A host of problems
Interpretation of the Gospel of Matthew has indeed inherited a legacy of
difficulty from the comparison drawn between Jonah and the Son of Man in
Matt 12: 39-41. Most of the difficulty is precipitated by the statement,
“For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great
fish, so will the Son of Man be three
days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Gospel tradition is
clear that Jesus was buried in a tomb in the evening of the day that
some parts of Western tradition call Friday, and that he was raised from
the dead on the morning of the day that the same parts of that tradition
call Sunday. The plain and simple literary sequence “day of
preparation,” “sabbath,” and “after the sabbath” (or “day of
preparation,” “next day,” and “first day of the week”) which
appears with slight variation in all the gospels (Matt 27:62; 28:1; Mark
15:42; 16:1,2; Luke 23:54,56; 24:1; John 19:31, 42; 20:1) can only be
rephrased in sequential terms equivalent to Friday, Saturday, and
Sunday. Moreover, gospel tradition identifies the day of Jesus’ death
and burial as the “day of preparation for the sabbath” or Friday (Matt
27:57, 62; Mark 15:25,42; Luke 23:44, 54; John 19:31). Try as we may
(and many have tried) there is no altogether credible way to get three
days and three nights between Friday evening and Sunday
morning.11Theodore of Heraclea (?-319 C.E.) was among the first
who tried: “Christ says he will spend ‘three days and three nights in
the heart of the earth.’ He is referring to the end of Friday, all of
Saturday and the beginning of Sunday [of the passion week], in
keeping with the way people understood the beginning and ending of
days” (Simonetti, 2001, p. 256). A more recent attempt was made by
France (1985): “Three days and three nights was a Jewish idiom
appropriate to a period covering only two nights (see my JOT ,
p.81, n.2). The heart of the earth probably refers to Sheol, the place
of the dead (cf. Jon 2:2, ‘the belly of Sheol’)-Jonah was rescued from
the prospect of death, Jesus from death itself” (p. 213).
There are other problems as well. Making “three days and three nights”
equivalent to a shorter interval strains credulity; the resurrection of
Jesus, which is understood by some as “the sign of Jonah,” was not
witnessed by “an evil and adulterous generation,” but only by
believers in Christ; an above sea-level tomb like the one that contained
the body of Jesus hardly qualifies as “the heart of the earth” in the
sense of subterranean depth, and interpreting “the heart of the earth”
literally as the underworld, the place of the dead, or Sheolstill does not resolve the chronological difficulty of “three days and
three nights.”
Moreover, the author Matthew knows that Jesus was not buried in the tomb
for three days and three nights, and, despite exegetical remarks to the
contrary, he never tries to use this interval as a metaphor for a
shorter time of burial. He knows that Jesus was only buried in the tomb
for roughly one day and two nights. This knowledge is disclosed in Matt
16:21; 17:23; and 20:19 where Jesus prophesizes that he will be raised
from the dead “on the third day” (τῇ τρίτῃ ήμέρᾳ). For Matthew, the
phrase “on the third day” does not mean “in three days and three
nights.” It does not even mean “in three days time.” In the context
of Matthew, the phrase “on the third day” means an interval that
includes the last part of Friday, all of Saturday, and the first part of
Sunday. Interpreters have nevertheless tried to show that “three days
and three nights” is somehow a substitute for “on the third day” in
Matthean thought. This has happened so often that it is almost an
unquestioned assumption that this substitution is a feature of Matthew’s
narrative. Yet to this day, no one has been able to show how a period of
roughly one day and two nights could be equivalent to a period of three
days and three nights. Nor has anyone been able to show that this
equivalency actually appears in Matthew.
In Matt 27:63-64, the chief priests and Pharisees tell Pilate that Jesus
said, “After three days I will rise again” (Μετὰ τρεῖς ήμέρας
ἐγείρομαι). They also tell Pilate that he must secure the tomb “until
the third day” (ἕως τῆς τρίτης ήμέρας) to prevent theft of the body and
the fabrication that Jesus was raised from the dead. Some seem to think
that this establishes some type of equivalency between “after three
days” and “until the third day,” and that, for some reason, this
equivalency should be extended to include “three days and three
nights.” This is common, but incoherent thinking. It stretches the
meaning of “until the third day” pass the breaking point.
Moreover, in Matthew, Jesus never said “After three days I will rise
again.” That Jesus said this is only what the chief priests and
Pharisees reportedly tell Pilate. It is a misquote. In Matthew, Jesus is
frequently misunderstood and misquoted by accusers, detractors, and even
bystanders (Matt 26:61; 27:11, 40, 47, 63). Nevertheless, even though
they express worry about what might happen “after three days” they
request that the tomb be guarded “until the third day.” The suggestion
here is that they only need to disprove the prophecy, and securing the
body “until the third day” (i.e., for a night, a day, and a night)
will do just that. In any case, “the third day” is the terminus for
their watch, and ironically for the burial of Jesus in the gospel. Even
in this case, “the third day” is not used as an alternative for
“three days and three nights.” The interval “three days and three
nights” must therefore be the time frame for some other experience. As
long as interpreters do not see that “three days and three nights”must refer to something other than just Jesus’ burial in the tomb
they will be oblivious to the weight of this alternative argument.