’s mother) would have already died. But Joseph could have been speaking of the resurrection when he said, “then sun and moon …were bowing down to me” or that Jacob interpreted it this way. It is entirely possible that Jacob misinterpreted the meaning of the dream. The NIV study Bible commentary says that “your mother” referred to Leah, who would have assumed the role of their mother when Rachel died. They just assume that Rachel had already died. There is no record that I can see of Jacob, Rachel, or Leah bowing down to Joseph. But the brothers did bow down to him more than once and this presumably included Benjamin in Genesis 43:26.

In (Genesis 43:7), the brothers told their father that “the man” (Joseph) had asked them if they had another brother. But it seems like they were not exactly telling the truth from Genesis 42:13. They are the ones who brought up that “the youngest is now with our father” in defense of the accusation that they were spies. Note that they also lied when then they said, “…and one is no more” referring to Joseph.

What then can we say definitively about the difference in the ages of Joseph and Benjamin? Joseph was born before Jacob had agreed to stay another six years with Laban (Genesis 30:25, 31:28, 29:18, 27). Benjamin was clearly born after this. Benjamin was old enough to eat a meal (Genesis 43:34) when he came to Egypt and Joseph was about 37 years old at that time.

The Millennium-Sabbath Theory

Introduction

There are many places in the scripture in which events that take place foreshadow future events. At times, these events are supplemented with commandments that certain things are to be done in remembrance of the event, and so also these become a foreshadowing of the future. The ideal example of this is the Passover. The lamb’s blood symbolizes the blood of Christ and the unleavened bread symbolizes his body, and so on. Even the loaf and cup that we partake of could somehow be a hint of what is to take place in eternity, for Jesus said, “But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s Kingdom.” (Matthew 26:29)

The idea that is presented in this writing is that the one thousand year reign of Christ (Revelation 20:1-6) is foreshadowed by when God rested on the seventh day (Genesis 2:2). What is unique about this theory is that it extends beyond just the Sabbath, but also foreshadows the whole of history. That is to say that, in general, each of the six days of creation represents consecutive one thousand year periods so that a summary of all of (religiously significant) history, up until, and including the Day of Judgment, can be seen figuratively in Genesis 1-3.

First let me reiterate that this is not to say that events of Genesis are merely symbolic. Those events really did literally happen—the possible figurative meaning is only secondary. There is no place in the Bible that plainly states this idea as a fact (that is why it is called a theory), and I am not saying that I firmly believe it, but I think it is worth it to present the evidence for it. This theory does not have nearly the predictive power of the literal, face-value prophecies about the death, burial, resurrection, and second-coming of Christ, but the correlation of the events of the six days of creation with the first 6000 years of history is striking.

The first piece of evidence is the statement: “…one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” (II Peter 3:8 and Psalms 90:4) Again, this is not to say that this interpretation of the verse is its only meaning. Of course, the main meaning of this sentence is that God is longsuffering, but the claim is made that it is also a key that points to this theory. Now let’s take a look at the specific days of creation and millennia in history.

The First Day

This is the only day in which the day itself is contained within the millennium that it represents. Some people claim that the earth existed for thousands of years before this day, that everything in the earth was destroyed (because of Satan’s fall), and that creation described in Genesis 1-2 was a second creation. This so-called pre-Adamite age, they say, was the age of the dinosaurs. They say that there is gap between verses 1 and 2 of the first chapter of Genesis so that what happened in verse one is not included in the first day. The fact that this day is called “the first day” should be enough to convince someone that this theory is false, but in case that is not convincing enough, thorough refutation is given in Exodus 20:11: “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested on the seventh day”. Therefore I take the beginning of the first day to be “the beginning” in Genesis 1:1 and also to be the starting point of the first millennium.

Genesis 1:1 states that “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” In a manner of speaking, he created it on the first day, but also the creation took six days (see Genesis 2:1). “Then God said, let there be light: and there was light.” (Genesis 1:3) This light represents the life that is in Jesus (John 1:4) who existed in the beginning with God (John 1:2). It also foreshadows the creation of the sun in on the fourth day. Verse 4 states that “…God divided the light from the darkness.” This represents the separation of God and man (Genesis 3:24, 4:14), and also of God and Satan (Isaiah 14:12). God also named the light and the darkness (verse 5) to represent the naming of (the tree of the knowledge of) good and evil.

The Second Day

When God created the firmament, he separated the waters (in heaven) from the earthly waters. In the same way, God and man became further separated during the second millennium because of the wickedness that had come upon the earth (Genesis 6:5-7, 11, 12).

In Genesis 6:2, 4 it talks about the “sons of God” taking “the daughters of men” as wives. The Hebrew word for “sons of God” is translated “angel” everywhere else it is used in the Bible. At some point, probably after the flood, the angels were no longer allowed to do this. This is another example of the separation of the heavenly from the earthly. Some people use Mark 12:25 to say that angels can’t be married, but notice that it says, “…they will be like the angels in heaven” which means as they were at the time that Jesus said that, not as they had been previously. Angels are by definition male, so they could only marry human women, and if they are separated from the earthly, then marriage is no longer possible. Obviously, angels were never meant to marry, and that is why the ones that did this were punished (I Peter 3:19, 20).

The separation of waters from waters also represents the appearance of dry land following the Flood (Genesis 8:13).

The Third Day

“The waters under the heaven were gathered together in one place” on the third day in Genesis 1:9 and also in Psalms 33:7. The same thing happened during the third millennium in Joshua 3:16 with the parting of the Jordan. In both instances, dry land appeared, as it did when the Red Sea was parted in Exodus 14:21, 22, which also happened during the third millennium.

The waters were then called “Seas”. In the Bible, the sea represents humanity, and the beasts that come out of it represent nations or rulers (Daniel 7:3, Revelation 13:1). It was during the third millennium that the nations that we have today began to emerge. The tower of Babel incident could have occurred during the beginning of the third millennium, which was the initial cause of the formation of the nations. By Usher’s dates, Abraham, called “the father of many nations” was born about 1996 B.C. The world was founded “upon the seas and established on the waters.” (Psalm 24:2). “…the earth was formed out of water and by water” (II Peter 3:5).

Many creation scientists believe that the “seas” (oceans) and continents that we have today were formed as a result of the splitting of a super continent (called Pangea) into the land of the Old World (Asia, Europe, Africa, and Australia) and the New World (North and South America). (Genesis 10:25) This event could also have happened at the beginning of the third millennium. (Peleg’s death falls into the late second millennium by Usher’s dates, but only by 13 years.)

Grass created on the third day also represents humanity, and in particular, the aspect of the shortness of his existence on the earth (Psalm 37:2, 90:5, 6, 103:15, 16, Isaiah 40:6-8, I Peter 1:24) It was during this millennium that man’s days were shortened to 120 years, just as God said would happen in Genesis 6:3. Abraham’s father Terah lived to be 205 years old (Genesis 11:32) and died during the third millennium (see Abraham’s approximate birth date above). Flowers (as they wither) are also used as a symbol for the brevity of man’s life. The word “flower” is not used in the third day text, but flowers are clearly included in what was created on the third day. “Herb yielding seed” (KJV) or “seed-bearing plants” (NIV) were created on the third day. (Genesis 1:11, 12)

Fruit trees were created on the third day, which represent nations in the scriptures. In particular, Israel is represented by fig tree (Joel 1:12, Matthew 24:32-34 [Note that the word generation can be translated “race” and is often footnoted as such.]) and an olive tree in Romans 11:11-24 (explained in Romans 11:25-32). Israel came to be a nation (having land) during this millennium, and God used events like the parting of the Red Sea and the Jordan River to bring this about.

The Fourth Day

The creation of lights in the firmament (Genesis 1:14) represents the coming of the prophets of the Old Testament. Starting with David and going on down to John the Baptist, these prophets gave signs (Genesis 1:14) about the coming of Christ, the light of the world (verse 15), and the dispensations (or seasons, Genesis 1:14). The dividing of the day from the night (also in verse 14) represents the separation or calling out of the true believers from the unbelieving world, which is what they (including Christ himself), accomplished. The “days and years” (also in verse 14) is what this whole idea is all about.

Usher dates the creation of the earth to 4004 B.C. The birth of Christ is dated to be about 4 B.C. Usher’s calculations are based on rounded numbers, so there is no way to know for sure which millennium Christ’s birth falls into. The Jews date the creation of the earth much later, and if this is more accurate, the Jesus’ birth definitely falls into the fourth millennium.

The two great lights in verse 16 are obviously the sun and the moon. There are many verses in the Bible where Jesus is figuratively represented by the sun. Malachi 4:2 says, “But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.” Note the messianic theme of the last two chapters of the Old Testament. At the transfiguration, “His face shone like the sun.” (Matthew 17:2) Psalm 84:11 says, “The LORD God is a sun and shield: the LORD will give grace and glory: no good thing will he withhold from them that walk uprightly.” See also Psalm 19 and Judges 5:31. There are other passages which are less obviously Christological. However, it is clear that on that resurrection morning, the sun rose when the Son rose!

Returning to text in Genesis 1:16, 18, we find another Christological reference. Christ rules over the “day” (the believers) while the unbelievers are ruled by the powers of darkness and of the Law. The moon may represent the Law of Moses.

The Fifth Day

On the fifth day, God created whales (KJV) and the creatures of the water. (Genesis 1:20-22) Jonah was in the belly of a whale or great fish for three days. (Jonah 1:17) This event clearly did not happen during the fifth millennium, but Jesus used this as a sign to predict his death and resurrection. (Matthew 12:40) If Usher’s dates are correct, then this event does fall into the fifth millennium.

The Holy Spirit (possibly) came during the fifth millennium and is represented by a dove in the Scriptures. God created birds on this day. The wind is also a type of the Holy Ghost. (John 3:8) Just as the wind would not be possible without the Sun, so the Holy Spirit would not be available to believers without the redeeming sacrifice of Christ. (Ecclesiastes 1:5, 6)

The Sixth Day

By any account, the sixth millennium begins a long time after the last Scriptures were written. For the symbolic comparisons to the sixth day, we need to rely on history and/or prophecy. With good reason, no dates are given for the fulfillment of the prophecy of the end times, so we must rely on our initial assumption that the seventh millennium is the millennial reign of Christ, and that the events which precede it in prophecy (i.e. the tribulation) fall into the sixth millennium.

God created the beast of the earth on the sixth day. (Genesis 1:24, 25) The beast will rise up out of the sea (Revelation 13:1) and his number will be 666 (Revelation 13:18). God also made man on the sixth day. (Genesis 1:26, 27) 666 is also man’s number. (Revelation 13:18) Man was made in the image of God. (Genesis 1:26, 27) An image of the beast will be made to be worshipped (Revelation 13:15). Man was given dominion over the earth. (Genesis 1:26) The beast will be given dominion over the earth. (Revelation 13:7) Cattle and creeping things were also created on this day.

It is interesting that God gave the Israelites twice as much manna to gather on the day before the Sabbath. (Exodus 16:22, 29) This could be a message that we should put twice as much effort into evangelism in our day as in previous millennia. If too much was gathered on the other days, it spoiled, (Exodus 16:20) which could represent wasted evangelistic efforts. There are always people who do not gather enough, even on the other days.

The Seventh Day

“On the seventh day, God ended His work”, rested, and sanctified it. In the Law of Moses, the Israelites were commanded to do no work on the Sabbath (seventh day). This is a remembrance of God’s rest from his creation. Could it also be a foreshadowing of an event to come? During the millennial reign of Christ, the remaining believers will be able to rest after being persecuted by the beast because he and the false prophet will have been cast into the lake of fire, and all who worshipped him will be slain. (Revelation 19:20, 21) They will also have rest from the temptation of Satan, for he is bound during the one thousand years. (Revelation 20:2)

In a larger context, the Sabbath represents permanent rest for the people of God. (Hebrews 4:1-13) This could be seen as a flaw in the theory. There is no direct connection between the Sabbath and the one thousand years, but only to the eternal rest.

Beyond the Seven Days

Perhaps the best evidence of this theory comes from the correlation between events that happen after the seven days and the one thousand year reign. The marriage of Adam and Eve (Genesis 2:24) foreshadows the marriage of Christ and the Church. (Revelation 21:2)

Satan (morning star and son of the dawn in the NIV, Lucifer in the KJV) was cast to the earth in Isaiah 14:12. “And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, and shall go out to…the earth,” (Revelation 20:7, 8). The serpent, who is the Devil (Revelation 12:9), deceived Adam and Eve. (Genesis 3:1-5) Satan “shall go out to deceive the nations”. (Revelation 20:8) The serpent is judged in Genesis 3:14, 15. The Devil is judged in Revelation 20:10. Adam and Eve, the only human beings alive at the time, are judged. (Genesis 3:16-19) All mankind is judged in Revelation 20:9, 12-15. Earlier God had warned (or prophesied to) Adam and Eve about eating from the forbidden tree. (Genesis 3:3) Then the serpent cast doubt on God’s word. (Genesis 3:4) This nullification of God’s prophecy (in their minds), eventually led to them being kept from the Tree of Life. (Genesis 3:22-24) Similarly, “if anyone takes words away from this book of this prophecy, God shall take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.” (Revelation 22:19, NIV)

God Saw That It Was Good

Notice the use of the phrase “God saw that it was good” throughout the first chapter of the Bible. On the first day, it only says that “God saw that the light was good” and does not say this about any of the other events of day one. Recall that the light represents Jesus and that the rest of the events of the first day have to do with the Fall. The phrase is not mentioned in the text of the second day, which has to do with the increasing wickedness of mankind and the destruction of the earth by the Flood. Events surrounding the foundation of the nation of Israel are symbolized on day three and the phrase is used twice. On the fourth day, the phrase is used in connection with the events symbolizing Christ’s birth. The events which symbolize the coming of the Holy Spirit are called good at the end of verse 21. While it would seem that the events of the Tribulation symbolized on day 6 would not be considered good, the phrase is used on this day in verse 25. Verse 31 even says that “it was very good”. But remember what happens at the end of the Tribulation. The beast and the false prophet are thrown into the lake of fire and Satan is bound. Some would say that the rapture of the church before the Tribulation is the “good” event of the sixth millennium. (I disagree with this eschatological view.) The fact that the gospel will preached to every nation is also a “good” aspect of this millennium. (Matthew 24:14) The phase is not used on day seven, but instead it says, “God blessed the seventh day and made it holy,” possibly indicating that the millennium was set apart from the other days as being not just that good things will happen during that millennium, but that the whole millennium will be good.

Conclusion

One could use these assumptions to calculate the time at which Christ shall return within some span of years. I would hope that no one reading this would do this. It could be that general idea of the Millennium-Sabbath theory is correct, but maybe some of the symbolic references I used, particularly on the fifth day (they are among the weakest) are not. (I tried to come up with at least one symbolic meaning for every object mentioned in the first chapter of Genesis.) Neither Adventism nor apologetics is the purpose of this writing, but the real purpose is demonstrate that God does things a certain way for a reason, which may not be clear to us in the beginning, but with time things come together perfectly.

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.

The Reverse Timeline Theory

Several months ago I watched the program Breakthrough with pastor Rod Parsley. In this particular program, he had a guest speaker, a Dr. Perry Stone who spoke about “hidden messages” in the Bible. No, this was not one of those episodes about the skip sequence “messages” in the Old Testament collectively called the Bible Code. Stone’s conjecture on this program is that events in Genesis 1-11 foreshadow end time events in reverse order. The strongest point that Dr. Stone makes is that he can prove using this reverse timeline that rapture of the church will take place before the tribulation. The basis of his idea, he says, is Ecclesiastes 1:9 which says, “What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.”

First of all, the context of the passage in Ecclesiastes 1:9 is that the same things happen over and over again—it is not (at least directly) speaking of a foreshadowing of future events by things that symbolize those events. However, I agree that there are many, many things in the Old and New Testaments which foreshadow future events. One example is the lamb’s blood being put on the doorposts being a foreshadowing of the crucifixion of Christ. So I would concede that point without benefit of Ecclesiastes 1:9. However, there is certainly nothing about a series of events occurring in reverse order in this verse. The verse could (if it really were talking about “hidden messages”) just as easily be talking about events in the same order rather than in reverse. This is what one would naturally think. This verse certainly does not declare when in Biblical history one should start looking for the first (or last as it were) event which foreshadows the first end time event. Nevertheless, for the sake of argument, let’s suppose that Mr. Stone’s general idea is right.

According to Stone, the tower of Babel incident is a type of the September 11th attacks. He states that both events divided the world. He mentions the connection between the war in Iraq and Babel/Babylon (which is located in modern day Iraq). The Bible does not mention that the tower of Babel was destroyed by terrorists or that it caused a war. He mentions the connection between Babylon and the government of the Beast. If the twin towers (there are two and not one as in the biblical story) are symbolic of Tower of Babel which was located in Babylon, then this would make United States of America the kingdom of the antichrist. There are people who believe this who protest at funerals for soldiers who died in Iraq. You are welcome to their opinion if you wish, but I’ll pass on that. There have been many issues which have divided the world throughout history. The tower of Babel incident could just as easily be a foreshadowing of something else. The day of Pentecost is a reverse of the tower of Babel. That is, languages were “unconfused” and cultural traditions which divided people were soon made obsolete in the church. I don’t see the connection between confusion of languages and the terrorist attacks. I don’t believe that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with it either.

Mr. Stone mentions the connection between the story of how Ham looked upon Noah’s drunken nakedness and modern day issues of homosexuality and drunkenness. As a result, of Ham’s sin, it was not Ham, but his son Canaan that was cursed. I don’t know what this means as far as types of the future, but I just thought I’d call attention to that detail as food for thought. I’ll concede the connection between Canaan and homosexuality, but this has always been an issue. Ditto on the drunkenness (or what he said that it symbolized). Ditto on the connection between abortion and man’s blood being shed (Genesis 9:5). Go back and read Ecclesiastes 1:9 again, Dr. Stone. It says, “There is nothing new under sun.”

Dr. Stone mentions that the dove that Noah sent out during the Flood is a symbol of the Holy Spirit. He mentions that the prophet Joel (2:28-32) prophesied that in the last days God would pour out His Spirit. I would assume that Mr. Stone believes in the Pentecostal movement and supernatural spiritual gifts. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit at the Azusa Street revival is touted by TBN as being the beginning of the fulfillment of this prophecy. This out of order in Mr. Stone’s chronology as this happened nearly a century before the September 11th attacks.

Dr. Stone cites the Great Flood as being a type of the Tsunami, and other modern day disasters. Many liberal scholars and unbelievers say that the Biblical Flood was local, Bible clearly states that Great Flood was world wide. With the exception of those living on the ark, God “wipe(d) from the face of the earth every living creature (He had) made.” (Genesis 7:4) No event such as this yet happened, but Jesus said, “As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the son of man.” (Matthew 24:37) The pattern of prophetic parallelisms in the Bible is that small things foreshadow big things. There were likely millions of people who perished in Flood and everyone in the whole world was immediately affected. There are two climactic events of the book of Revelation where essentially everyone alive is judged.

The first is in Revelation 19:11-21. Jesus Christ himself strikes down the nations (verse 15) and birds gorge themselves on “the flesh all people” (verse 18). There are many references to this event in the Old Testament, especially Isaiah. It says that there will be so much blood, that the mountains will melt (34:3). In many places it speaks of a time when there will be very few people left alive on the earth. The flood clearly foreshadows this point in history.

The other climactic event is the White Throne Judgment. This is when everyone who is dead is resurrected to be judged. Instead of being drowned in water, people are brought forth out the sea (Revelation 20:13). Like the Great Flood, this is a judgment in which whole world is judged and relatively few are saved.

The striking down of the nations, I would say, would fit the Flood better than the White Throne Judgment. Neither of these interpretations fit with Mr. Stone’s pre-tribulationist eschatology (as you will see in the next paragraph). Nowhere in Dr. Stone’s chronology does he mention these great climaxes in biblical prophecy. They just don’t fit with anything else in Genesis 1-11.

The pivotal claim that Dr. Stone makes in this piece that the translation of Enoch in Genesis 5:21-24 is a type of the rapture in that famous passage in I Thessalonians 4. This claim does make some sense, but it is also connected with the ascension of Christ (which also foreshadows the rapture). But, if Dr. Stone’s theory is correct, we should expect some major cataclysmic event (foreshadowed by the Flood) to happen before the rapture. What else could this be but the striking down of the nations, which happens at the end of the Great Tribulation?

We creationists tend to think that God created everything perfect in the beginning, but because of Adam’s sin, things get worse and worse as time goes along. We tend to believe that millennial reign of Christ will restore the physical state of the earth back to the way it was before the Flood. In particular, the average life expectancy in these two dispensations is similar. Note that in Isaiah 65:17-25 people live longer than now, but they do eventually die. But the millennial reign of Christ is to be a dispensation of peace and the world was full violence in the years just before the Flood. The earth would likely have been more peaceful before Enoch was translated, which was roughly 987 years from the creation of Adam (check my calculations from Genesis 5:3-24 and make sure I’m right). We don’t know the exact number because these numbers are rounded. The 1000 years of the millennial reign of Christ could also be rounded figure.

Now let’s look at what Dr. Stone claims will happen after the rapture. He says that Cain killing Abel is a type of the Great Tribulation. This, he says, is the persecution of the church (which is supposed to be gone). OK, I get it. Another church is formed by new Christian converts after the rapture. I guess that makes sense if you only pick out certain passages instead taking what the Bible as a whole. Anyway, Stone tries to make a connection between the mark put on Cain and the mark of the Beast. The word for “mark” in Greek that is used in Revelation in the phrase “the mark of the Beast” means a sharpening or incision. Eschatologists have speculated that this could mean that this “mark” could be some kind of microchip implanted through an incision in the hand or forehead. The Hebrew word for mark is not that specific. The NAS does not even use this word “mark” in the instance of Cain’s punishment, but rather the word “sign”. This is how that Hebrew word is most frequently translated in the Old Testament in most versions.

Dr. Stone also tries to make some connection between the statements of the murderer Lamech (the descendent of Cain) and the Great Tribulation. The passage reads: “If Cain be avenged seven times, then Lamech shall be avenged 70 times seven times.” It is true that the judgments in Revelation (which occur during the tribulation and not after) occur in sevens. The way I read this is that Lamech is saying that he wants vengeance against God for the punishment he received. This is not saying that Cain received a sevenfold punishment. The figure 490 was the number years declared for the Jews and the “holy city for the finishing of transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy.” (Daniel 9:24) This 490 year period began with the giving of the order to rebuild the city. Jesus Christ was baptized and began his ministry exactly 483 years after this order just as verse 25 says. There is much speculation about whether the last seven or the last half of the last seven is suspended until the Tribulation. Even if this is true, most of the 490 year period has nothing to do with the Tribulation. It only could end during or at the end of it. I certainly wouldn’t build a whole doctrine around one interpretation or another. 490 was also the number of times Jesus said that you should forgive someone who sins against you. How does that have anything to do with the tribulation? Dr. Stone really grasps at straws when he goes outside the written word for evidence that Cain split Abel’s head with a scythe or something like that which hadn’t been invented yet (Genesis 4:22 gives the impression that Lamech’s son Tubal-Cain invented metal working). This is not the same thing as a beheading (Revelation 20:4).

Lamech was probably born after Enoch was translated (we don’t know for sure because no chronology is given for Cain’s line). Dr. Stone seems to base his chronology upon the order that things appear in the text and not chronological order.

If Abel’s murder is not a type of the Tribulation, then what could it be? Most scholars say that Abel was a type of Christ. Jesus declared that generation (or the race) of his day was guilty of Abel’s murder. The crying out from the ground of Abel’s blood is sometimes paralleled to the blood of Christ crying out on behalf of sinners. This is out of order with Stone’s chronology. I will point out the Stone, as well as most other pre-tribulationists rarely speak of the passage in Revelation 20:7-10 which is what happens immediately after the millennium. I can’t quite see how this fits with the story of Cain and Abel, but it’s no worse than Stone’s interpretation.

Clearly, the conditions on the earth before Adam sinned were totally perfect. This period taken as whole, therefore, more closely represents eternity in heaven and not the millennium. The millennium-Sabbath theory is whole other ballgame. This is beyond the scope of what I want to write about in this article.

In conclusion, even if the reverse timeline theory is correct, it definitely does not prove that the rapture will take place before the tribulation. If anything, it shows the opposite, but this theory is very shaky in the first place. Why waste valuable TV time preaching about “hidden messages” in the Bible, when there are so many people who need hear the message which is not hidden. They need to be convicted in their hearts that they are sinners and they need to see the need for God’s grace.