PDA

View Full Version : Good Friday Poll



antichrist
25-03-2005, 06:02 AM
In the flavour of today's holiday we should do something spiritual or otherwise don't take the holiday. All of you Christians at the Doeberl are hypocrites. Playing chess at the time of Christ's death.

At least you should do a few ultimate sacs to compensate. And at 3pm do an "ode" - like turn all the lights off, stop clocks and few minutes silence.

Can mod please modify poll to include "none of the above".

Spiny Norman
25-03-2005, 07:40 AM
... and a happy Easter to you too AC ... compliments of the season! You might also ask what a "good Christian" such as myself is doing on a bulletin board on such a sacred day?

My answer to that is two-fold: (1) I treat all days as equal (so today is not particularly special for me); and (2) even if I did treat today as special, I would have such concern for your eternal soul that I would be forced to visit here just so I could share the good news with you! What good news? God loves you mate! Have a great Easter. :)

:owned:

P.S. Hope everyone else has a good holiday too. I'll be @ home doing paperwork for most of it unfortunately.

P.P.S. I won't make the mistake of ordering fish-n-chips for dinner tonight either .... last year we had to wait about 2 hours! I'm having a BBQ instead.

Trent Parker
25-03-2005, 11:32 AM
I planned dinner for tonight yesterday.... A nice vegie stir fry with some prawns.. mmmmm.

What am i doing here on this sacred day? The rest of my family is down Sussex Inlet camping out over the long weekend. i'm home with my bro. So got nothing else better to do.

Doing paper work frosty? I'm doing work as well...... Cleaning up my room that has been a "bombs hit it" for the last couple of months... :uhoh:

Kevin Bonham
25-03-2005, 12:53 PM
Tonight I'm celebrating the day by going to a black metal gig called "Recrucifying the Bastard". The name of at least one of the bands performing is so inappropriate for this BB that I am surprised said band have not been prosecuted yet.

I have been surprised to discover recently that I can actually listen to black metal; it really isn't all that heavy.

Garvinator
25-03-2005, 12:56 PM
... and a happy Easter to you too AC ... compliments of the season! You might also ask what a "good Christian" such as myself is doing on a bulletin board on such a sacred day?

My answer to that is two-fold: (1) I treat all days as equal (so today is not particularly special for me); and (2) even if I did treat today as special, I would have such concern for your eternal soul that I would be forced to visit here just so I could share the good news with you! What good news? God loves you mate! Have a great Easter. :)

:owned:

P.S. Hope everyone else has a good holiday too. I'll be @ home doing paperwork for most of it unfortunately.
even Jesus cant stop the paperwork :P paperwork is all powerful, dont mess with it ;) :lol: :lol:

eclectic
25-03-2005, 01:17 PM
It should be noted that today is also the feast* (actually i think because it coincides with good friday this year it gets reclassified as a solemnity) of the annunication so a double paradox in that the virgin mary conceives and sees her son die on the same day

eclectic

antichrist
25-03-2005, 04:49 PM
It should be noted that today is also the feast* (actually i think because it coincides with good friday this year it gets reclassified as a solemnity) of the annunication so a double paradox in that the virgin mary conceives and sees her son die on the same day

eclectic

That Holy Ghost has a lot to answer for. Did he pay child maintenance? Did they do a DNA test? May have been the camel trader.

There was a radical uni group in Sydney who would distribute phamplets titled "Kill Christ Again". The leader has now become a feature writer for Sydney Morning Herald.

Spiny Norman
26-03-2005, 09:54 AM
Tonight I'm celebrating the day by going to a black metal gig called "Recrucifying the Bastard". The name of at least one of the bands performing is so inappropriate for this BB that I am surprised said band have not been prosecuted yet.

Desperados hanging on grimly to their marketing "point of difference". :lol:

Rincewind
26-03-2005, 10:11 AM
Desperados hanging on grimly to their marketing "point of difference". :lol:

I suppose they could argue they're talking about Sparticus. :D

Oepty
26-03-2005, 02:01 PM
antichrist, do some maths. How could Jesus have spent three days in the grave if he died 3pm Friday and was raised by dawn on Sunday? I don't hold much store in Good Friday because the idea Jesus died on Friday is just wrong.
Scott

Rincewind
26-03-2005, 02:13 PM
antichrist, do some maths. How could Jesus have spent three days in the grave if he died 3pm Friday and was raised by dawn on Sunday? I don't hold much store in Good Friday because the idea Jesus died on Friday is just wrong.

Mark 15:42 says that he was prepared and entombed on the day before the Sabbath. That would have been Friday afternoon. Then Mark 16:1 says the women went to the tomb the morning after the Sabbath was over (ie Sunday morning). So what's the problem?

Oepty
26-03-2005, 02:23 PM
Under the law of Moses there were three other days also called Sabbath's even though they where not Saturday's. One of these was the Passover. I would contend that the Sabbath referred to is not a Saturaday but the Passover.
Scott

eclectic
26-03-2005, 02:28 PM
antichrist, do some maths. How could Jesus have spent three days in the grave if he died 3pm Friday and was raised by dawn on Sunday? I don't hold much store in Good Friday because the idea Jesus died on Friday is just wrong.
Scott

it's how the reckoning is done

friday for the first day
saturday for the second
sunday for the third

the idea is most likely to indicate that he has been dead for at least a complete day before his resurrection

eclectic

Rincewind
26-03-2005, 03:01 PM
Under the law of Moses there were three other days also called Sabbath's even though they where not Saturday's. One of these was the Passover. I would contend that the Sabbath referred to is not a Saturaday but the Passover.

AFAIK Mark does not make any distinction. Why do you think he is talking about two different Sabbaths?

Oepty
26-03-2005, 03:13 PM
Well it would be my opinion that the Passover was on the Friday and then there was the normal Sabbath was on the Saturday meaning there was two consectative Sabbath's.
Scott

Rincewind
26-03-2005, 03:37 PM
Well it would be my opinion that the Passover was on the Friday and then there was the normal Sabbath was on the Saturday meaning there was two consectative Sabbath's.

That's your opinion but do you have a rationale?

Oepty
26-03-2005, 03:45 PM
Yes.

Rincewind
26-03-2005, 03:54 PM
Yes.

Care to provide it? After all it was you who insisted with...


do some maths. How could Jesus have spent three days in the grave if he died 3pm Friday and was raised by dawn on Sunday? I don't hold much store in Good Friday because the idea Jesus died on Friday is just wrong.

eclectic
26-03-2005, 03:55 PM
Well it would be my opinion that the Passover was on the Friday and then there was the normal Sabbath was on the Saturday meaning there was two consectative Sabbath's.
Scott

here's an interesting link which seems to "support" freddy's idea though not exactly

http://www.heritagebbc.com/archive3/0142.html

note the timeline on the bottom

eclectic

antichrist
26-03-2005, 04:42 PM
Beam me down Scott
In case you don't know why all you sects have been persecuted by the RCC throughout history it is because of your re/misinterpretation of the Bible. It is the Jews and Catholics book and you Johnny-come-latelies want to create new heresies and sow discord for the Church. You deserve everything you get!!

Rincewind
26-03-2005, 05:01 PM
here's an interesting link which seems to "support" freddy's idea though not exactly

http://www.heritagebbc.com/archive3/0142.html

note the timeline on the bottom

I guess baptists and christadelphians are not in exact accord then.

Thunderspirit
26-03-2005, 08:03 PM
Tonight I'm celebrating the day by going to a black metal gig called "Recrucifying the Bastard". The name of at least one of the bands performing is so inappropriate for this BB that I am surprised said band have not been prosecuted yet.

I have been surprised to discover recently that I can actually listen to black metal; it really isn't all that heavy.

Kevvie,
Some may get offended my such a post. Not questioning your right to post it, but Christianity is important to some people..

Rincewind
26-03-2005, 09:24 PM
Some may get offended my such a post. Not questioning your right to post it, but Christianity is important to some people..

Look, all he said was that piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah. ;)

antichrist
26-03-2005, 10:46 PM
Kevvie,
Some may get offended my such a post. Not questioning your right to post it, but Christianity is important to some people..

Correction, some people think that Christianity is important.

Spiny Norman
27-03-2005, 07:04 PM
Look, all he said was that piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah. ;)

"Mum, can I go to the stoning?"

eclectic
27-03-2005, 07:22 PM
"Mum, can I go to the stoning?"

now come on? who said that? own up!

he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... he did ... ...

;)

eclectic

Spiny Norman
27-03-2005, 08:01 PM
"I'll have that large flat stone there, 3 with points .... and ... a packet of gravel".

:eek:

They were in a rush to get him hoisted up on the cross because the Passover was due next day (regardless of whether it was or wasn't a regular Sabbath day, they didn't want to be made cermonially unclean and therefore miss out on the festivities). Anyone who had to handle a dead body would have been unclean. If it were a sabbath next day, then letting things go on after sunset on the Friday would have counted as work and therefore they might've missed their opportunity to get rid of him altogether.

I think Jewish people traditionally counted days based on the number of sunsets (but I am not certain of this), so Friday sunset marked the end of the first day, Saturday sunset the end of the second day, and Sunday morning was therefore "on the third day".

Oepty
27-03-2005, 08:14 PM
I guess baptists and christadelphians are not in exact accord then.

Please note my position is not an offical Christadelphians and I have heard Christadelphians explain the timeline in a very similar way to the one in the link below. There are also theories that suggest that the true date for the Passover was the day before day it was held in Jesus day because of a mix up of dates. In the end I believe that you can put forth credible explainations for Jesus having been crucified on the Thursday or the Wednesday, but in no way can you for it being on the Friday. There is simple not enough time. If you take Jesus dying at 3pm on Friday and start the time there, and maybe it is not the correct starting time, and continue until the lastest possible time as 6am on Sunday morning you have only 39 hours. Not even 2 days. I have looked at this subject awhile ago and had discussion with other Christadelphians who favour the Wednesday explaination and decided that Thursday was the more likely explanation. If someone can prove me wrong well it won't be any big deal to me. I can't be right all the time. I would welcome further discussion on this issue.

Anyway onto there being 2 different Sabbaths. The key New Testament quote to support this is John 19:31 which says that the Sabbath following Jesus death was an high day (KJV, NASB) or a special Sabbath (NIV).

Scott

Rincewind
27-03-2005, 10:02 PM
Anyway onto there being 2 different Sabbaths. The key New Testament quote to support this is John 19:31 which says that the Sabbath following Jesus death was an high day (KJV, NASB) or a special Sabbath (NIV).

That seems a pretty weak link to support the two sabbath idea. A special sabbath might just mean an important one in the calendar (as the passover would be) and not necessarily an extra one. John is also generally taken to be the youngest gospel and written some 10 - 20 years later than the synoptics.

Mark, Matthew and Luke to my knowledge make no mention of a special (or even extra) sabbath.

It seems you want Christ in the ground for 72 hours as this would fit better with the prophesy of resurrection. However, the physical evidence (such as it is) for that length of burial is rather flimsy.

Kevin Bonham
28-03-2005, 10:20 PM
Kevvie,
Some may get offended my such a post.

If they're the sort who think that atheists are any more likely to go to Hell than they are, or the sort who think that all atheists are deluded and/or unhappy, then I shall count that as a bonus.

I hardly need reminding that many Christians are utterly hypocritical on the issue of causing offence and are all too ready to get upset at the slightest insult to their messiah, while gladly propping up a faith that spits out all manner of insults to those who do not believe.

If any Christian reader can convince me that their version of Christianity contains no unwarranted negative judgements or offensive statements about nonChristians then I shall gladly apologise for any offense I might have caused to them personally.

Not otherwise.

Kaitlin
28-03-2005, 10:23 PM
If they're the sort who think that atheists are any more likely to go to Hell than they are, or the sort who think that all atheists are deluded and/or unhappy, then I shall count that as a bonus.

I hardly need reminding that many Christians are utterly hypocritical on the issue of causing offence and are all too ready to get upset at the slightest insult to their messiah, while gladly propping up a faith that spits out all manner of insults to those who do not believe.

If any Christian reader can convince me that their version of Christianity contains no unwarranted negative judgements or offensive statements about nonChristians then I shall gladly apologise for any offense I might have caused to them personally.

Not otherwise.

What if they dont tell anyone what they think
..is that like 'saying nothing bad about anyone'.

antichrist
28-03-2005, 10:39 PM
What if they dont tell anyone what they think
..is that like 'saying nothing bad about anyone'.

Well I will have you know that God says if even if you lust that it is still a sin! So keep your eyes off me!!

Oepty
31-03-2005, 10:46 AM
That seems a pretty weak link to support the two sabbath idea. A special sabbath might just mean an important one in the calendar (as the passover would be) and not necessarily an extra one. John is also generally taken to be the youngest gospel and written some 10 - 20 years later than the synoptics.


You could be right, but I really doubt it. I should have said the key verse to show that the Sabbath being talked about was not only a normal Saturday Sabbath. I don't see any relevance as to whether John is the youngest gospel or not. Makes no difference to me.



Mark, Matthew and Luke to my knowledge make no mention of a special (or even extra) sabbath.

Forgot to check this but I think you are right.



It seems you want Christ in the ground for 72 hours as this would fit better with the prophesy of resurrection. However, the physical evidence (such as it is) for that length of burial is rather flimsy.

Read Acts 10:40 and I Corinthians 15:4. They both say he rose the third day. These accounts of what had happened can not be true of a Friday death and burial. I am not after exactly 72 hours in the grave, this figure is not given in the Bible. It comes from an assumption that the three days and three nights have to be complete, I don't think this assumption has to be made.

Scott

Rincewind
31-03-2005, 11:13 AM
You could be right, but I really doubt it. I should have said the key verse to show that the Sabbath being talked about was not only a normal Saturday Sabbath. I don't see any relevance as to whether John is the youngest gospel or not. Makes no difference to me.

OK not you you but generally accounts written closer to the event in question tend to be more reliable (all other thnigs remaining equal). Recollections are better and less time for popular legends to emerge.


Read Acts 10:40 and I Corinthians 15:4. They both say he rose the third day. These accounts of what had happened can not be true of a Friday death and burial. I am not after exactly 72 hours in the grave, this figure is not given in the Bible. It comes from an assumption that the three days and three nights have to be complete, I don't think this assumption has to be made.

OK then given that what is wrong with the orthodox accounting that Friday is the 1st day, Saturday the 2nd, and the resurrection occuring on Sunday, the 3rd day? This satisfies Ac 10:40 and 1Co 15:4 for my money.

Oepty
31-03-2005, 11:39 AM
OK not you you but generally accounts written closer to the event in question tend to be more reliable (all other thnigs remaining equal). Recollections are better and less time for popular legends to emerge.

That is true, but I doubt John would have got it so wrong seeing it was the incident that he based his whole life on. Secondly not explicitly saying Passover was a Sabbath does not mean they did not know it was a Sabbath. Any Jew would have known it as it occurred once a year they could not help but know it. It is a bit like saying Christmas Day is a public holiday, everyone knows it, at least in my experience.



OK then given that what is wrong with the orthodox accounting that Friday is the 1st day, Saturday the 2nd, and the resurrection occuring on Sunday, the 3rd day? This satisfies Ac 10:40 and 1Co 15:4 for my money.

36 or 39 (depending on where you count the starting point) hours is not even 2 days. Sunday is only the second day since Jesus' death and burial.

Scott

Rincewind
31-03-2005, 12:38 PM
That is true, but I doubt John would have got it so wrong seeing it was the incident that he based his whole life on. Secondly not explicitly saying Passover was a Sabbath does not mean they did not know it was a Sabbath. Any Jew would have known it as it occurred once a year they could not help but know it. It is a bit like saying Christmas Day is a public holiday, everyone knows it, at least in my experience.

Wouldn't you then expect Luke to at least make mention of it then? Since is generally thought that he wasn't from Judea and so such a interesting point would have been noteworthy.


36 or 39 (depending on where you count the starting point) hours is not even 2 days. Sunday is only the second day since Jesus' death and burial.

But you are ignoring that "On the third day" can mean something all together different from "after 3 days".

Rhubarb
31-03-2005, 01:08 PM
Freddy, if you had been born in 1899 and died in 2001 you would have been alive in three centuries but for a lot less than 200 years, correct?

Oepty
31-03-2005, 04:21 PM
Freddy, if you had been born in 1899 and died in 2001 you would have been alive in three centuries but for a lot less than 200 years, correct?

Yes that is true Greg. But for you to be alive in the third century after your birth, you have to be alive in 2101.
Scott

EDIT: Badly written, so changed to make more sense

Oepty
31-03-2005, 04:54 PM
Wouldn't you then expect Luke to at least make mention of it then? Since is generally thought that he wasn't from Judea and so such a interesting point would have been noteworthy.


Good point. One I can not answer at the moment. Will have another look



But you are ignoring that "On the third day" can mean something all together different from "after 3 days".

The third day is the time between the end of day 2 and the start of day 4. The same time as day 3. I don't know what you are are saying it means.
It seems quite clear to me if you count days after Friday, Saturday is the 1st, Sunday is the 2nd and Monday is the 3rd.
Scott

antichrist
31-03-2005, 04:57 PM
To the tune of
I'M A BELIEVER
Gods are only true in fairy tales,
Then for someone else but not for me,
Reason was out to get me
No matter how I tried
Scepticism and doubts on your superstition,
Then I studied philosophy
Now I'm not a believer
I couldn't believe if I tried.
666

with apologies to Neil Diamond

Rhubarb
31-03-2005, 05:13 PM
Hey Baz, I tried. I'm outta here.

Spiny Norman
31-03-2005, 05:59 PM
Hey Baz, I tried. I'm outta here.

A worthy effort it was too! I'll have another try myself. Freddy, I can recommend the following site:

WWW.ASKMOSES.COM

Appears to be run by a Jewish Rabbi. He will actually answer your questions live online! Pretty cool that. Anyway, there's a lot of Passover information there that may be relevant. For example:

What is Passover (or Pesach in Hebrew):
http://www.askmoses.com/qa_detail.html?h=107&o=148

He says that Passover is always on the 15th of Nissan and that this usually equates to a date in April in the Western calendar. The relevant quote is as follows:


B. Passover is a Spring holiday; it starts on the 15th of Nissan (usually sometime in April) and lasts for eight days (in Israel, seven days). The first two and last two days (in Israel, only the first and last day) are major holidays, i.e. on these days it is forbidden to work, drive, turn on or off a light, etc. The middle days are Chol Hamoed.


C. We observe Passover much the same way the Jews did on the first 15th of Nissan in Egypt. Pesach is observed by sacrificing a lamb, eating “bitter herbs”, and Matzah, and purging one’s house of any grain-based leavened item. The lamb is not done today due to the Temple’s absence, but everything else is: the mad, meticulous scrubbing and cleaning of every nook and cranny, the Seders on the first two nights, and the Shabbat-like services on the first and last days.

So it appears that regardless of whether the next day was a "real Sabbath" or not, if Passover was beginning then the next day was a Sabbath-like day of particular importance and required certain observances.

Add all this to Barry's logic (with which I am in agreement) and it seems like a slam dunk to me.

Rincewind
31-03-2005, 08:32 PM
It seems quite clear to me if you count days after Friday, Saturday is the 1st, Sunday is the 2nd and Monday is the 3rd.
(my emphasis)

Please justify why you start after Friday. If he was put in the ground some time on the Friday (as required by the laws of the sabbath) then surely Friday was the 1st day of his interment.


With regard to kegless's point. Say someone was born in 1899 and died in 2001 They completed either 101 or 102 years when they died but lived in the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries. And therefore died in third century in which they lived. It is basically a timing thing and the way we count centuries (from 1801-1900, 1901-2000 and 2001-2100).

With centuries it doesn't come up an awful lot, but with days people tend to be a lot more imprecise. Ask someone how long Doeberl went for they will tell you 4 days Friday to Monday. However the first round starts at 1:30pm on the Friday and the majority of players would have finished their last round game by 1pm on the Monday. "But wait, that's less than three days," you cry...

Oepty
04-04-2005, 01:18 PM
Barry. Read 1 Cor 15:4 again and you should be able to see why I am saying that it means the third day AFTER. I am aware that you can count the way you and others did, but it is NOT the correct way in this case.
Scott

Rincewind
04-04-2005, 02:33 PM
Barry. Read 1 Cor 15:4 again and you should be able to see why I am saying that it means the third day AFTER. I am aware that you can count the way you and others did, but it is NOT the correct way in this case.
Scott

1 Cor 15:4
And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures,

I think you are going to have to help me out here Scott, cause I can't see what you're getting at.

Oepty
04-04-2005, 05:44 PM
It says that he rose on the third day, ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES. This means that any interpretation of what is meant by the third day has to be in line with what the scriptures say, or you have to say Paul was absolutely stupid and wrote something that contradicts the rest of the Bible. That means 3 days/3 nights. To have 3 days you have to have at an absolute minimum 2 complete nights. To have 3 nights nights you have to have at an absolute minimum 2 complete days. So this means that you need as an absolute minimum 48 + a tiny bit hours. This means that using the point of death being 3pm or the point of being put in the ground at around 6pm, as the starting point leaves you with well less than 48 hours and are therefore not agreeing with Paul, and Jesus also when he said he would be in the grave for 3 days and 3 nights.

This is why I said the 3rd day after friday. The 2 quotes I showed don't really give a measuring point for the point from which the 3rd day is mentioned.
Scott

Rincewind
04-04-2005, 06:18 PM
OK, So it is pretty much what I thought when I said


It seems you want Christ in the ground for 72 hours as this would fit better with the prophesy of resurrection. However, the physical evidence (such as it is) for that length of burial is rather flimsy.

So despite the factthat none of the gospels explicitly mention an extra sabbath you construe that there must have been one so that 1 Cor 15:4 is consistent with prophesy which it doesn't explicitly mention.

Sounds like a circular argument to me. You are contruing events to fit the prophesy and then saying, "look, the Christ fulfilled the prophesy".

BTW, how do you know Paul wasn't referring to a scripture which has been lost; or alternatively that Paul didn't believe that a Friday burial and Sunday resurrection would not have fulfilled the prophesy?


Also, do you have a reference to all the OT passages which prophesise a 3 day burial?

antichrist
04-04-2005, 06:26 PM
Freddy, sorry to be rude but Baz you must realise that you are debating a Christadelifian(?), they do their own interpretations, as simple as that, the rest of Christianity may hate them for that but that is how they are.

Trying to make sense of the Bible in any interpretation is impossible anyway, so they cannot be blamed excessively.

Oepty
05-04-2005, 12:50 PM
OK, So it is pretty much what I thought when I said


Okay. I don't remember totally disagreeing with that quote, at least the first sentence of it. I did disagree with the 72 hours bit of it as I explained then and similar thinkings is behind my last post.

Paul account might be wrong, or it might be right. What I am saying is there is a consistent way at looking at the event as recorded in the Bible. That involves not having the death on Friday. I am not too fussed about the details myself, except I have never seen an account with the death being on Friday which I would see a credible. If you can prove that there is one then I will have 3, not 2 options to chose from. I cannot totally prove which day that Christ died on, I don't think I have ever claimed that.



So despite the factthat none of the gospels explicitly mention an extra sabbath you construe that there must have been one so that 1 Cor 15:4 is consistent with prophesy which it doesn't explicitly mention.


I agree, nowhere in the gospels is there a phrase like "and there were 2 sabbaths". It requires some more knowledge of what the Bible teaches to get to a point where you can say there might have been a second Sabbath.
You need to know that the passover was regarded as a Sabbath under the Law. Once you know that you have 2 options, the Passover was on the normal weekly Sabbath or it was not.
There is then the quote from John which talked about before. I still think this is significant, even though you do not.



Sounds like a circular argument to me. You are contruing events to fit the prophesy and then saying, "look, the Christ fulfilled the prophesy".


I don't think I have ever claimed that this fulfilment of prophecy, if it was such, as proof of anything. On the other hand if you could prove that the absolutely no second Sabbath, which I think is impossible in my view. There is definitely is enough evidence to the possibility of 2 Sabbaths. But if you could then you could go back and say that there is a contradiction in the Bible because Jesus did not fulfill prophecy. This means the Bible is lies. I would agree with you, but as I said I think your job is impossible.



BTW, how do you know Paul wasn't referring to a scripture which has been lost; or alternatively that Paul didn't believe that a Friday burial and Sunday resurrection would not have fulfilled the prophesy?

I would see the first as highly unlikely and if the second then he was wrong.



Also, do you have a reference to all the OT passages which prophesise a 3 day burial?
Coming