Question 57: If Christ died on Friday afternoon before sundown and rose on Sunday before dawn, how could he say in Matthew 12:40 he would be “three days and three nights” in the grave.

In Jewish reckoning, part of a day accounts for the whole day, all twenty-four hours of it, both the day and the night of it.  Actually, the Gospels have three statements that appear contradictory in Gentile reckoning of time but not in Jewish reckoning of time.  Sometimes Jesus said He would rise “on the third day”.  Sometimes He said He would rise “after three days”.  Jesus also used the expression “three days and three nights”.  All three statements are in the same Gospel so it is not merely a variation among the Gospel writers.  These would be contradictory expressions in Gentile reckoning of time but not in Jewish reckoning where part of the day counts for the whole day.  He did rise “on the third day” because Friday before sundown was the first day, Saturday was the second day, and Saturday evening when three stars became visible was the beginning of the third day, Sunday.  Because part of Sunday counts as all of Sunday, He also rose “after three days”.  And the phrase “three days and three nights” refers to any period of time that touches three days, because part of a day counts for the whole day, both the daylight and night time of it.  For example in Esther 4:16, Esther tells the people to fast for three days and three nights and after these three days of fasting she will then go see the king.  Left to itself that might imply that a three full twenty-four hour fast, and on the fourth day she will see the king.  However, in Esther 5:1, it is on the third day that she goes to see the king and there is no way to squeeze three twenty-four hour periods from that passage, nor is it necessary in light of Jewish reckoning.

Click here to learn more about Ariel Ministries and to enjoy our many online resources. To make this and other resources available, Ariel Ministries relies upon donations from people like you. If you feel the Lord Messiah would have you be a part of this ministry through a financial gift, please click Thank you!

Arnold Answers is a bi-weekly Q & A with founder and director of Ariel Ministries, Dr. Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum.


Missions – To the Jew First

Evangelizing the Jewish People:

The first aspect of the Church’s responsibility is in the realm of evangelism: the Church is responsible to proclaim the gospel to the Jew first.

1. The Principle of Evangelism – Romans 1:16

For I am not ashamed of the gospel: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believes; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

This verse gives the principle of evangelism: whenever the gospel goes out, in whatever means it goes out, it is to go out to the Jew first. There is only one verb that controls the last two clauses, the verb is. It is in the Greek present tense, which emphasizes continuous action. This means that the gospel is continuously God’s power to save, and so it is continuously to the Jew first. If one tries to reinterpret this verse, like so many have, as simply to mean that “the gospel was to the Jew first, but it is no longer,” the verse would then have to mean that “the gospel used to be God’s power to save, but it is no longer.” If the gospel is always God’s power to save, then it is always to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

2. The Principle Applies to All

This principle applies regardless of the method of evangelism, whether it is person to person, door to door, radio, TV, mass evangelism, whatever. This principle applies regardless of specific individual calling. It applies to both active evangelism, when one is doing the work of an evangelist, and to passive evangelism, when one is supporting those who are doing the work of evangelism. Either way, the gospel is to the Jew first.

Some have said, “It is one thing for missionaries of Ariel Ministries to follow this principle, because they are doing the work of full time Jewish evangelism, but does this principle really apply to someone who was called to go elsewhere; such as China, Japan, the American Indian, Taiwan, Africa, Australia, New Zealand? Does it really apply in these cases?”

Paul answers this very issue in Romans 11:13-14:

But I speak to you that are Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle of Gentiles, I glorify my ministry; if by any means I may provoke to jealousy them that are my flesh, and may save some of them.

Here, Paul points to himself as one who was not called to go to Jews. His calling was to be the apostle of the Gentiles, while Peter was the apostle of the Jews. And yet, while Paul’s calling was to be to the Gentiles, he never forgot the principle of Romans 1:16. Everywhere he went, he went to the Jew first.

3. The Principle at Work

Paul’s actions in the Book of Acts shows this very principle at work, beginning in Acts 13:2-3:

And as they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. Then, when they had fasted and prayed and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.

It was in Acts 9 that Paul received his commission to be the apostle of the Gentiles, but only as of chapter 13 is he sent out by the Chuch of Antioch to do just that. Now the apostle of the Gentiles goes out to the Gentiles, but his procedure is always to the Jew first.

Act 13:5 states: And when they were at Salamis, they proclaimed the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews.

Verse 14 states: But they, passing through from Perga, came to Antioch of Pisidia; and they went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.

Acts 14:1: And it came to pass in Iconium that they entered together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spoke that a great multitude both of Jews and of Greeks believed.

Acts 16:12-13a: and from thence to Philippi, which is a city of Macedonia, the first of the district, a Roman colony: and we were in this city tarrying certain days. And on the sabbath day we went forth without the gate by a river side, where we supposed there was a place of prayer.

Because this was a Sabbath prayer meeting, it means that it was a Jewish prayer meeting. Paul came to Philippi, but the Jewish community in Philippi was too small to have a synagogue, and he could not go immediately to the synagogue to proclaim the gospel. When there were not enough Jews in a community to finance a synagogue, the Jewish rule was that they were to have their prayer meeting on the Sabbath by a body of water. Paul waited until the Sabbath day, went to a place where he knew the Jews would gather, and fulfilled the commission to proclaim the gospel to the Jew first.

Another instance of showing the principle of Romans 1:16 at work is found in Acts 17:1-2: Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: and Paul, as his custom was, went in unto them, and for three sabbath days reasoned with them from the Scriptures.

Again in Acts 17:10: And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Beroea: who when they were come thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.

And in Acts 17:16-17a: Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was provoked within him as he beheld the city full of idols. So he reasoned in the synagogue with Jews and the devout persons.

When Paul came into Athens and saw the city given over to idolatry, his spirit was provoked to preach to those who worshipped the idols. However, it was not the Jews who worshipped these idols, because, by then, idolatry had ceased to be a Jewish problem. It was the Gentiles of Athens who worshipped these idols, and he was provoked to preach to these Gentiles. But the principle of Romans 1:16 had to stand, so he went to the synagogue first in verse 17, and then he went on to the Gentile Greeks in verse 18.

Acts 18:1, 4 states: After these things he departed from Athens, and came to Corinth …  And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded Jews and Greeks.

Verse 19 states: And they came to Ephesus, and he left them there: but he himself entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with the Jews.

Acts 19:1, 8 states: And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper country came to Ephesus … And he entered into the synagogue, and spoke boldly for the space of three months, reasoning and persuading as to the things concerning the kingdom of God.

Finally, in Acts 28:17: And it came to pass, that after three days he called together those that were the chief of the Jews.

Because Paul was a prisoner when he came to Rome, he could not go to the synagogue. So to fulfill Romans 1:16, he called the Jewish people to himself in order to proclaim the gospel to the Jew first.


Romans 1:16 is the principle; Romans 11:13-14 teaches that the principle applies to all; and the Book of Acts shows the principle and action at work. The gospel is always to go to the Jew first, both in active evangelism, when one is doing the work of an evangelist as these Acts passages show, but also in passive evangelism, when one is supporting those who are doing the work of evangelism.

Excerpt from The Church and the Jews – PDF and MP3

For a fuller exposition see The Remnant of Israel – Also in iBooks (iPad) and Kindle

True Wisdom – James 3:17-18

’17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without variance, without hypocrisy. 18 And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace for them that make peace.’

True wisdom is the result of a tamed tongue. In verse 17, the evidences of true heavenly wisdom are given: But the wisdom that is from above. But makes a contrast. It is followed by the list of seven characteristics of true wisdom.

He begins by stating: is first pure. By ranking it first, pure becomes primary and fundamental. As an inner quality of wisdom, pure is the most important. All the other descriptive terms are external to a man’s heart. To be pure signifies it is undefiled and clean. As a word used of Jesus in I John 3:3, it is free from all of the characteristics of false wisdom. Then, a list of external characteristics follows. Note how then ensues logically, reasonably from the internal purity.

The second characteristic is: peaceable, which promotes peace and tries to heal divisions but not at the expense of purity.

The third characteristic is: gentle. The Greek denotes “gentle;” “considerate;” “forbearing;” “courteous;” “reasonable;” “kindly.” It is a disposition that does not insist upon its own rights; it pertains to that which regards the feelings of others, carrying the concept of equity and fairness.

The fourth characteristic is: easy to be entreated or approached. This is a Greek word placed only in this verse and nowhere else. Outside the New Testament, it was used of someone who submitted to military discipline. In this situation, it conveys openness to reason; willingness to yield; to be easily persuaded. Conversely, it opposes being stubborn and unyielding.

The fifth characteristic is: full of mercy, yielding compassion, pity, kind actions, and helpful deeds. As a result, good fruits are produced on behalf of the needy. This reference is to kind actions and helpful deeds. Good modifies fruits meaning beneficial. The word fruits is plural because it results in a variety of good works.

The sixth characteristic is: without variance, without partiality and prejudice. This Greek word appears only here in verse 17 and nowhere else in the New Testament. It denotes “to be undivided,” without division or discord, and it reinforces consistency in contrast to the uncontrolled tongue, which was described in earlier verses as inconsistent.

The seventh characteristic is: without hypocrisy; sincere, genuine, and free from all pretense.

Because of these seven characteristics of true wisdom, in verse 18 Jacob/James declares the results of true wisdom: And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace for them that make peace. The phrase fruit of righteousness allows for two possible interpretations. It might be appositional, meaning fruit that consists of righteousness. Or, it might be subjective, meaning fruit that righteousness produces. It is sown in peace; producing peace. It is for them that make peace, or the peacemakers. The fruit of righteousness is sown by peacemakers who enjoy the results of their work. Righteousness cannot be produced when conditions are full of strife, jealousy, and selfishness, which are the products of false wisdom. However, verses 17-18 contain the consequences of wisdom from above that are the counterpart to the results of bad wisdom of verse 16.

Excerpt From: Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum. “The Messianic Jewish Epistles.”

Also in ePub and kindle formats

Titles of Yeshua the Messiah

1. Lamb of God

This title of the Messiah is found in John 1:29 and 36:

29 On the morrow he sees Yeshua coming unto him, and says, Behold, the Lamb of God, that takes away the sin of the world! … 36 and he looked upon Yeshua as he walked, and said, Behold, the Lamb of God!

By giving Him the title of the Lamb of God, John connected Yeshua with two Old Testament elements: the paschal lamb of Exodus 12 and the Messianic Lamb of Isaiah 53. The title Lamb of God emphasizes that He is the fulfillment of the Feast of Passover and that He will be the final Passover sacrifice.

2. Mediator

There are two aspects to Yeshua’s role as mediator.

First, He is the mediator between God and man (I Tim. 2:5).

Second, He is the mediator of the New Covenant. In Hebrews 8:6, He is called the mediator of a better covenant, and in Hebrews 9:15 and 12:24, He is the mediator of a new covenant.

The point here is that, on one hand, He is the mediator between God and man, so He is functioning as a priest. On the other hand, as the mediator of the New—and better—Covenant, He is functioning as the covenant-sealer or signatory.

3. Intercessor

That Yeshua is our intercessor is brought out in Romans 8:34 and Hebrews 7:25:

Who is he that condemns? It is Messiah Yeshua that died, yea rather, that was raised from the dead, who is at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.

Wherefore also he is able to save to the uttermost them that draw near unto God through him, seeing he ever lives to make intercession for them.

Functioning as our intercessor is part of His high priestly ministry in that He intercedes on behalf of the believer before God. The picture is that as mediator, He represents God to man, and as intercessor, He represents man to God.

4. Advocate

The title of Advocate is applied to Yeshua in I John 2:1:

My little children, these things write I unto you that ye may not sin. And if any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Yeshua Messiah the righteous.

The term advocate has the concept of being a lawyer. The reason that believers need Yeshua as their advocate is because of Satan’s title as the accuser of the brethren (Job 1:1-12; 2:4-5; Zech. 3:1-2; Rev. 12:10). Satan still has access to heaven to appear before the very presence of God. He does so for one reason, which is to accuse the brethren. If a believer falls into a state of unconfessed sin, sooner or later Satan will appear before God the Father to accuse that believer. This is the exact reason why believers still need the ministry of Yeshua as an advocate. Whenever Satan has any grounds to accuse a saint, Yeshua can say, “Lay that sin upon my account. I have already paid the penalty for that sin when I died for that person on the cross.”

5. Savior

This particular title emphasizes the Messiah’s work of salvation in that He is the One who saves. As Messiah, He is able to save. By the shedding of His blood, He has provided the basis of salvation. He is viewed as the Savior throughout the New Testament in verses such as Luke 2:11, John 4:42, Acts 5:31, I Timothy 1:1, Titus 2:13, and II Peter 2:20.

Excerpt From: Ariel Ministries. “Messiah Yeshua, Divine Redeemer: Christology From a Messianic Jewish Perspective.”


Anyone who has read through the New Testament soon realizes that it frequently quotes the Old Testament and quotes it in various ways.[1] This is especially true with the Gospels. Sometimes, because the context of the Old Testament quotation does not seem to fit the New Testament context, it appears that the New Testament takes too much liberty with the Old Testament. Rabbinic writings frequently quoted the Old Testament in a variety of ways, and the Jewish writers of the New Testament followed the same procedure. The rabbis gave the four ways of quotation the title of pardes, which stood for pshat, remez, drash, and sod. The New Testament quotes the Old Testament in the same four ways as the rabbis did. This will be a study to see just how the New Testament does quote the Old Testament.

By way of introduction, it should be pointed out that, in the context of the Old Testament, there were four different types of messianic prophecy and four categories of quotations in the New Testament.

There are four types of messianic prophecy in the Old Testament, including: messianic prophecy dealing only with the First Coming of the Messiah (e.g. Deuteronomy 18:15 19), messianic prophecy dealing strictly with His Second Coming and nothing else (e.g. Isaiah 2:1 4), messianic prophecy that blends the two Comings of the one Messiah into a single picture (e.g. ; Isaiah 9:5 7),[2] and messianic prophecy that gives the entire redemptive career of the Messiah, which includes four elements: His First Coming, the interval between the First and Second Comings, the Second Coming, and the Messianic Kingdom (e.g. Ps 110).

The New Testament quotes the Old Testament, but it quotes it in four different ways or categories. Every Old Testament quotation found within the New Testament will always fit into one of these four categories. In this study, Matthew 2 will be used as a base, simply because this one chapter has all four categories of quotations.[3]

Literal Prophecy Plus Literal Fulfillment: Pshat
The first category is known as “literal prophecy plus literal fulfillment,” reflecting the rabbinic pshat, which refers to the simple meaning of the text. The example of this first category is found in Matthew 2:5 6.

This passage in the New Testament quotes Micah 5:2, the context of which is dealing with the birth of the Messiah. The literal meaning of Micah 5:2 is that when the Messiah is born, He will be born in the town of Bethlehem in the region of Judah and nowhere else; not the Bethlehem of Galilee or any other town in Judah.

In the New Testament, there is a literal fulfillment of that literal prophecy. When Yeshua (Jesus) was born as the Messiah, He was born in the town of Bethlehem, and no other town in the tribal region of Judah. Furthermore, He was born in Bethlehem of Judah, not Bethlehem of Galilee. This was a literal fulfillment of Micah 5:2. Hence, literal prophecy plus literal fulfillment. The prophecy makes only one point. When it is fulfilled in the New Testament in a perfect way, the New Testament quotes the Old Testament.

Literal Plus Typical: Remez
The second category of quotations can be labeled “literal plus typical.” In rabbinic theology it was known are remez or “hint.” An example of this category is found in Matthew 2:15.

This verse quotes Hosea 11:1. In the context of Hosea 11:1, the prophet is speaking of the Exodus, a literal historical event, not a prophecy. The background to Hosea 11:1 is Exodus 4:22 23. Israel as a nation is the son of God: Israel is my son, my first born. When God brought Israel out of Egypt, it is pictured by Hosea 11:1 as God bringing His son out of the land of Egypt. That is the literal meaning of Hosea 11:1; it is an historical verse dealing with an historical event, the Exodus.

However, the literal Old Testament event becomes a type of a New Testament event. Now there is an ideal Son of God, the individual Son of God, the Messianic Son of God, the Messiah Himself. When Yeshua was brought out of the land of Egypt as a babe, God was again bringing His Son out of Egypt. This is a type and anti-type. The type was Israel, the national son coming out of Egypt. The anti-type is the Messianic Son of God also coming out of Egypt.

Literal Plus Application: Drash
The third category is “literal plus application,” correlating with the rabbinic drash. The example of this category is Matthew 2:17 18.

This time, Matthew quoted Jeremiah 31:15. The context of Jeremiah 31:15 speaks about the Babylonian Captivity, which was neither historical nor prophetic, but a current event of Jeremiah’s own time. As the captivity was starting, the picture is that the Babylonians gathered all the young Jewish men together at a meeting point where they would then begin marching these young sons away to Babylon. On the way, they went by the town of Ramah near where Rachel was buried. In the Old Testament, Rachel became the symbol of Jewish motherhood. As the young Jewish men were being taken away into captivity, Jewish mothers began weeping for sons they would never see again. Jeremiah pictured this as Rachel weeping for her children; And she would not be comforted, because they are not. Rachel weeping symbolized Jewish mothers weeping because their sons were being taken away from them. They were weeping for sons they would never see again. That is the literal meaning of Jeremiah 31:15: Jewish mothers weeping for sons they would never see again.

That verse is quoted in the New Testament because of one point of similarity. It is not a literal fulfillment nor a full-scale typology, but simply an application because of some point of similarity. In this case, the one point of similarity was Jewish mothers weeping for sons they would never see again because Herod had slaughtered all the males of Bethlehem from the age of two years old and under. Therefore, because of one point of similarity, the New Testament quotes the Old Testament as an application only.

English idiomatic expressions do the same thing. For example, take the saying, “He met his Waterloo.” What does that mean? It does not mean that the man went to Waterloo in Belgium and got defeated in a battle. However, it does go back to an historical event. That historical event had to do with Napoleon, who had ambitions to build an empire, and those rising ambitions finally collapsed at the Battle of Waterloo, when he was defeated by enemy forces. Because of one point of similaritydefeat of an ambitionthat figure is used of a man who is rising to power because of ambition, then suddenly something happens and his whole kingdom collapses. “He met his Waterloo.” Not that he went to Belgium and fought a war; rather, his ambitions were suddenly wiped out because of a climactic event in his life. By the same usage, the New Testament, because of one point of similarity, will often quote the Old Testament.

Summation: Sod
The fourth category is “summation” or “summary.” The meaning of sod is “secret” or “mystery” or “something unknown.” The example of the fourth category is found in Matthew 2:23.

The supposed specific quotation is: he should be called a Nazarene. Try as one may, one will never find a single prophecy that states: he should be called a Nazarene. Some have tried to connect this somehow with Isaiah 11:1, but that connection is tenuous. Verse 23 uses the plural term prophets, not a single prophet.

The fourth category is a summary of Old Testament teaching, not a direct quotation from the Old Testament. The clue is when the word “prophet” is used in the plural, as it is used here. In the first three categories, the word “prophet” is used, in most cases, in the singular. In the fourth category, it is used in the plural: spoken through the prophets. Rather than quoting, the author is summarizing what the prophets said. In this case, the prophets said that he should be called a Nazarene.

What was a Nazarene? A Nazarene was someone who was despised and rejected (John 1:45 46).

Nathanael’s question, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? is reflecting the negative viewpoint people had of Nazarenes. The prophets predicted that the Messiah would be a despised and rejected individual, and this is encapsulated by the term “Nazarene.” In those days, calling someone a Nazarene meant he was despised and rejected. The Messiah would be a despised and rejected individual. That is a summation, not a quotation.


Every New Testament quotation of the Old Testament will fit into one of these four categories. The procedure is not simply “to interpret the Old by the New” as Covenant Theology insists. The procedure is first to see what the original quotation means in its own context. Once the context is determined, then it can also be determined in which of the four categories the quotation belongs. There is no need to conclude that the New Testament changes or reinterprets the Old Testament. Even preachers today make applications of biblical historical or prophetic texts to the modern situation without implying that that was the intent of the original author.


1. This post is a modified version of Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum’s original Messianic Bible Study. The full version may be obtained here.
2. In other words, the prophecy contains a prophecy of the First Coming and a prophecy of the Second Coming, but there is nothing in the text itself to indicate that there is a gap of time between the First and Second Comings.
3. The titles of these four categories come from David L. Cooper’s Messiah: His Historical Appearance (Los Angeles, Biblical Research Society, 1958), but they reflect four rabbinic usages.

Ezekiel 37:15‑28

Chapter 37 of Ezekiel is a highly symbolic chapter.[1] In verses 1‑14, Ezekiel deals with the symbol of the dry bones, which pictures Israel as a regathered nation in a state of unbelief. Verses 15-28 deals with the sign of the two sticks, which pictures the reunification of the divided kingdom. The historical background to this passage is found in I Kings 12 and II Chronicles 10.

Ezekiel 37:15‑17

In verse 15, the word of Jehovah comes to Ezekiel and a new prophecy is announced in verse 16. Ezekiel’s instructions are twofold: first, he is to take one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions. The phrase the children of Israel included the tribes that were allied with Judah: Benjamin and Simeon. Here, the words his companions refer to Judah’s companions. The first stick represents the Kingdom of Judah. Next, Ezekiel is instructed to take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions. The phrase the stick of Ephraim refers to the most prominent son of Joseph, who fathered the Tribe of Ephraim, the most prominent tribe of the northern kingdom. The phrase all the house of Israel refers to the other nine tribes that were allies with Ephraim; these are his companions. The second stick represents the Kingdom of Israel. The actual joining of the sticks is in verse 17. When Ezekiel joins the two sticks together, they appear to be one in his hand.

Ezekiel 37:18‑20

Ezekiel’s actions caused the people to ask for an explanation of this symbolic act in verse 18. The question raised in the minds of Ezekiel’s people, the Jewish people, was “Will you not show us what you mean by these things?” This shows that there has been a change of attitude toward Ezekiel on the part of the people. Instead of poking fun at him or simply ignoring him, he is now taken quite seriously when he performs this symbolic act with the two sticks. Ezekiel answers that God declares: Behold, I, meaning that God Himself will bring Judah and Israel together so that they will once again be one nation. God then explains how they shall be one in my hand. Note that the expression in my hand means God’s hand; it is God who is going to bring this about, not Ezekiel.

     Ezekiel 37:21‑23

The application of the sign is specifically to the people of Israel and Ezekiel emphasizes three things. (1) God will re-gather the Jewish people, (2) the people will be re-unified (cp. 1 Chron 17:21), and (3) God promises a future cleansing from idols, detestable things, and transgressions.

Ezekiel 37:24

Two of David’s offices are revealed in this verse: king and shepherd. The first office is that of a king. In the governmental system of the Messianic or Millennial Kingdom, Jesus will rule as King over the whole world. Under Him, there will be two branches of government: the Gentile branch and the Jewish branch. The Gentile branch of government will be comprised of the Church saints and Tribulation saints, who are destined to co‑reign with the Messiah over the Gentile nations. The resurrected David is destined to co‑reign with Jesus over the Jewish branch. From the viewpoint of the Messiah, David is His servant; but from the viewpoint of Israel, David will be their king. The second office of David is that of a shepherd. As a shepherd, he will guide Israel and he will feed Israel. Never again will Israel have a leader who will lead them astray. Under David’s leadership and shepherding as king, the Jewish nation will walk in the ordinances of God and they will observe God’s statutes in the Millennial Kingdom.

Ezekiel 37:25

Ezekiel brings out two thoughts in this verse, God will give them the Land of Israel; and secondly, they will occupy the Land for generations. The word they refers to the first generation that enters the Kingdom. The phrase their children, and their children’s children refers to the succeeding generations who are born in the Kingdom. The Hebrew word used here for for ever is ad olam, which means “until an age,” not “an eternity.” There is no classical Hebrew word that actually means “eternity.” The closest that Hebrew can come to that concept would be an expression like “without end.” That is, in fact, how God is described. Although the word for ever is very often found in English translations, the Hebrew word is either le olam, which means “unto an age,” or ad olam, which means “until an age.” In other words, once they are brought into the Land, they will continually possess the Land throughout the Kingdom Age. At no point during the thousand years of the Kingdom will they be dispossessed of the Land or scattered out of the Land again. Whereas earlier he was called king and shepherd, now he is called prince. From the viewpoint of Israel, he will be their king; but from the viewpoint of the Messiah, he will be a prince, because He will be under authority of King Messiah. He will be their prince for ever, but again, the Hebrew word used here is ad olam, which means “until an age.” In other words, this will be David’s office throughout the Messianic Kingdom; he will not be deposed from this position whatsoever.

Ezekiel 37:26‑28

The Millennial Temple will be built in the Millennial Kingdom and will be the Fourth Temple spoken of in Scripture. Ezekiel later details this Millennial Temple that God will erect in the Messianic Kingdom in chapters 40‑48. The basis of the Millennial Temple will be the New Covenant, a covenant of peace and it is an everlasting covenant (Jeremiah 31:31‑34).

Ezekiel makes three points. (1) God Himself will place them in the Land; not only will they have the right of possession, they will actually be dwelling in the Land, (2) Once they have settled, God will multiply them; there will be an increase of the Jewish population, (3) God will set His sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.

In this relationship, God states: My tabernacle also shall be with them. The Hebrew word used here for tabernacle means “My Presence‑dwelling” or “My Shechinah Glory.” In verse 26, the emphasis on the word sanctuary was on the holiness of the Fourth Temple, but in this verse, the emphasis on the word tabernacle is that the new Temple will be the dwelling place of the Shechinah Glory. When will the nations, meaning “the Gentiles,” know that Jehovah is the One who sanctifies Israel? God’s answer is: when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore. The Gentile nations will recognize that this restoration and reunification of Israel, with God’s Temple in the midst of them, means that Israel’s God is indeed the only true God. Ezekiel’s vision of the two sticks concludes with the promise that God will set up His dwelling‑place in the midst of the children of Israel.

[1] This post is a modified version of Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum’s original Messianic Bible Study. The full version may be obtained here.


This post offers a few insights about the Book of Habakkuk.[1]

The theme of the Book of Habakkuk is: The just shall live by faith. The name Habakkuk comes from a Hebrew root, meaning, “to embrace.” When writing his name, the last consonant is doubled, thus intensifying the meaning. The name Habakkuk, then, means “full embrace.” Outside of that, nothing else is known about him or his family. There is a Jewish tradition that says Habakkuk was the son of the Shunammite woman. This is based on II Kings 4:16, where Elisha tells the Shunammite woman that she will “embrace a son.” Since the name Habakkuk means “full embrace,” this Jewish tradition claims that Habakkuk was the son of the Shunammite woman. But that is purely traditional and there is no real historical validity to that particular claim.

When the Book of Habakkuk was written can be determined with a fair degree of accuracy from certain statements made within this particular book. For example, it is obvious from Habakkuk 1:1‑5 that Babylonhad not yet risen to empire status, since the appearance of Babylonis prophesied as being a work of God at which Israelwill wonder with great wonder. So the book was obviously written before Babylonbecame a major power. This also means that the book was written before the fall of Nineveh, which occurred in 612 B.C. Ninevehwas destroyed by the Babylonians, so by then, the rise of Babylonto empire status would no longer have been a surprise. Therefore, the Book of Habakkuk must have been written before 612 B.C. It would also appear that the book was written some time after 640 B.C., because the rise of Babylonwas a work that would be done within their lifetime. Habakkuk used the term your days in verse 5, which would put it roughly about 640 B.C. Another clue comes from the superscription in Habakkuk 3:19. Based upon that superscription, the indication is that the book was written at a time when the Levitical priesthood was in full session and operating correctly. The best time to put the writing of the Book of Habakkuk would be during the reign of Josiah, and that fits all of the facts. So the book was written some time between 640‑622 B.C., and more likely during the latter reign of Josiah, after he had thoroughly cleansed theTemple, probably between 630‑622 B.C.

It is obvious from the context that Habakkuk was a prophet living in Judah, since Israel, the northern kingdom, was no longer in existence by then. Based on the superscription of Habakkuk 3:19, it would appear that he was also living in the City ofJerusalem. The locale, then, was definitelyJudah, and most likelyJerusalem.

The historical setting was the time of the reign of good King Josiah. It was a time of great outward prosperity, but the people themselves were inwardly corrupt. Although Josiah’s own heart was right, as far as the people were concerned, much of his reformation was merely external conformity, rather than internal conformity. On the international scene, the Assyrians were no longer an immediate threat toJudah, but they were still a strong power in the days of Habakkuk.

The Book of Habakkuk makes four major points. First, the fact of divine discipline: at some point, God will discipline sin. Secondly, sin is self‑destructive: sin carries within itself the seeds of its own destruction. Thirdly, the just shall live by faith. And fourthly, all injustices will be rectified by the Second Coming of the Messiah.

The uniqueness of the Book of Habakkuk is threefold. First, Habakkuk did not prophesy to the nation or to the people as other prophets did, but he spoke to God alone. Secondly, he was not concerned with delivering a message, but the content of his burden is solving a problem. Thirdly, he imparted God’s message, not by prophetic discourse as other prophets did; rather, he imparted God’s message as it came to him through dialogue with God, then he recorded it.

As far as exposition is concerned, the book is divided into three main units. The first unit is the introduction in verse 1; the second unit is comprised of chapters 1:2‑2:20, which deal with the burden of Habakkuk; the third unit is chapter 3, which contains the prayer of Habakkuk.

In the New Testament, Habakkuk is quoted four times. Habakkuk 1:5 is quoted in Acts 13:41. Habakkuk 2:4 is quoted twice in the New Testament: in Romans 1:17 and in Galatians 3:11. It is significant that this verse is quoted by these two particular New Testament books, because it is Habakkuk 2:4 that teaches the theme of the book: the just shall live by faith. In these two books written by Paul, the apostle was particularly concerned with the issue of living by faith. Salvation by faith, justification by faith, sanctification by faith, glorification by faith—the entire life of the believer is a life of faith. Also Habakkuk 2:3‑4 is quoted is in Hebrews 10:37‑38.

[1] This post is a modified version of Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum’s original Messianic Bible Study. The full version may be obtained here.


The Millennium will not begin on the day immediately following the last day of the Great Tribulation because there will be a Seventy‑five Day Interval. During this time between the Great Tribulation and the beginning of the Messianic Age, a number of events will occur.[1]

THE INTERVAL:  Daniel 12:11‑12

The figure of 1,260 days has appeared in Revelation 11:3 and 12:6. This figure—which is the same as the 42 months of Revelation 13:5 and a time and times and half a time of Daniel 7:25 and Revelation 12:14—is equivalent to 3½ years. Sometimes, it is used in reference to the first half of the Tribulation, from the signing of the Seven‑year Covenant to the takeover of the Jewish Temple and the commitment of the Abomination of Desolation by the Antichrist. Other times, it refers to the second half of the Tribulation, from the Abomination of Desolation to the Second Coming of the Messiah, during which time the Antichrist will rule the world. The demise of the Antichrist and the end of the Tribulation will come 1,260 days after the midpoint of the Tribulation.

In this Daniel passage, two other figures are given. The first figure is 1,290 days in verse 11; this is an additional thirty days, during which the Abomination of Desolation remains in the Temple before its removal. The second figure is 1,335 days in verse 12, which is forty‑five days beyond the 1,290‑day period, and seventy‑five days beyond the 1,260‑day period. A special blessing is pronounced on those who will make it to the 1,335th day. The blessing is that those who survive until the seventy‑fifth day of the interval will enter the Messianic Kingdom. That this is indeed a blessing will be seen in this study. There will be many who will fail and die before the 1,335th day comes, although they did survive past the 1,260th day.

A number of events will transpire during the Seventy‑five Day Interval, but it is impossible to determine the chronological sequence of these events. Therefore, they will be studied thematically rather than chronologically.


The event that will signal the beginning of the second half of the Great Tribulation will be the Antichrist’s takeover of the Jewish Temple, from which he will declare himself to be the Almighty God. He will then have the False Prophet set up his image in the Temple, and thus commit the Abomination of Desolation. The word abomination in Scripture always implies some kind of idol, so it is this image of the Antichrist in particular that is indeed the Abomination of Desolation.

The Antichrist will retain control of the world for 1,260 days, after which he will be killed. But the image that had been made alive (Rev. 13:15) will be allowed to continue another thirty days, as Daniel 12:11 states. The Bible does not tell us why the Abomination of Desolation is allowed to continue thirty days beyond the end of the Tribulation.

Keep in mind that there is no real urgency to cleanse this particular Templeto begin with. This is the ThirdTempleor the TribulationTemple, and it is never sanctioned by God like the other temples were. The FirstTemple was built by Solomon and sanctioned by God. The SecondTemple was built by Zerubbabel and also sanctioned by God. Later, when it was renovated by Herod, it was sanctioned by God because Yeshua (Jesus) had no problem seeing it as the center of Jewish worship in His own time. The Fourth Temple, the Millennial or Messianic Temple, will be sanctioned by God, because Yeshua Himself will be responsible for building it. But theTribulationTemple never will be sanctioned by God, as is made clear from a study of the first several verses of Isaiah 66. Because God will not sanction theThirdTemple, He will be in no hurry to cleanse this particularTemple. In fact, this Temple will ultimately be destroyed, because it will not be the Temple of the Kingdom.

After thirty days, the Abomination of Desolation will be destroyed, bringing the Abomination of Desolation to an end.

2.  THE ANTICHRIST:  Revelation 19:20

It is declared that the beast, which is the Antichrist, will be cast alive into the lake of fire. This seems to contradict passages of Scripture such as II Thessalonians 2:8‑9, where we are told that the Antichrist will be killed as one of the first casualties of the Second Coming of the Messiah. Therefore, this verse requires that the Antichrist must be resurrected at this time and then be cast alive into the Lake of Fire. It is for this reason that Isaiah 14:20 declared that the body of the Antichrist will never see burial.

There is some irony to be found in this fact. The term first resurrection applies to the resurrection of all the righteous, although it comes in stages. The term second resurrection applies to the resurrection of all the damned, and this, too, will come in stages. The Messiah was the firstfruits of the first resurrection. The irony here is that the one who would be the counterfeit son will be allowed to act out the counterfeit role to completion by becoming the firstfruits of the second resurrection. But the result of his resurrection will be the Lake of Fire.

3.  The False Prophet:  Revelation 19:20

Also according to Revelation 19:20, the false prophet—the counterfeit holy spirit, who will have a counterfeit gift of miracles by which he will do his work of deception, calling men to worship the Antichrist, to take upon themselves the mark of the beast, and to worship his image—he, too, will be cast alive into the Lake of Fire.

For the first thousand years that theLakeofFirewill be inhabited, the Antichrist and the False Prophet will be there all by themselves.

4.  Satan’s Fifth Abode:  Revelation 20:1‑3

As for Satan, the counterfeit father, he will be cast into his fifth abode, as described in Revelation 20:1‑3. His abode during the Messianic Kingdom will be the abyss¾the section of Sheol or Hades that is a temporary place of confinement for fallen angels.

5.  The Judgment of the Gentiles

Although a great many Gentiles will be killed through the course of the Tribulation, and Gentile armies will suffer slaughter in the Campaign of Armageddon, a number will still be living. All these will now be gathered together for a judgment (Joel 3:1-3; Matthew 25:31‑46, 26:46.

6.  The Resurrection of the Old Testament Saints

The Rapture will include only the Church saints, and it will occur before the Great Tribulation. Later, during the Seventy‑five Day Interval, the Old Testament saints will be resurrected. This is stated by two Old Testament passages, Isaiah 26:19 and Dan 12:2.

7.  The Resurrection of the Tribulation Saints: Revelation 20:4

Not only will there be a resurrection of Old Testament saints, there will also be a resurrection of those saints who will be killed in the course of the Great Tribulation. John sees two groups of saints co‑reigning with Messiah. First, there are those to whom judgment was given. The judgment spoken of here is the Judgment Seat of the Messiah. These saints, then, will be the church saints who will be resurrected at the Rapture of the Church and will receive their rewards in the course of the judgment.

But the second group of saints that John sees are identified as those who have been beheaded because they did not worship the Antichrist nor his image nor were they willing to receive the mark of the beast. Obviously, then, these cannot be anyone else but the Tribulation saints, and they, too, will be resurrected at this time.

8.  The First Resurrection

      A.  The Participants:  Revelation 20:5‑6

The first resurrection involves the resurrection of believers only. According to verse 5, the resurrection of the Tribulation saints completes this first resurrection. It is separated from the completion of the second resurrection by a thousand years.

The point of verse 6 is that the first resurrection involves believers only. This is why it is blessed and holy to be a participant in the first resurrection.

     B.  The Progression:  I Corinthians 15:20‑23

After declaring that a resurrection of the righteous will occur in verses 20‑22, Paul states in verse 23 that the righteous will be resurrected each in his own order. The word translated order is a military term used for a sequence of troops of soldiers marching in a procession or into battle. There is one troop division, followed by another troop division, and so on.

The first resurrection is not a general, one‑time resurrection of righteous ones, it comes in an orderly progression of five stages. First, the Resurrection of Yeshua the Messiah in verse 23—He is the firstfruits of the first resurrection. Secondly, the resurrection of the church saints at the Rapture of the Church, prior to the Great Tribulation (I Thes. 4:16). Thirdly, the resurrection of the Two Witnesses in the middle of the Tribulation (Rev. 11:11‑13). Fourthly, the resurrection of the Old Testament saints (Is. 26:19; Dan. 12:2) during the Seventy‑five Day Interval after the Tribulation. And fifth, the resurrection of the Tribulation saints (Rev. 20:4). The resurrection of the Tribulation saints completes the first resurrection. There will be no such thing as a resurrection of Millennial saints.

The next resurrection that occurs will be that of the unbelievers one thousand years later for the Great White Throne Judgment and before theLakeofFire.

These are the events of the Seventy‑five Day Interval leading up toward that long, special period of history that the faithful look forward to: the Millennium or the Messianic Age.

[1] This post is a modified version of Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum’s original Messianic Bible Study. The full version may be obtained here.

The Old Testament Requirements for Kingship

Following on our last post, we might still ask, “Why is there a need for Matthew’s genealogy of Joseph at all?” Everyone agrees that Joseph was not the real father of Jesus. Let’s look at the Old Testament for further detail.[1]

After the division of the kingdom at the death of Solomon, there were two basic requirements for kingship, one pertinent to the Throne of Judah in Jerusalem and the to he Throne of Israel in Samaria.


No one was allowed to sit on David’s Throne unless he was a member of the House of David.


No one was able to sit on Samaria’s throne unless he had divine appointment through prophetic sanction. Anyone who attempted to rule without prophetic sanction was assassinated (I Kg. 11:26‑39; 15:28‑30; 16:1‑4, 11‑15; 21:21‑29; II Kg. 9:6‑10; 10:29‑31; 15:8‑12).

The Question Resolved

With this background, the question of the Messiah’s right to the Throne of David can be resolved vis-à-vis the two genealogies.

Matthew 1:1‑17: Davidic Descent & The Line of Joseph in Matthew’s Genealogy

Matthew’s genealogy traces the line of Joseph, the stepfather of the Messiah. In verses 2‑6, the line is traced from Abraham and continues down to David and Solomon. In verses 7‑11 the line is traced to Jechoniah, who was one of the last kings before the Babylonian Captivity. It is the person of Jechoniah that is significant in dealing with the genealogy of Matthew because of the special curse pronounced on him in Jeremiah 22:24‑30. In verse 30, the content of this curse was that no descendant of Jechoniah would have any right to the Throne of David. In the genealogy of Matthew, it should be noted that Joseph was a direct descendant of Jechoniah (Mat. 1:16). So, if Yeshua had been the son of Joseph, this would have disqualified Him from sitting upon David’s Throne.

The point of Matthew’s genealogy, then, is to show why Jesus could not be king if He had been Joseph’s son. For this reason, Matthew starts out with the genealogy, and then proceeds with the account of the Virgin Birth, which is the way out of the Jechoniah problem from Matthew’s viewpoint.

Luke 3:23‑38: The Line of Mary in Luke’s Genealogy:

Luke’s genealogy traces the line of Mary and portrays how Jesus could claim the Throne of David. Luke begins his genealogy in the reverse order of Matthew’s, going from the present back into the past. The line is traced until it returns to the family of David in verses 31‑32. However, the son of David involved in this genealogy is not Solomon but Nathan. The important point here is that Mary was a member of the House of David totally apart from Jechoniah. Since Jesus was truly Mary’s son He, too, was a member of the House of David, totally apart from the curse of Jechoniah. In the days of Jeremiah, there was the added requirement for kingship that one had to be a member of the House of David apart from Jechoniah (Jer. 22:24‑30). Zedekiah, who reigned after Jechoniah, was not the son of Jechoniah. In the case of Yeshua, He was a member of the House of David through Mary, totally apart from Jechoniah. In this manner, He fulfilled the first Old Testament requirement for kingship.

Divine Appointment

Furthermore, although there were a number of other descendants of David who could claim equality with Yeshua to the Throne of David, only Jesus was divinely appointed as such (Luke 1:30‑33).

Thus, unlike the purpose of Matthew’s genealogy, Luke’s genealogy shows why Jesus could be king.

There are three further lines of reasoning to suggest that Luke’s account records Mary’s genealogy.

1)     The Talmud refers to Mary as the daughter of Heli. Mary was recognized to be the daughter of Heli as mentioned in Luke 3:23.

2)     The absence of Mary’s name is quite in keeping with Jewish practices on genealogies, and it was not unusual for a son‑in‑law to be listed in his wife’s genealogy.

3)     Matthew is clearly writing from the viewpoint of Joseph – with Mary in a passive role – and in Luke’s Gospel, Joseph is the one who plays the passive role.

[1] This post is a modified version of Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum’s original Messianic Bible Study. The full version may be obtained here.


One question that is often raised is, “Because Jesus was only the son of Mary and not the real son of Joseph, does He have the right to sit on David’s Throne?”[1] Related to this is the issue of the genealogies found in Matthew 1:1‑17 and Luke 3:23‑38:

a)     If Jesus had been the son of only Mary, why was it necessary to give Joseph’s genealogy?

b)     How would someone know that Luke’s genealogy is that of Mary if she is not named in it, but Joseph is?

These are questions that need to be answered satisfactorily in order to provide a basis for understanding why Yeshua could claim the Throne of David.


Of the four Gospels, only two record the events of the birth and early life of Yeshua: Matthew and Luke. For this reason, it is only natural that these two would bother recording a genealogy. While both Matthew and Luke give the story of the birth of Jesus, they tell the story from two different perspectives: Matthew tells the story from Joseph’s perspective and Luke tells the story from Mary’s perspective. Moreover, the purpose of Joseph’s genealogy in the Book of Matthew is set forth to show that if Jesus truly had been the son of Joseph, He could not be king. In the Book of Luke, the purpose of the genealogy of Mary is to show why He could claim the Throne of David.


The question still arises, “Why is there a need for these two genealogies, especially when Yeshua was not the real son of Joseph?” Whereas one popular explanation suggests that Matthew’s Gospel gives the “royal” line and Luke’s Gospel the “real” line, this post will show that the opposite is true.

In his genealogy, Matthew breaks with Jewish tradition in two ways: he skips names, and he mentions the names of four different women: Tamar, the wife of Judah, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba. Why does he mention these four when there are so many other prominent Jewish women he could have mentioned in the genealogy of Yeshua? One thing that the four women had in common was that they were all Gentiles. By naming these four women and no others, Matthew was pointing out that one of the purposes of the coming of Yeshua was not only to save the lost sheep of the House of Israel, but also that Gentiles would benefit from His coming. Three of these women were guilty of specific sexual sins: one was guilty of adultery, another of prostitution, and another of incest. With this, Matthew begins pointing toward the purpose of the coming of the Messiah – to save sinners.

While Matthew breaks with Jewish tradition in these two ways, Luke, however, follows strict Jewish law, procedure, and custom: he does not skip names, and he does not mention the names of any women.

Next time we will explore the Old Testament requirements for kingship.

[1] This post is a modified version of Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum’s original Messianic Bible Study. The full version may be obtained here.