On What Day Did Jesus Die?

In Matthew 28:40, Jesus says,

"For just 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."


The common belief among Christians is that Jesus was crucified on Friday and rose on Sunday. But as Jack Kelly points out, "There isn’t any way you can put three days and three nights between Friday afternoon and Sunday morning."

I read Jack Kelly's article on this controversy two years ago, and conveniently, he posted it today on his website. It's rather brief, and I found it very helpful and convincing. In summary, he argues that Jesus was crucified on Thursday, which was Passover. The next day was a Sabbath, but not a typical Sabbath. It was the first day of the Feast of Unleavened bread, and that year, it was a Friday. In the Jewish system, a new day began at sundown, and Jesus was actually laid in the tomb before sundown on Passover day. Therefore, he was in the tomb on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday day, and Friday, Saturday, and Sunday night. He arose before sunrise on Sunday morning, and therefore was not in the tomb at all during Sunday day.

You can read the whole article here if you're interested. I'd definately reccomend it.

I'd be interested if anyone has heard this take before, and if anyone is aware of any problems in his logic or his argument. His is the only article I've read staking this claim, although I'm sure there are others.

The future of interpretation of the bill of rights

An article posted today on Foxnews.com reveals the scary reality of interpreting the bill of rights apart from a framework of absolute truth. Here's the subject:

A porn flick making its way across college campuses is drawing stiff resistance from critics who say universities shouldn't pay for smut. But the film's supporters say it doesn't rise to the legal definition of obscenity, and the schools have a First Amendment right to show it.

Legally, freedom of speech does not hold for obscenity. So the definition of 'obscenity' is particularly important. I've personally never considered the "legal definition of obscenity".

According to the Supreme Court's ruling in Miller v. California, speech can only be defined as obscene when it meets three conditions -- it must appeal to prurient interest, violate contemporary community standards and lack serious artistic, literary, political or scientific value.

(Prurient - Adj.
1. Having, inclined to have, or characterized by lascivious or lustful thoughts, desires, etc.
2. Causing lasciviousness or lust
3. Having a restless desire or longing. )

Robert Shibley, vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), was interviewd by Foxnews for their article. He states his opinion:

"We're very concerned about the Maryland Legislature interfering, and here's the reason why," he said. "I don't think there's any doubt that this movie is pornographic in nature but I think there is a very active question about whether this movie constitutes obscenity in any sense."

Pornography is not obscene?

"I don't think this would be found to be obscene in the legal sense under the Miller v. California test because I do think this has artistic value," Shibley said, adding, "I am not comfortable with the government deciding what kind of art has value and what doesn't."

Here is the underlying question: Does the government have any legitimate basis for making moral judgments?

Francis Schaeffer said that if the Bible is set aside as the moral standard for society and law, then over time it would be replaced by some elitist group, who would set the standards themselves.

Read the whole article here.

Christian Patience

Over the last few days I've been typing out the manuscript for the first sermon that I will ever preach. It's for my introductory preaching class. The text is James 5:7-11. Below is a paragraph from my conclusion. I'm not sure if this will make it in the final cut or not, but I thought I'd post it here. In 1 Timothy 4:16, Paul says, "Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers." God has truly ministered to me in the perparation of this sermon. A pastor who faithfully prepares and preaches sermons is uniquely ministered to by his very work. It's been a pleasure to experience this.

Christian patience is radical, and it is radically different from anything that the world would label as patience. What makes us different is our God. If God is sovereign over the time of Christ’s return and the end of history, then he also sovereignly allows all of the suffering which we endure until that day. The ability to be patient is directly related to one’s faith that there is a purpose to the time spent waiting. As pain increases, hope more easily decreases, and impatience easily takes over. To the unbelieving mind, time spent waiting is time wasted. Time spent suffering is certainly wasted, and is meaningless. Consider the logic behind those who support assisted suicide. We hear reasoning like this, “He was in so much pain. Life just wasn’t worth living.” The Christian perspective is incomprehensible to the unregenerate mind. Not only is the end worthwhile, but the present is as well. And we have the promise from God that our pain will never go unmatched by the grace which he provides. God is merciful, he is compassionate, he gives only good things to his children.

Challies post on Evil as Entertainment

Tim Challies posted a blog today entitled Evil as Entertainment. I would highly recommend reading it. For someone who spends at least some time every day reading articles, news, and blogs on the internet, it was convicting for me. Here is an excerpt:

What is the problem with this? Again, Postman answers, “In both oral and typographic cultures, information derives its importance from the possibilities of action.” Telegraphy, television and other forms of electronic media have made the relationship between information and action both abstract and remote. We hear more news than ever which elicits more opinions than ever, but which leave us increasingly impotent, unable to do anything more than offer opinions and bluster about what we might do if we could.

I'm often struck by the productivity of guys who lived hundreds of years ago, without computers, or even modern writing implements. People like Augustine and Jonathan Edwards wrote more books, essays, and sermons that amount to more books than the vast majority of Americans will ever even read. I pray that God will give us wisdom in learning to use modern conveniences for his glory.

Newsweek article on Christianity in America

There's a good article in this week's Newsweek titled The End of Christian America. It's definitely worth reading, and I think rather well written and fair. Here's an excerpt giving some of the statistics that resulted in the article being written:

According to the American Religious Identification Survey that got Mohler's attention, the percentage of self-identified Christians has fallen 10 percentage points since 1990, from 86 to 76 percent. The Jewish population is 1.2 percent; the Muslim, 0.6 percent. A separate Pew Forum poll echoed the ARIS finding, reporting that the percentage of people who say they are unaffiliated with any particular faith has doubled in recent years, to 16 percent; in terms of voting, this group grew from 5 percent in 1988 to 12 percent in 2008—roughly the same percentage of the electorate as African-Americans. (Seventy-five percent of unaffiliated voters chose Barack Obama, a Christian.) Meanwhile, the number of people willing to describe themselves as atheist or agnostic has increased about fourfold from 1990 to 2009, from 1 million to about 3.6 million. (That is about double the number of, say, Episcopalians in the United States.)

On his blog, Al Mohler comments on the article and on his conversations with the the author, who is the editor of Newsweek.