from Google Images
Just because the Apostles and other disciples of Jesus wouldn’t believe in Jesus’ resurrection, doesn’t mean they had lost all hope. It is true that they didn’t look for Jesus to walk out of the grave, but the mention of the third day by the two traveling to Emmaus indicates that they did look for something to occur three days after Jesus was crucified (Luke 24:21). Nevertheless, how should we understand this? They couldn’t have mentioned the three days in the context of Jesus’ promise to rise again, otherwise their faith in that promise, i.e. to at least look for his resurrection, would have permitted the two to recognize Jesus who walked with them. Moreover their disbelief of the women’s witness, saying it was pure nonsense, shows they couldn’t have been looking for Jesus to rise from the dead. So, what significance did the three days have for Jesus’ disciples?
The third day has had an interesting history in the lives of God’s people. For example, Abraham journeyed with Isaac and on the third day saw the place where he was to sacrifice him (Genesis 22:4). In other words, for three days Abraham’s heart held his son dead, but on the third day he was given back to him. For three days Joseph held 10 of his brothers in prison, saying they couldn’t leave unless one of them would go and fetch their brother, Benjamin, but on the third day, he came and permitted all to return to Jacob, except for Simeon (Genesis 42:18). So, nine were released from prison on the third day.
In Joshua 2:16 the two spies were told to hide themselves in the mountain for three days until those who sought their lives returned to Jericho, and on the third day they would be free to return to their people. Israel camped for three days beneath Mount Sinai, and on the third day the Law was given (Exodus 19:16). Jonah was in the belly of the great fish for three days and three nights, and on the third day he was vomited ashore, as though he were alive from the dead (Jonah 1:17; 2:10). The children of the captivity camped for three days, and on the third day it was found they had no son of Levi (Ezra 8:15). For three days and three nights Esther and the Jews in captivity fasted, and on the third day she put on her royal apparel (Esther 5:1). Israel was humbled under the discipline of God, but believed that after two days he would revive them and on the third day they would be raised up (Hosea 6:1-2). This is a picture not of literal resurrection but of renewal of the nation.
Therefore, although Jesus clearly said he would rise on the third day, the disciples had no context in their worldview to understand a literal resurrection (cf. Luke 24:11). Therefore, they looked for a spiritual kind of resurrection, perhaps of the nation or maybe of the Lord’s work led by a new prophet. It seems clear that the Apostles and disciples with them struggled to understand what might occur on the third day after Jesus was crucified. The two on their way to Emmaus claimed “this is (G71) the third day since these things were done” (Luke 24:21). Literally, the Greek is “this leads (G71) the third day since these things were done” (Luke 24:21). In other words, this day, the first day of the week, is the first day after the third day, so hope was fading, because nothing happened! The disciples had been looking for something to occur on the third day, which would have been the weekly Sabbath (Saturday), but they were losing all hope, because it was now after the third day.
It was this context that Jesus addressed, as he began to upbraid his disciples for their unbelief and slowness to accept what the scriptures say (Luke 24:25-27). Then he explained that according to the scriptures it was necessary for the Messiah to suffer, and he began to tell them about those prophesies that pertained to him (cf. Genesis 3:15; Genesis 49:10; Numbers 21:8-9; Deuteronomy 18:15; 2 Samuel 7; Psalm 16:10, Psalm 22, Psalm 110:1-7; Psalm 118; Isaiah 9:6-7; Isaiah 53:1-12; Daniel 9:25-27; Malachi 4:2-6).
The problem with Jesus’ disciples’ understanding of scripture was that they believed only those prophecies which agreed with what they had been taught about the Messiah (cf. John 12:34).[1] They saw all of the glory of the Messiah, but nothing of the pain in those prophecies. Cherry-picking prophecy doesn’t work. If one is willing to accept the good, one must also be willing to embrace the bad in order to make sense of the good and to put the good in its proper context.
________________________________________
[1] See my earlier study: The Unbelief of the Disciples
Things Paul & Luke 
woodrow nichols
May 19, 2021 at 12:48
Paul said Jesus rose the third day according to the scriptures. 1 Corinthians 15:4. That was only the Old Testament at the time The quote from Hosea would have contributed to this belief. Isaiah, while omitting the third day, still tells us that the dead body of the Messiah would arise with the dead and the Rephaim, that is the spirits of the Giants in Tartarus, thus abolishing Hades. Isaiah 26:19: “Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise.”) Daniel 12:2 is even more specific: “And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.”
Other than that, prophecy has to be cherry-picked, for that is rightly dividing the Word of Truth. After all, false as well as true prophecy is recorded in the Bible. Hulda’s prophecy to King Josiah is the most notable (2 Kings 22:14-20), and don’t forget the Book of Revelation which assures its readers that it will come true quickly and soon. Revelation 1:1 — “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass.”)
The test is Deuteronomy 18:22: “When a prophet speaketh in the Name of YHWH, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which YHWH hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.” Yes, you don’t have to fear this book inspired by Lucifer (Rev. 22:16: “I am the Root and Offspring of David, and the Bright and Morning Star [Lucifer].”)
Woodrow NIchols
Eddie
May 19, 2021 at 15:48
Woodrow, you are utterly amazing. No matter how many times you are proved wrong, according to the Scriptures, you still maintain you are correct. You have no authority to which you appeal, other than yourself. You claim you rightly divide the word of God—you interpret it; you believe your own interpretations; and that settles it!!!
Nothing is said of giants, rephaim, or tartarus in Isaiah 26:19. Zip! That’s what you have. That’s what you always have, yet you continue to regurgitate your false doctrine. The text is speaking **only** of Israel rising, because they’ve been cast out of their land, their kings were made eunuchs in Babylon, and it appeared hopeless that they would be restored as a nation (rise from the dead — once a people were removed from their land by a stronger nation, they were never restored. Cyrus did what no previous king had ever done). There is no mention of the Messiah. Paul never made reference to this Scripture.
Concerning Daniel 12:2, now that is speaking of the resurrection from the dead, but you continue to mix truth with your false doctrine, using **your doctrine** to interpret truth. Thus, you can only end in greater confusion, because the truth, which is there to correct falsehood and point you in the right direction, you have cast aside and interpreted it according to your own foolishness.
Concerning the Apocalypse, you have no idea what that prophecy is about, what was predicted or to whom it concerned. Therefore, it (not you, never you) but **it** (the Apocalypse) must be wrong and a false prophecy, and using Deuteronomy 18:22 doesn’t help you. It only adds greater expression to your ignorance.
woodrow nichols
May 19, 2021 at 16:10
Well, the Revelation of John didn’t come true quickly or soon, or shortly come to pass, did it? As for Isaiah 26:19, the verse ends with “and the earth shall cast out the Rephaim.” It’s in the Hebrew, and, again, I didn’t make it up. As for my theories, I accept them as the best explanation in my opinion, nothing more Paul may not have alluded to this verse, but Peter sure did in 1 Peter 3:18-20. Who do you think were the spirits in prison who were sometimes disobedient in the time of Noah., Those were the spirits of the Nephilim aka Rephaim who were cast into Tartarus [prison]. You can’t change prophecy by smooth exegesis, Eddie.
Woodrow Nichols
Eddie
May 19, 2021 at 19:45
Sure it did! It was fulfilled in 70 AD at the return of Christ to judge Jerusalem and destroy the Temple. This was also the time of the resurrection of the dead and the rewarding of the saints.
Ah! My mistake. I should have come out and said they were not the Nephilim, as I assumed you thought. And, it appears I was correct, for as you state later in your reply you were referring to the Nephilim. They are not the same. The text is using the Hebrew, rephaim metaphorically for the then present condition of the Jews—cast out of the land, the Temple destroyed, and their kings were made eunuchs in Babylon. It was as though they were dead, but they hoped in the Lord that he would bring them back to the land (a resurrection for the nation).
There you go again, Woodrow, adding to the text in an effort to make your false doctrines look true. Peter makes no mention of the Nephilim, nor does he refer to Isaiah 26:19. We went round and round with this before. The “spirits” in prison were the patriarchs prior to the Flood, you know, Lamech, Methuselah etc. He preached to them by the Spirit, which was in Noah, a preacher of righteousness (2Peter 2:5). The prison is the grave, and, by the way, the only ‘prison’ Peter mentions is ‘phulake’ (G5438), not Tartarus, which is a pagan name for the place of the dead who possess a kind of consciousness. They also have a ruler. Perhaps this is what you were referring to—a little truth and a lot of falsehood etc.
woodrow nichols
May 19, 2021 at 22:57
Are you saying that we were born in a world where the Resurrection of the Dead has already taken place? Where are they now? Where is the New Jerusalem? That didn’t come true quickly, soon, or shortly come to pass. You say Isaiah is using the Rephaim as metaphors. Prove it! You know you can’t. My so called false doctrines, which I don’t teach as Truth, are nothing compared to your gift of fiction.
Woodrow Nichols
Eddie
May 20, 2021 at 00:11
They are both not here and all over the earth. Those in literal graves have arisen and they’re not here. On the other hand, living Christians were / are also a part of the resurrection, and we are all over the earth. It isn’t speaking of physical bodies, you know. After all, many bodies were burned up or fully decayed, eaten by animals etc. Where are they? What’s to resurrect? When we pass on, we are given new bodies. The resurrection involved making our spirits alive again, giving them bodies that would permit them to experience the Lord’s creation, and restoring our fellowship with the Lord, which was lost in Eden through Adam’s rebellion.
We, i.e. Christians, are the New Jerusalem. Daniel 2 tells us that the Kingdom which was established in the first century AD was to go on forever, and so it shall.
It is used so in Proverbs 9:18 and 21:16, are you suggesting that the Jews weren’t taken to Babylon about the time Isaiah wrote this? There is no mention of the Messiah in the text, as you suggest it refers to him. You do so without evidence. The same word is used in verse-14 for those who ruled the Jews in the past, but the Lord destroyed them all. None of them will rise to power again, meaning it is used metaphorically in verse-14. Certainly, it couldn’t be referring to the general resurrection, because the unjust would rise to their shame, and this, according to the Scripture you quoted previously, Daniel 12:2. If the unjust would rise, but in Isaiah 26:14 the Jews’ previous conquerors wont’ rise again, it must refer to their coming to power again. Yet, the Jews trusted they would rise again—as a nation, and they did. Cyrus sent them back to their homeland, something no other ruler had ever done. This fits the context. Your giants / Nephilim do not.
woodrow nichols
May 20, 2021 at 02:58
Well, I’m glad you don’t take Revelation literally and I agree that we are the New Jerusalem. But I would say a majority of Christians take Revelation too seriously and are always trying to apply the things in it to current events. I agree the Resurrection is spiritual and that Christ was in a spiritual body with he ate with the disciples and let them feel the nail holes, in other words they can materialize at will. Resurrected bodies are like the bodies of Angels which can have sex and eat food too, like YHWH with his picnic with Abraham before Sodom was destroyed.
Woodrow NIchols
Eddie
May 20, 2021 at 05:22
How would anyone take Revelation ‘literally’ beings with seven heads, ten horns etc.??? Revelation should be taken seriously. By doing so, one can avoid many errors embraced as truth today.
Christ was in his physical body when he arose from the dead. It was important for him to rise in the same body, which was crucified. The Apostles feeling the nail holes serves no purpose whatsoever, if Jesus’ body wasn’t the same body that was crucified.
Angels aren’t sexual beings. Jesus claimed they simply don’t procreate (Matthew 22:30). Sexuality has to do with the flesh. It is how man multiplies. Angels don’t multiply, they are created individually, and we in the Kingdom of God cannot multiply, i.e. produce another human for the Kingdom of God. Each believer is produced by God through preaching and / or reading the word of God. Under the Old Covenant, every Israelite who was born of woman was a member of the Kingdom of God—Israel. It was how God’s Kingdom (physical) grew. Not so today.
woodrow nichols
May 20, 2021 at 10:02
Well, you totally disagree with Genesis 6, where the angels desired human women and mated with them and their offspring were Nephilim, hybred beings. Jesus said they do not marry, but that must be the first estate that they abandoned when they fell from heaven.
Woodrow Nichols
Eddie
May 20, 2021 at 16:42
There you go again, taking what you think is true and making the word of God testify to support your false doctrine.
Jude doesn’t mention anything about anyone but ‘aggelos’ (G32), which can be either a spirit being (angel) or a human (a messenger), like John the Baptizer (I send my ‘messenger’ [aggelos – G32] cp. Mark 1:2). Knowing it can be a spirit or a human, Woodrow naturally chooses the ‘spirit’ in an effort to cause the Greek word to refer to a heavenly being. What was their ‘first estate’ and what ‘habitation’ did they leave? Jude doesn’t say, but Woodrow knows. Woodrow always knows, and makes the word of God support his illogical theories. Woodrow believes angels screwed women in Genesis 6; therefore, Jude **must** be supporting Woodrow’s doctrine. Jude doesn’t mention anything about the giants etc. but, the fact that Jude mentions “aggelos” (G32) who sinned, that’s enough for Woodrow! He can run with that and support all sorts of false theories.
No! What I **totally disagree** with is your asinine interpretation of Genesis 6. Despite God showing you in Genesis 1 that “kind” produces after its “kind,” you make a spirit being rape a human female (how that is done I haven’t a clue), but spirits rape women and produce great big powerful beings, and what does God do? He floods the earth, killing every man, woman and child except for eight people (Noah’s family), and puts the spirits in prison and they’re the ones who caused all the trouble. Some justice eh? Well, I’m glad to understand that this isn’t true, but it’s your theory that’s illogical.
woodrow nichols
May 20, 2021 at 17:06
Peter and Jude accepted 1 Enoch and you don’t. Your beef is with them, not me.
Woodrow Nichols
woodrow nichols
May 20, 2021 at 20:32
Oh, yes, did you ever consider that the Baptist was an incarnation of an Angel of God?
Woodrow Nichols
Eddie
May 20, 2021 at 23:56
No.
woodrow nichols
May 21, 2021 at 09:03
Oh right, you reject the whole idea of reincarnation, even though Christ hints at it in his view that the Baptist was the reincarnation of Elijah.
Woodrow Nichols
Eddie
May 21, 2021 at 09:39
The doctrine of reincarnation is a rejection of grace and the cross. Choose what you believe, Woodrow, because you cannot believe in reincarnation and salvation through the blood of Christ.
woodrow nichols
May 21, 2021 at 14:15
You say I cannot. Who are you to say that? My salvation is eternal, brother. Nothing can take it away from me, regardless of what I believe. As for belief, as I said before, I only weigh probablilities and accept what I think is the best explanation. Jesus’s words about the Baptist are ambiguous, and we have the freedom to choose what we believe is the best explanation, subject to change. I have to call you out on your satanic condemnation of my beliefs based on a ludicrous rejection of a distinct possibility. Thank heavens your ideas are strange, cultic, and arrogant, and have absolutely nothing to do with reality, based on vast speculations of idiocy.
Reincarnation may be what you believe is heaven and I imagine you will be very surprised when you die. What you call the resurrection may be a new life here on earth. God bless you, brother.
Woodrow Nichols