Apostle Abel Damina, a prominent theologian and preacher known for his meticulous scriptural analysis, has sparked renewed discussion around the traditionally accepted timeline of Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. He contends that the widely observed Good Friday commemoration doesn’t align with the biblical narrative, specifically challenging the notion that Jesus died on a Friday and rose on Sunday. Damina argues that this timeline fails to fulfill the scriptural prophecy of Jesus spending three days and three nights in the tomb, a prophecy he links directly to the Old Testament account of Jonah’s three days and three nights within the great fish.
Central to Damina’s argument is the explicit mention of “three days and three nights” in Matthew 12:40, which he believes necessitates a longer period than the Friday evening to Sunday morning timeframe typically associated with the crucifixion and resurrection. He meticulously dissects the traditional timeline, pointing out that from Friday evening to Saturday evening constitutes only one night, and from Saturday evening to Sunday evening constitutes a second night, falling short of the prophesied three. This discrepancy, according to Damina, casts doubt on the accuracy of the Friday crucifixion narrative.
Furthermore, Damina emphasizes the prophetic significance of Jonah’s experience, stating that it foreshadowed Jesus’s time in the tomb. This parallel, he argues, reinforces the requirement for a three-day and three-night entombment, a detail that he believes carries theological weight and underscores the importance of accurately interpreting scripture. He suggests that the misinterpretation of this timeline undermines the prophetic connection between Jonah and Jesus, and by extension, potentially weakens the understanding of Jesus’s sacrifice.
Damina proposes an alternative timeline, suggesting that Jesus died on Wednesday evening, coinciding with what is referred to as “High Mass” in Jewish tradition. This adjusted chronology, he posits, allows for the full three days and three nights in the tomb, fulfilling the prophecy outlined in Matthew. He argues that this Wednesday evening crucifixion aligns with the scriptural account more accurately, providing the necessary timeframe for the three days and three nights.
While acknowledging the established tradition of Good Friday as both a religious and national holiday, Damina encourages a reevaluation of its significance in light of his proposed timeline. He suggests that while the holiday provides a time for reflection, it should not be understood as a literal commemoration of Jesus’s death and burial, as the traditional Friday crucifixion date doesn’t align with the biblical account of three days and three nights in the tomb. He emphasizes the importance of prioritizing scriptural accuracy over tradition, even when it challenges long-held beliefs.
Damina’s assertion challenges a deeply ingrained theological understanding within Christianity, prompting a reassessment of the traditionally accepted timeline of Jesus’s crucifixion and resurrection. His argument, rooted in a literal interpretation of scripture and a focus on prophetic symbolism, encourages a deeper engagement with the biblical text and raises questions about the historical and theological implications of the commonly accepted Good Friday narrative. This alternative perspective, while potentially controversial, contributes to a broader discussion on the interpretation of scripture and its impact on Christian beliefs and practices. It highlights the importance of ongoing critical analysis and open dialogue within theological discourse.
