Bringing you the "Good News" of Jesus Christ and His Church While PROMOTING CATHOLIC Apologetic Support groups loyal to the Holy Father and Church's magisterium
Home About
AskACatholic.com
What's New? Resources The Church Family Life Mass and
Adoration
Ask A Catholic
Knowledge base
AskACatholic Disclaimer
Search the
AskACatholic Database
Donate and
Support our work
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
New Questions
Cool Catholic Videos
About Saints
Disciplines and Practices
Purgatory and Indulgences
About the Holy Mass
About Mary
Searching and Confused
Homosexual Issues
Life and Family
No Salvation Outside the Church
Sacred Scripture
back
non-Catholic Cults
Justification and Salvation
The Pope and Papacy
The Sacraments
Relationships and Marriage situations
Specific people, organizations and events
Doctrine and Teachings
Specific Practices
Church Internals
Church History

SearchingForThePassage wrote:

Hi, guys —

Part of our Nicene Creed states:

. . . and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures

  • Which Scripture passage refers to this statement in either the New Testament or
    Old Testament Scriptures?

SearchingForThePassage

  { Where is the phrase: "and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures" in the Bible? }

Mike replied:

Dear SearchingForThePassage —

Thanks for the question.

These Gospel passages give you the Resurrection narratives:

Although they don't explicitly say the third day He rose again the following passages from Luke's Gospel confirm this, when Jesus appears to His disciplines on the road to Emmaus. The last verse Luke 24:46, come right from the mouth of Our Lord, Himself.

  • Luke 24:21

    21 But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel. Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since this happened. (Luke 24:21)

  • Luke 24:46

    46 and said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, (Luke 24:46)

A reading of the other three Gospel narratives in Matthew, Mark, and John can only come to one conclusion: that he rose from the dead on the third day, as He had foretold numerous time before His Crucifixion.

St. Paul makes it very clear in his first letter to the Corinthians:

The Resurrection of Christ

15 1 Now I would remind you, brethren, in what terms I preached to you the gospel, which you received, in which you stand, 2 by which you are saved, if you hold it fast — unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what
I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

1 Corinthians 15:1-8

There are many foreshadowing's in the Old Testament of the Resurrection but I don't know them all. Jonas and the whale is one of them.

Mike

SearchingForThePassage replied:

Thanks for the reply Mike!

I queried this question because I would like to understand how the Council of Nicea formulated the Creed, statement by statement. The discourse of the statement appears to satisfy questions for believing Catholics only, not for the non-believers who require a point of reference other then the New Testament.

I did ponder about the reference to Jonah, and Jesus' statement in John 2:19,

"I will rebuild this Temple in three days"

but only as a reply to the unbelieving compatriots who asked for a sign and authority, not as a prophetic reference from the old books pointing out to His Resurrection after three days.

If the Council however, referred the Gospels as Scriptures, then there's no debate and the statement in contention is valid for me.

  • What's your view on my comments?

In Christ,

SearchingForThePassage

Mike replied:

Dear SearchingForThePassage —

Whether the statement in contention is valid or not, shouldn't even be in question.

For a Catholic it's valid! Our faith is not ultimately based on the Scriptures per se; rather the Scriptures come from the Church that was founded by Christ. Our faith is based on the Word of God, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity (who became a living, breathing Man, like you and me, who is also God, without sin), and the Church He founded in 33 A.D. and whose Holy Spirit was sent to the first Apostles and their successors.

Catholics trust what previous Catholic councils have said as true because we believe they were guided by the Holy Spirit.

  • Why would you expect non-believers to believe in a Church council that is not part of their congregation?

They base their faith on varying recipes of Bible verses instead of receiving the whole Bible;
a Bible the Catholic Church first canonized in 382 A.D. at the Council of Rome.

The teachings of the Council of Nicea were meant primarily for Catholics and others interested in what Catholic Christians believed.

Mike

Searching followed-up later:

Hi Mike!

I'm still interested in pursuing the discourse to anyone who would be interested with the subject of discussion.

I am a still devout Catholic and have no intention of deviating from the Magisterium of the Church. I feel that my query merits discussion to anyone who would like to fully appreciate what being Catholic means. For as long as queries are done in sincerity and with no malice nor with ill intent, discussions serves to enrich and enlighten anyone's spiritually.

Having said so, I proceed with a statement of proposition why the Nicene Creed is as important for the believers and as for non-believers alike.

A Creed made for believers can erroneously be self-serving and detrimental. Thus, a convincing argument must be made for non-believers with an unbiased perspective of the discussion. The Church after all, is Apostolic.

Ironically, I am coming from a discussion from within the fold and thus would be viewed as biased but that's another matter. I'll attempt to query from a non-believer's stand point.

The segment in the Creed . . . .in fulfillment of the Scripture begs to answer from which Scripture?, Old or New?

At the time of our Lord's lifetime, His statements can't be considered Scripture because it's in the present tense. In fact, to what merit does Our Lord hold if all of His arguments have no prophetic reference at all.

. . . on the third day He rose again in fulfillment of the Scripture points to three Old Testament Scriptures as I have come to realize.

2 Maccabees 7:11
Daniel 12:2
Jonah

Maccabees and Daniel's prophetic references indeed proves our Lord's contemporaries wrong when He demonstrated it after three days, in fulfillment of the Old Testament Scriptures from their very own Torah.

The Pharisees got it right, the Sadducees didn't.

Now, alluding to Him rising after three days according to the Old prophetic Scripture is the tricky part. (As mentioned on the road to Emmaus). Far from being known that I'm scripturally versed, I am unable to find that reference but then again, the New Testament is based on Faith as opposed to the Old Testament's being based on the Law.

And as far as I could understand the Torah, it was based on the promised Messiah. Anything after that, the Torah doesn't have further references to what the Messiah will do except the promise of salvation.

It's another discussion how our Jewish brothers interpreted the promise of salvation by political means which led to their downfall but the Torah wanted the Jews to believe in the Messiah through Faith.

Three times Yahweh spoke in public in Jesus' lifetime to believe in Him, and they denied him.

  • Again, to what merit Our Lord would argue that He is the Messiah if He would proclaim it by Himself?

The anointing should come from another reference to make it valid.

And the Jews can't expect the promise of salvation from someone who is not the Messiah.

Thus, the Old Testament Scripture alluding to His Resurrection after three days can't be found (or is difficult to refer to) on the prophetic words, if I correctly surmised.

It must be based on the words of a troubled citizen in Galilee, Nazareth from a carpenter who does prodigies far beyond any prophets have done . . . . in Faith.

Thus, our Lord stated Jonah alluding an old prophetic Scripture of His three-day resurrection in Faith.

His Resurrection should completely dispel any doubts about His people's destiny in resurrection and His appointment as the Messiah.

I can't find any reason for the Jews not to yield if He did . . . which in Faith, I believe He did.

My three cents worth.

In Christ,

SearchingForThePassage

Eric replied:

Dear Searching,

Hosea 6:2 is a possibility. Psalm 41:9-11 doesn't give a number but it talks about being raised up.

There are also mystical references to the third day, such as:

  • the restoration of the cupbearer to Pharoah as prophesied by Joseph (Genesis 40:12-23)
  • the symbolic resurrection of Isaac from the dead on the third day (Genesis 22:1-4)
  • Jonah, and
  • all the other symbolic references to three days.

Hope this helps,

Eric

Please report any and all typos or grammatical errors.
Suggestions for this web page and the web site can be sent to Mike Humphrey
© 2012 Panoramic Sites
The Early Church Fathers Church Fathers on the Primacy of Peter. The Early Church Fathers on the Catholic Church and the term Catholic. The Early Church Fathers on the importance of the Roman Catholic Church centered in Rome.