Does the Torah Speak of Yeshua’s Death and Resurrection

“Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:3–4)

Gage, W. A. (2011). Milestones to Emmaus: The Third Day Resurrection in the Old Testament (p. iv). Warren A. Gage.

Milestone 1: Isaac Delivered from the Knife on the Third Day (Genesis 22:1–14, with focus on verse 4: “Then on the third day Abraham raised his eyes and saw the place afar off.”)

Warren Gage presents this as the first major “milestone” in his argument. He argues that the Tanach (Hebrew Bible) repeatedly foreshadows Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection on the third day. In his framework, the Akedah (Binding of Isaac) serves as a typological preview. Abraham’s journey to the site of sacrifice takes three days. Isaac is essentially “offered” (facing death), but is dramatically spared and “received back” alive on the third day.

As a result, Gage sees this as a pattern of suffering/death threat followed by deliverance/glory on “the third day.” This, in his view, mirrors Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. Furthermore, he connects it to Hebrews 11:17–19. There the New Testament says Abraham “received [Isaac] back as a type” (or figuratively, “in a figure,” ἐν παραβολῇ), implying a resurrection motif.

This is a classic Christian typological reading, and it’s not unique to Gage. Many evangelical scholars and early church fathers (like Origen) have drawn similar parallels. However, when we examine the text of Genesis 22 in its original context, language, and Jewish interpretive tradition, this connection to a literal “third day resurrection” does not hold up as a direct prophetic pattern.

In fact, here’s a step-by-step breakdown of why it doesn’t fit as evidence for Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection “according to the Scriptures.” This is what Paul invokes in 1 Corinthians 15:4.

1. The “Third Day” in Genesis 22:4 Is Simply Travel Time, Not a Theological Marker of Resurrection

• The phrase “on the third day” (בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי / bayyom hashlishi) describes the duration of Abraham’s physical journey from Beersheba to Mount Moriah. That is a distance of roughly 50–70 km, realistic for a three-day walk with servants and a donkey.
• It functions as a narrative detail to build suspense and emphasize Abraham’s obedience over an extended period. There’s no indication in the text itself that the number three carries symbolic weight here related to death and revival.
• The actual near-sacrifice and deliverance happen immediately upon arrival—no additional “three days” of death-like state or burial occur. Isaac is never killed, buried, or resurrected; the knife is raised and stopped in the same moment.

In contrast, Jesus’ resurrection follows a literal three days in the tomb (death → burial → resurrection). The Akedah has no equivalent sequence.

2. No Actual Death or Resurrection Occurs—Only a Threat Averted

• Isaac faces imminent death but is spared by divine intervention, which substitutes a ram for him. Importantly, the text explicitly states: “Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son” (Gen 22:13).
• Hebrews 11:19’s phrase “figuratively speaking” (or “in a parable/figure”) refers to Abraham’s faith that God could raise the dead if needed (v. 19: “He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead”), but it does not claim Isaac was actually dead and resurrected. Therefore, it’s about Abraham’s mindset, not a historical event.
• Jewish tradition (midrashim in Genesis Rabbah and elsewhere) sometimes explores imaginative ideas of Isaac’s ashes or momentary death, but these are later interpretive expansions, not in the biblical text itself. The plain reading (peshat) is clear: no death occurs.

3. Jewish Interpretation of the Akedah Focuses on Faith, Obedience, and Merit—Not Resurrection Typology

• In rabbinic sources, the Akedah is central to Rosh Hashanah liturgy, invoking Abraham’s (and Isaac’s) merit for atonement and mercy on Israel. The ram’s horn (shofar) recalls the ram offered in place of.
• Some medieval texts (e.g., influenced by midrash) speculate on Isaac’s willingness or even symbolic death, but mainstream Jewish exegesis (e.g., Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Rashbam) rejects literal sacrifice or resurrection ideas as contrary to the text.
• The “third day” is rarely, if ever, highlighted in Jewish commentary as a resurrection motif here—it’s practical journey time.

4. Broader Biblical Use of “Third Day” Lacks Consistent Resurrection Theme

• “Third day” appears frequently in the Tanach for various reasons: preparation (Exod 19:11–16, Sinai revelation), travel, recovery (Hos 6:2 is poetic/national revival, not literal individual resurrection), or narrative pacing.
• While some Christian interpreters see a pattern of “suffering then glory on the third day,” this is a retrospective reading. The Tanach itself does not present a unified “third day resurrection doctrine.” For instance, Jonah 1:17 (three days in the fish) is the closest Jesus explicitly cites (Matt 12:40), but even that is about deliverance from peril, not death-and-resurrection in the full sense.

Conclusion on Milestone 1

Gage’s claim relies on a strong typological/allegorical lens. He sees Christ’s shadows everywhere, even where the text gives no internal signal. From the perspective of the Tanach’s original language, context, and Jewish hermeneutics, Genesis 22 teaches profound lessons about faith, obedience, divine provision, and the rejection of human sacrifice.

However, it does not prophesy or typify a Messiah who dies, is buried, and rises on the third day. Instead, the “third day” here is incidental travel, not a deliberate foreshadowing of resurrection.

This pattern repeats in many of Gage’s milestones. A surface-level numerical match (“third day”) is elevated into a prophetic template. But the textual details (no death, no burial, no rising) don’t align with the core elements Paul references in 1 Cor 15:3–4.

Hazan Gavriel ben David