This study draws on the information found in the volume entitled A Guide To The Gospels written by W. Graham Scroggie; chapter 14; The Day Of The Crucifixion.

This study will compare the “traditional” view of a Friday crucifixion / Sunday resurrection with the less popular approach of a Wednesday crucifixion / Saturday evening resurrection, based upon several passages of Scripture that deal with both the historical account of our Lord’s passion and the prophecy of His entombment.

Four major issues are at stake in this paper;
1. Verbal and Plenary Inspiration of the Bible.
2. The Exactness of the Fulfillment of Prophecy.
3. Proper Hermeneutics.
4. The Validity of the Messiahship of Jesus Christ.

On this last point it is imperative to note that if Jesus Christ did not fulfill all that was prophesied of Him then He is not the Messiah! This is perhaps the greatest reason why a study of this topic is most crucial. Let us begin then with a simple question;

Our starting place is a statement of prophecy found in the Old Testament book of Jonah, chapter 1 and verse 17;

PROPHECY:
Jonah 1:17 Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah.  And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.

This statement in the Old Testament was nothing less than a prophecy of Messiah's burial. Neither the Ninevites, the author of the book of Jonah, Jonah himself nor anybody else could possibly have known this meaning. To them it was nothing more than a statement of historical fact and a questionable one at that as far as the natural mind is concerned. Many in our day would bring such a statement before the bar of human judgment without ever considering the prophetic nature of it. They simply lay a humanistic challenge to the idea that anybody could possible fit into the inside of a creature of the ocean and remain alive for more than a few moments! But the author of the book of Jonah makes no attempt to satisfy the natural mind which is pure enmity against the things of God. He simply gives us the bare statement that Jonah spent 3 days & 3 nights inside the belly of a great fish and survived the ordeal unhurt! If this were all there were to the issue it would still be sufficient for the Christian to bless God who is able to perform such miraculous things! But this is not the end of the issue for when we arrive at the New Testament we find these very words given to us by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself with respect to His death and burial.

INTERPRETATION:
Mt 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

From the lips of the Son of God we have the divine commentary on the meaning of Jonah's prophecy.  It was nothing less than a direct reference as to the length of time Messiah would reside within the heart of the earth after His crucifixion.

   The preciseness of the language in both passages has far reaching implications. For one, the issue of verbal inspiration is at stake. For another, the validity of the Messiahship of Christ  is  under consideration. One of the major ways that Christ was proven to be the Messiah of God was the fact that He fulfilled all the Old Testament  prophecies and He did so quite precisely. If there was any prophecy that He claimed to fulfill and did not fulfill it "according to the Scripture" (1Cor 15:3,4) then... He was not the Messiah of God. Prophecies of Messiah in the Old Testament  were fulfilled very precisely by Jesus. Pick any one and study it e.g. Ps 22... Why should the prophecy of His burial and its fulfillment  be any less precise especially when we view the exactness of the words given in both passages?

   Traditionally, the application of this prophecy has centered around the idea of Christ having been laid in the tomb on the evening before the Jewish Sabbath and rising again at the end of it. This works out to a Friday evening burial with a Sunday morning resurrection. In order to accommodate the “three days and three nights” element of the prophecy the Jewish idea of a part of a day being taken for the whole is employed. Here I quote from Scroggie’s book;
“Now, it is well known that the Jews reckoned any part of a day as a whole day. Rabbi Elazar ben Axaryah says, ‘A day and a night are an Onah (Hebrew for a portion of time), and a portion of an Onah is as the whole of it.’ ”     Ibid p 570
It is on this basis that the “three days and three nights” is explained. Now, when a time reference of three days is mentioned this is a well ordered explanation within the Jewish tradition of reckoning time. But when we attempt to apply this to our texts in question we run head-long into a major obstacle; that obstacle being that both texts plainly tell us that there were not only three days but also three nights! The mentioning of the three nights in addition to three days impels us to a closer examination of the time element meant here. It is this reference to three nights that causes the traditional Jewish reckoning of time to collapse. These words are specific and precise and require something more exact than the traditional parts-of-days approach. Again Scroggie states; “But when the number of ‘nights’  is stated as well as the number of ‘days’ the expression ceases to be an idiom, and becomes a literal statement of fact, and there was not three ‘nights’ between Friday evening and Sunday morning by any process of reckoning.” Ibid.

   Therefore, those who hold to the "partial days & nights" theory reduce these words to nothing more than a figure of speech. This weakens the obvious preciseness of the language and opens the door to a “nose of wax” hermeneutic that will allow us to make the Bible say whatever we want it to. Why stop there? On the basis of this hermeneutic Jonah inside a fish, and the death, burial & resurrection of Messiah can be viewed as nothing more than figures of speech or allegories meant to teach a "deep spiritual truth" but they were not actual historical facts! This would explain how a man could be "3 days & 3 nights inside a fish" and survive. But… if the days and nights were not literal and actual then on what basis can we be sure that the events themselves were? Certainly not on the use of language! With this idea at least four Biblical doctrines come under attack.

1; It destroys the special, miraculous activity of God and reduces Christianity to nothing more than mysticism and fable!
2; It questions the verbal inspiration of Scripture.
3; It allows a loose interpretation of the Bible in general and of prophecy in particular. The Bible becomes a book of wax open to any interpretation.
4; It questions the wisdom of the Lord Jesus Christ in His use of Scripture!  If partial days were meant to depict the time Christ would spend in the tomb then why were both Jonah and Christ exact in their use of words?
   Furthermore, the wisdom of the Holy Spirit is also questioned in His work of inspiration as the holy men of God were carried along by Him in their writing of the Scriptures. Obviously the writers of both Jonah and Matthew chose their words carefully under the influence of the Holy Ghost and to leave us in such a dilemma without an explanation on such an important theme as the death, burial and resurrection of Christ is indeed a mystery.
 

   The traditional partial days view works out to having Christ in the tomb for 36 hours at most. Let us examine this a bit closer.
   If Christ spent but 36 hours in the tomb as is commonly accepted, several unavoidable "dilemmas" arise. 1. Jonah's words & Christ's words are not equal! When Christ quoted Jonah He meant something different than what Jonah meant. What confidence do we have then in the basic principle of Biblical interpretation that says; The New Testament interprets the Old Testament. If Jonah was inside the fish for a full 72 hours, as his words indicate, why would the Lord Jesus change the meaning of the words “three days and three nights” without an explanation? Conversely, if Jonah was in the fish but 36 hours why did he not say "a day and a half" instead of the very precise "three days and three nights"? 2. As pointed out above, if Christ used Jonah's words as a figure of speech then both sayings were but figurative. The manner in which Jesus spoke in Matt 12 conveys the idea quite forcefully that equality must be maintained! That is, whatever three days and three nights meant for Jonah it must have the same meaning for Christ or else language has lost its meaning and God spoke with forked tongue! The language of Christ strongly indicates that equality be maintained. The Greek syntax of  “as … so shall” is used in other verses to depict the element of equality; e.g. Matt 13:40; 24:27, 38, 39;  John 5:21, 26. This can only mean that if Christ spent “parts” of 3 days & 3 nights in the tomb then so also did Jonah in the fish! How else can 1 Cor 15:4 be maintained? The only way to say Christ was in the tomb 36 hours according to the Scriptures is to say that Jonah also was in the fish 36 hours and spoke "figuratively" when he wrote his prophecy. One great commentator has indeed taken this very path as he seeks to “adjust” the prophecy in Jonah in order to maintain the traditional view. I quote here from the pen of the great John Gill on Jonah 1:17.
“and Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights: that is, one whole natural day, consisting of twenty four hours, and part of two others; the Jews having no other way of expressing a natural day but by day and night; and to this the antitype answers; namely, our Lord's being so long in the grave; of whose death, burial, and resurrection, this was a type, as appears from Mt 12:40;”
And commenting on Matt 12:40 he states..” by this rule, the case here is easily adjusted;”.  He means the Jewish idea of part of a day being taken for the whole. But now the question naturally arises; upon what basis is such an “adjustment” made to the Word of God. Certainly not on the basis of Biblical evidence for there is none! Further, this hermeneutic will easily wreak havoc if applied to the Genesis account of the origin of the universe! We can “adjust” our idea of “day”; “morning”; and “evening” in order to maintain any view of origins we like! So much for the careful handling of the Word of God.

   Further, it cannot be maintained that the phrase "three days and three nights" must be a figure of speech on the basis that that's the way the Jewish people understood it. Why not? For the simple reason that the King of the Jews, Messiah Himself, negates this idea with his own words. The Lord Jesus tells us plainly what He means when He uses the word “day” in John 11:9; "Are there not twelve hours in the day!" Why should we suppose that He meant something different in Matt 12:40? This is equally applicable at the north & south poles where the "days" are 6 months long. Jesus was not speaking of the rising of the sun but rather of a distinct period of time measured by hours, whether or not the sun was shining! Here the Son of God Himself ascribes a definition to the term day and it is twelve literal hours!

                              WHEN WAS JESUS CRUCIFIED?       Top

This view of a literal three days and three nights unavoidably forces us to deal with the whole issue of the passion, death & resurrection of the Son of God. If this view is maintained the whole passion week calendar is thrown out of whack and two thousand years of church tradition must be re-examined. Be that as it may, what saith the Scriptures?

Jesus was crucified on the first day of the feast of unleavened bread which was the Jewish Passover;

Jn 18:28 Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and  it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the Passover.

The context is clear that this was the day that Christ was crucified. This was the Passover. Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread are used interchangeably to refer to the same time period. Notice;

Mk 14:1  After two days was [the feast of] the Passover, and of unleavened  bread: and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him  by craft, and put [him] to death.

Lu 22:1  Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the  Passover.

Here then is clear evidence of a very important point, that being that  Jesus was placed on the cross on Passover. In addition, this day was always the fourteenth day of the first month on the Jewish calendar, regardless of which day of the week it fell on. This is called Nisan 14 or Abib 14. Here is the reference;

Lev 23:5 In the fourteenth [day] of the first month at even [is] the LORD'S Passover.

This is an important point in this study because it is the calendar day that needs to be kept in mind with regard to when Christ was crucified; not the day of the week. Days of the week are nowhere mentioned in Scripture but calendar days and Sabbaths are. The calendar day was the 14th of the month, as pointed out, regardless of what day of the week it fell on.
It is important to note the words "at even" in the verse for this tells us the exact time of the beginning of the Passover. This is in accordance with the Jewish reckoning of a day, which began at 6:00 PM evening.
Jesus & His disciples "ate the Passover" on a different day than the Jews did yet they both observed the Jewish Passover. Jesus ate on the actual day of Passover, Nisan 14, which was the Preparation; Jn 19:31 and He was crucified on the same day.

Ah, but someone says: Jesus ate the Passover supper on the evening of Nisan 14 and was crucified the next day, Nisan 15!

ANSWER: This thinking reflects our western cultural way of reckoning time. However, when we are involved in Biblical study we must be careful not to impose our cultural thinking patterns on the Bible. Do not forget that the Jewish day began at 6:00 PM!! Thus they "ate the Passover" in the evening and yet the next morning was still Passover in the which Christ was put on the cross at 9:00 AM. This was still Nisan 14 and is referred to as the Preparation;

Jn 19:31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies  should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day, (for that Sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and  [that] they might be taken away.
42:There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews' preparation [day];  for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.

Preparation for what? Preparation for the 1st day of Unleavened Bread which day was a high Sabbath day,  not the ordinary weekly Sabbath!   Verse 31. This is crucial for it will determine what Sabbath followed the day of the crucifixion. If it was the ordinary weekly Sabbath then we are left with the insoluble dilemmas mentioned above. But if this was a Sabbath other than the weekly one we are presented not only with a great harmony of Scripture but a wonderful fulfillment of Jonah’s prophecy by Messiah to the letter.

Let us look at the Old Testament information on the Sabbath found in Lev. ch 23. This passage sheds great light on our search for the truth. In verse 3 we have a description of the Jewish Sabbath.
Lev 23:3  Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day [is] the Sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work [therein]: it [is] the Sabbath of the LORD in all your dwellings.

Notice that two characteristics of the Sabbath are given to us. One is that it is a "holy convocation" or calling together. The other is that no work is to be done. Though it is true that verse 3 refers to the regular weekly Sabbath yet in verse 7, the 15th of Nisan has the same two characteristics thus showing that it also was a Sabbath but a different one than the regular weekly Sabbath. This Sabbath always occurs on the 15th of Nisan regardless of the day of the week.

6  And on the fifteenth day of the same month [is] the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread.
7  In the first day ye shall have an holy convocation: ye shall do no
servile work therein.

Here the marks of “holy convocation” and “no servile work” show this to be a Sabbath which occurred on Nisan 15th regardless of the day of the week. The “first day” is the first of the seven days that constituted the Passover feast proper. This was the “high Sabbath” spoken of in John 19:31. It is this very Sabbath, the 15th of Nisan, which followed the crucifixion and burial of our Savior! Thus it is a Sabbath, and not necessarily a Saturday. It could and did fall on any given day of the week. Christ, who is our Passover, was crucified on the Jewish Passover. He was crucified on the Preparation, which was the day before the high Sabbath and not the ordinary weekly Sabbath. With this concept in hand we now examine the resurrection of Christ and put all this together.

                WHEN DID CHRIST ARISE FROM THE GRAVE?     Top

   It may come as a surprise to some but the New Testament nowhere tells us on what day of the week Christ arose! It does mention different phases of the day such as “early in the morning” and “while it was still dark” and the like but as to the specific day, whether Saturday or Sunday nothing is said. In fact none of the days of the week are mentioned anywhere at all in the entire Bible! As to the references to “Sabbath”; “first day of the week”; “early in the morning”; and such that are given in the resurrection passages they are nothing more than references as to the time the visitors came to the tomb, not to the time of the resurrection. Many folks make the mistake of applying these time references to the resurrection but upon reading the passages closely one finds that they do not. They all refer to the times when the women visited the tomb, after the resurrection had already taken place.

Mt 28:1 In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first  [day] of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the  sepulchre…..  to verse 6 where the angel says..
6  He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where
 the Lord lay.

Here is the first reference in the New Testament to the historical fact of Christ’s resurrection. Several things are worth noting. 1; It was the end of the regular weekly Sabbath which fell on the 7th day as we are told it was beginning to dawn on the 1st day of the week. 2; The phrases, “In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first  [day] of the week” are indications as to when both Marys came to the tomb and not to the time of Christ’s resurrection. 3; The women came upon an already empty tomb! The women were plainly told by the angel that He was not there. He is risen.  4; The one Greek word that does refer to the resurrection is translated He is risen; it is a verb given in the aorist tense. This indicates something that has already happened in the past. What this simply means is that when the women arrived at the tomb Christ had already arisen before they got there. The references to time tell us of the women’s visit but other than the angel’s “He is risen” the passage says nothing as to when Christ arose! All this points to a resurrection that took place well before the first day of the week. Thus this verse cannot be used to “prove” a Sunday morning resurrection. In fact the evidence given in John, which we shall examine, is overwhelming that the resurrection took place long before the sun cast its glorious rays upon the scene.

The parallels in Mark 16:1-6 and Luke 24:1-6 give identical accounts as to the time being on the first day of the week. In Mark we are told the sun was risen. Again these are references as to the time the visitors came but not the time of the resurrection. Both passages tell us “they (visitors) came unto the sepulchre”, not “he arose from the dead”. The 3 passages are nearly identical and all speak of the time the visitors came to the tomb but say nothing of the time Christ arose.  They came to the tomb "as it began to dawn; very early in the morning;" and Christ was GONE! At this point Christ had already been alive for some time. And when we look at John 20:1 we discover conclusive proof that Christ arose on the Jewish Sabbath before the first day began! Notice;

Jn 20:1 The first [day] of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

Here the phrase “when it was yet dark” renders a powerful testimony to the fact that Christ did not arise at sunrise, Sunday morning. Here we are told of the time of Mary’s coming to the tomb, not the resurrection, and it was on the first day of the week while it was yet dark. Traditionally many agree that Christ arose from the grave at about 6 o'clock. But what 6 o'clock? To say it was Sunday morning you must force the language of John 20:1. The only other alternative is 6:00 PM Saturday, the end of the Jewish Sabbath! Mary Magdalene went to the tomb while it was still dark, the first day of the week (Sunday), and found the same thing the others found; an empty tomb! Christ had already risen long before the sun rose.  This is so because Messiah executed His conquest of death at 6:00 PM on Saturday, the end of the Jewish Sabbath. We shall show this glorious truth forthwith. But first, obviously this presents a huge dilemma in the light of the traditional view that Christ was buried on 6:00 PM Friday. If we say that He rose on 6;00 PM Saturday evening this means that, having been buried at about 6:00 PM Friday He only spent a little more than 24 hours in the grave! If this is so then what becomes of the doctrine of verbal inspiration? A 24 hour time span plays complete havoc with language that tells us Three Days and Three Nights was the time marked out for Christ‘s burial! How can any sane reasoning come up with Three Days and Three Nights equaling 24 hours? Even a 36 hour time span must put a great force on words and language as this is only one half of Three Days and Three Nights. Conversely,  in the light of John 20:1 we are hard pressed to stretch the time element to 6:00 AM Sunday without again doing damage to the doctrine of verbal inspiration. Thus we may note;

OBJECTION: Jesus arose on the first day of the week;
Mark 16:9 Now when [Jesus] was risen early the first [day] of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

ANSWER: 1st; If this is true then we have a direct contradiction to John 20:1.  But Mk 16:9 does not say "Now when Jesus arose on the first day of the week" but rather He "was risen", again in the aorist tense indicating action in the past. 2nd; As already pointed out, the reference of time is not to His rising from the dead but rather to the time of his appearance to Mary Magdalene. She was the first one to whom He appeared after His resurrection and the infallible record tells us in John 20:1 that though the appearance took place on the first day of the week the resurrection had already taken place while it was yet dark! Thus Mark 16:9 is a reference to the time of His apparition to Mary and cannot be used to prove a Sunday morning resurrection.
   How then can this matter be addressed and answered without doing great damage to the Word of God? It all comes together by maintaining the view, as noted above, that there was more than one Sabbath on passion week. We shall now prove this and in so doing resolve this dilemma into a wonderful demonstration of the exactness given by God in His Word. As we have said, the Preparation was the day before a special high Sabbath that was distinct from the normal weekly Sabbath and could fall on any day of the week. During Passion week this was a Wednesday. Jesus and His disciples actually "ate the Passover" on a Tuesday evening. This is proven conclusively by the following Scriptures;

Lu 23:50 And, behold, [there was] a man named Joseph, a counselor; [and he was] a good man, and a just:
 51 (The same had not consented to the counsel and deed of them;) [he was] of Arimathaea, a city of the Jews: who also himself waited for the kingdom of God.
 52 This [man] went unto Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus.
 53 And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein never man before was laid.
 54 And that day was the preparation, and the Sabbath drew on.
 55 And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid.
 56 And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment.

OBSERVATIONS: 1. Jesus was placed in the tomb shortly before 6:PM for the Sabbath "drew on"; This was the high Sabbath that followed the Preparation. vs 54.  2. The woman did 3 things. They witnessed the burial of Jesus; they returned and prepared spices; they rested on the Sabbath day which immediately overtook them.

QUESTION: Where did the women get these spices and more importantly, when did they get them?? The New Testament itself gives us the answer.

ANSWER:
Mr 16:1 And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the
[mother] of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

The King James is about the only version that translates "had bought". It is more correctly rendered in other versions as simply "bought". Where did the women obtain the spices for Messiah's body? The verse tells us that they bought them. And exactly when did they buy these spices? Why just exactly after the Sabbath had past! But wait-a-minute! According to the Luke passage they prepared these spices before the Sabbath! How in the world could they have prepared the spices before  the Sabbath when they did not obtain them until after the Sabbath? If Christ was laid in the tomb on Friday and "the (weekly) Sabbath drew on" these women had neither time nor opportunity to run out and buy spices and prepare them without breaking the Sabbath and their necks as well! This is an impossible dilemma that has but one solution; There were two Sabbaths during passion week, which is what this paper has been saying all along! Wednesday was the Passover and was also the Preparation and the crucifixion; Thursday was the high Sabbath; Friday the women went out and bought the spices and prepared them and then rested on the weekly Sabbath according to the commandment! Therefore, Messiah entered the tomb just before 6:00 PM Wednesday evening and came back out at the same time on Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath...  EXACTLY THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS (72 HOURS) LATER !!! HE IS GOD'S ANOINTED MESSIAH WHO FULFILLED THE OLD TESTAMENT  SCRIPTURES TO THE  LETTER!

                                    A Problem Passage;                   Top

We now examine a passage that to some, might present a problem to this view. As we do we need to keep a few things in mind; 1; Every doctrine has its problem passages but those passages are seldom strong enough to “refute” the truth. Usually upon close examination they are seen to harmonize with the truth and this is as it should be.  2; Neither should we seek to build a doctrine simply on a so-called problem passage. This would violate the sane hermeneutic that says the obscure or doubtful passages must be interpreted in the light of other, more clear Scriptures. With this in mind let us look at Luke 24….

Luke 24:  21  But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel:  and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.

Observations;
The “today” of this verse is Sunday as we are told in verses 1 & 13. This is referred to by the travelers as being the “third day”. This was the third day since “these things” were done. The word “done”  means “come to pass” and is translated as such elsewhere. The problem presented is in attempting to “calculate” this third day with the “these things” mentioned. Apart from any lengthy search as to what the “these things” refers to it has been pointed out that they include all events of the passion of our Lord including the sealing of the tomb and setting a watch by Pilate the day after the crucifixion.  By the view set forth in this paper “these things”, sealing and watch-setting  would have taken place on Thursday and from then until Sunday is indeed three days. Again, “these things” may even have included the women buying and preparing the spices and resting on the Sabbath. This verse by its very nature is ambiguous and inconclusive. However, realizing that this is so it is important to note that the Friday crucifixion view presents the same problem! Here the “these things” would have to exclude the sealing of the tomb which would have occurred on Saturday. In either case the problem is just as forceful for either view. This verse is too inconclusive and unclear to base our view on. Therefore we do not build our doctrine on this passage. Nor should we allow such a dubious verse to militate against the force of the clear teaching of other passages on this important topic. May God give us grace to receive His Word in faith and marvel at His kindness to us in the exactness of His presentation of the truth to sinful men.
 
 

Positively, at least four things are maintained intact by this view.
1; The verbal inspiration of the Bible.
2; The perspicuity of Scripture. That is, its plainness and clarity. One need not be A Greek scholar, theologian or learned historian to understand the Scriptures.
3; The exactness of prophecy and its fulfillment given by God.
4; The glorious person of Jesus Christ who was and is God’s Messiah who came to deliver His people from the wrath to come and He did so by proving Himself to be the Messiah as He fulfilled all prophecy “according to the Scriptures”… to the letter!

In addition;
5; A sunrise service  on Easter Sunday is nice but  has nothing to do with Biblical Christianity.
6; It imposes a challenge to the changing of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday on the basis that Sunday is the day Christ arose from the dead! If He arose on the Jewish Sabbath the view that Sunday is now the Christian Sabbath because Christ arose on this day is meaningless.
It therefore places the Old Testament Sabbath under the category of things of the Old Covenant that are done away in Christ! Thus the view of Sunday being the Christian Sabbath held by many must be re-examined. Nowhere in the New Testament do we find such a teaching.
                                                                                                           Top
Postscript…
   Question: If you were going away Friday evening and planned to return sometime early Sunday say between 3 & 6 AM would you tell your wife (if you are married) or good friends that you would be gone for three days AND THREE NIGHTS?
Conversely,  If your wife said she would be away for three days and three nights, and left Friday evening... When would you expect her back? Even if you were a Jew?
 
Prove All Things