Return to Answer

The resurrection is typified in Noah's Flood. The Flood typifies/represents the Day of Judgment when this world will be burned up (2 Peter 3:12-13, Rev 21:1, Isaiah 65:17). The world before the Flood represents This World, and the time after the Flood represents "the New Heavens and the New Earth" which God will create. The ark itself typifies the Saviour, only in him will anyone be rescued. The ark coming to rest on Mount Ararat signifies the Messiah entering into the rest of the New Heavens and New Earth before the new creation is yet fully ready for his people.

When the Israelites left Egypt God told Moses the first month would be Aviv or Abib, (literally "Spring"). "This month shall be the beginning of the months. It shall be the first month of the year for you" (Exodus 12:2). After the Babylonian captivity the month would be known as "Nisan". This is the month of the Passover which comes after the Spring Equinox.

Before the Exodus the Israelites followed the Egyptian Calendar where the first month was in the Autumn, and later called "Tishri" by the Jews; and Nisan was the seventh month. Our Lord was crucified on the fourteenth of Nisan, and rose again on the sixteenth Nisan. Noah presumably measured the first day of the month slightly differently to the Jews in New Testament times (and today), producing a difference of only one day (i.e. 17th not 16th).

"And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat" (Genesis 8:4). The ark rested on the 17th Nisan. This represents the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth on the 16th Nisan.

Right back at the time of the Flood, God was prefiguring the resurrection of the Messiah!

(The typical nature of the ark's rest is taken from "The Law of the Offerings" by Andrew Jukes, Kregel, 1966, chapter "The Types in general", page 30).

The TIMING of the Resurrection in the Book of Daniel

According to NT the resurrection is sufficient proof He is the Son of God

The Old Testament, then, is not necessary to prove the resurrection, Paul made no use of it in his sermon. But the resurrection must not contradict the OT, as Isaiah says:

It is not correct to claim that "In and of itself, the resurrection proves nothing. You must bring independent proof from outside the New Testament so as no to be guilty of circular logic." Paul brought no evidence from the OT. If it is circular logic to restrict to the NT alone then why isn't it circular logic to restrict to NT and OT alone? The NT has sufficient evidence within itself to prove it is the Word of God. But as Isaiah 8:20 shows what is needed is to show that the resurrection, and the NT and the OT all agree together, that the NT does not contradict the OT.

We do not have the NT as a solitary witness for the messiahship of Jesus of Nazareth, we have the OT also as an independent witness, that out of the mouth of two or three witnesses everything might be established (Deuteronomy 19:15, Matthew 18:16). And in that the Jews in the main reject Jesus of Nazareth as their Messiah, the witness of the Tanakh is strengthened because there has obviously been no collusion between Christians and Jews in the making or preservation of the OT, seeing the two peoples oppose each other in this matter. The OT and the NT are thus two witnesses which are entirely independent.

The real problem is some people prefer the comfort of the approval of friends and family rather than seeking of the truth, rather seeing the than the praise of God. But Jesus asks us all even now "What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and yet to lose his own soul?" And Jesus repeats the warning found at the end of the book of Isaiah, that those who prefer to proudly disbelieve and carry on in their own wilful rebellion will at the last Day of Judgement be looked upon by the Children of God:

"And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me; for their shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring to all flesh." (Isaiah 66:24, Matthew 5:27-30, Mark 9:43-48).

According to NT the resurrection is sufficient proof He is the Son of God.

The Old Testament, then, is not necessary to prove the resurrection, Paul made no use of it in his sermon to those Gentiles. But the resurrection must not contradict the OT, as Isaiah says:

It is not correct to claim that "In and of itself, the resurrection proves nothing. You must bring independent proof from outside the New Testament so as not to be guilty of circular logic." Paul brought no evidence from the OT when preaching to the Gentiles on Mars' Hill (Acts 17:22 etc).

And if it is circular logic to restrict to the NT alone then why isn't it circular logic to restrict to NT and OT alone? The NT has sufficient evidence within itself to prove it is the Word of God. But as Isaiah 8:20 shows what is needed is to show that the resurrection, and the NT and the OT all agree together, that the NT does not contradict the OT.

We do not have the NT as a solitary witness for the messiahship of Jesus of Nazareth, we have the OT also as an independent witness, that out of the mouth of two or three witnesses everything might be established (Deuteronomy 19:15, Matthew 18:16). And in that relgious Jews accept the OT (the Tanakh) and reject Jesus of Nazareth as their Messiah, the witness of the Tanakh is strengthened because there has obviously been no collusion between Christians and Jews in the making or preservation of the OT, seeing the two peoples oppose each other when interpretting its relevance to Jesus of Nazareth. It doesn't take too much effort to prove that the Jew's own book (- they themselves confirm the words written are from God -) points to Jesus of Nazareth as the promised Messiah.

The OT and the NT are thus two witnesses which are entirely independent.

The real problem is some people prefer the comfort of the approval of friends and family rather than seeking of the truth, rather seeking the praise of men than the praise of God. But Jesus asks us all even now "What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and yet to lose his own soul?" And Jesus repeats the warning found at the end of the book of Isaiah, that those who prefer to proudly disbelieve and carry on in their own wilful rebellion will at the last Day of Judgement be looked upon by the Children of God:

"And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring to all flesh." (Isaiah 66:24, Matthew 5:27-30, Mark 9:43-48).

And note that the time of the call to fasting "three days, night and day" by Esther (Esther 4:16) was at the time of Passover exactly the time when Christ was "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matthew 12:40, Mark 14:14) for Passover was always upon the 14th of Nisan (Exodus 12:6) and Haman's letter for the destruction of the Jews, upon which Mordecai immedately acted, was sent out 13th Nisan (Esther 3:7 & 3:12).

And note that the time of the call to fasting "three days, night and day" by Esther (Esther 4:16) was at the time of Passover exactly the time when Christ was "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matthew 12:40, Mark 14:14) for Passover was always upon the 14th of Nisan (Exodus 12:6) and Haman's letter for the destruction of the Jews, upon which Mordecai immedately acted, was sent out 13th Nisan (Esther 3:7 & 3:12). It is quite possible then that Esther's fast began the same day of the year as the crucifixion and that Esther appeared before the King to intercede for the Jews on what Christians today call "Easter Sunday" or "Resurrection Sunday".