Three Days And Three Nights Or The Third Day?

Three Days And Three Nights Or The Third Day?

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, October 6, 2026 (Donate)

Some people suggest there is a contradiction in the counting for duration of Christ’s body in the grave. But this allegation fades when you understand it properly.[1] But it concerns Christ's crucifixion and resurrection and specifically, how long He was in the grave. 

So why is this an issue? It has to do with the Jonah passage.

Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered, saying, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from You.” But He answered and said to them, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. “For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. “The men of Nineveh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and indeed a greater than Jonah is here. (Matthew 12:38-41, NKJV).

Some interpret “three days and three nights” as requiring three complete 24-hour periods, or 72 hours. This has led some Christians to argue for a Thursday crucifixion (a few even say Wednesday) rather than the traditional Friday crucifixion.

However, Scripture repeatedly says Christ would rise/rose "the third day" (Luke 18:33; Luke 24:46; Acts 10:40; 1 Corinthians 15:4). A strict 72-hour interpretation creates a perceived difficulty: after three complete days and nights have elapsed, the resurrection would seemingly occur on the fourth day rather than the third day. See the alleged difficulty now?

The body of Christ was laid in a new grave to which no one had been laid before. Image requested by Bodie Hodge*

How To Count The Days

One of the key issues is how days were counted in biblical culture. Ancient Jewish reckoning could count part of a day as belonging to that day.

For instance, in the Bible’s book of Esther, it provides an important Old Testament example. Esther requested that the Jews "neither eat nor drink for three days, night or day" before she approached the king (Esther 4:16). Yet Esther 5:1 says that she went before the king "on the third day," rather than waiting until three complete 24-hour periods had expired.

Another example occurs in Matthew 27:63-64. The chief priests and Pharisees remembered Jesus saying, "After three days I will rise." Yet they asked Pilate to secure the tomb "until the third day." Apparently, they understood "after three days" and "the third day" as compatible and equivocal expressions.

We still do this today to a certain degree. If I said I left on Monday and arrived on Saturday, I would have no problem saying that it took me six days to arrive. Does this mean I took six full days of nights and days to arrive and actually made it to my destination on the seventh day? No. Yet, the way I wrote this (“it took me six days”) is inclusive of days and nights (e.g., a 24-hour day).  

Consequently, expressions such as "three days and three nights," "after three days," and "the third day" aren’t in contradict with one another. So any alleged difficulty is solved when you understand the meaning behind the phrases as used culturally at the time.

Even so, this now brings us to the issue of what day Jesus was crucified.

Count Backwards: Sunday (3^rd), Saturday (2^nd), Friday (1^st)

On the Friday-crucifixion understanding, Friday counts as the 1^st day, even though Jesus died around the ninth hour (~3 pm by our modern reckoning) and was buried later that day. Saturday was the 2^nd day. Sunday was the 3^rd day, and Christ rose early that morning.

·       Friday - Day 1: Crucifixion and burial

·       Saturday - Day 2: Christ remained in the tomb

·       Sunday - Day 3: Resurrection

This also fits the statements that Jesus died on the Preparation Day before the Sabbath (Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54) which is Friday. Furthermore, the women discovered the empty tomb on the 1^st day of the week (Matthew 28:1; Luke 24:1). So the traditional Friday-Sunday aligns consistently with Scripture.

Guards were guarding until the third day; Image requested by Bodie Hodge*

Furthermore, it goes back to the earliest church records too. Early Christian writers such as Ignatius and Irenaeus also understood Christ as rising on the third day while accepting the language of "three days and three nights." Their writings aren’t Scripture, but they show that early Christians didn’t necessarily understand Matthew 12:40 as demanding precisely 72 hours.

What About Wednesday Or Thursday Crucifixion That Some Suggest?

For those pushing the full three days and three nights, one must arrive at a Thursday crucifixion (others push it as far back as Wednesday, but I’ve met precious few who would  argue for that).  

The Wednesday or Thursday models are attempts to reconcile Jonah’s comparison in another way. Those pushing for a Thursday crucifixion usually try to interpret John 19:31, as having an extra Sabbath, so that you also have a second Preparation Day for that week.

They call the approaching alternate Sabbath a "high day," as referring to an additional festival Sabbath rather than simply the ordinary weekly Sabbath that fell on the Passover/Feast of Unleavened Bread festival (making it a high Sabbath or high day already).

Even so, these views attempt to provide additional nights between Christ's burial and resurrection in an attempt to have 3 full days and nights (per the comparison to Jonah) between Christ’s death and resurrection.

Such an interpretations is held by respected Christians committed to biblical authority, and the issue shouldn’t be a reason to go start anew church! Nevertheless, there are difficulties with these alternatives. Scripture never states that an additional Sabbath occurred between the crucifixion and the regular weekly Sabbath.

Image from Presentation Library

The biggest problem with this view is that Christ would have risen on the fourth day in that scenario. Moving the crucifixion earlier makes it more difficult to deal with the chronology because of the numerous passages that say that Christ rose or would rise on "the third day" (Matthew 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 27:63-64; Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; Luke 9:22; 13:32; 18:31-33; 24:6-7, 21, 46; John 2:19-22; Acts 10:40; 1 Corinthians 15:3-4). Consider also that Jesus, said He would raise in three days when compared to the temple’s destruction (John 2:19-22). So instead of dealing with the interpretive understanding of the Jonah passage, now you have to deal with a new understanding of a whole bunch of passages!

It’s better to use clear and repeated passages to help interpret a passage that may initially appear difficult (interpret Scripture with Scripture). Matthew 12:40 (Jonah passage) should therefore be understood alongside the many "third day" passages rather than used to overturn or reinterpret all of them.

So why is the Jonah passage the one that seems to stick out. There is an obvious reason that we haven’t discussed yet—but now it’s time!

Be Careful Of Metaphorical Language

Jesus' comparison to Jonah in Matthew 12:40 is metaphorical and functions as a simile: "For as Jonah was...so will the Son of Man be."

The point of the comparison is the correspondence between Jonah's experience and Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, not necessarily a requirement that every chronological detail be mathematically identical. Jonah was as good as dead being swallowed by a specially prepared fish. Yet he came out of watery beast and lived and preached in Nineveh.

And the scribes and Pharisees believed in the account of Jonah! They knew such a task was all too easy for God to accomplish. Yet, here they were arguing over and over with Jesus, who is God.

But take special note…the phraseology comparing Christ’s situation to Jonah’s situation is metaphorical, not literal. Thus, when we read “three days and three nights, we need to understand that this is an allegorical comparison, where the many passages about Christ raising on the third day are founded in historical narrative. So, the third day is the key to understanding Christ’s resurrection for specific timing. Again, use the clear passages for a proper understanding and let the similes be similes.  

The expression "three days and three nights" should therefore be interpreted in harmony with the much more frequent and explicit biblical expression "the third day." So they are complimentary.

Besides, Esther, similar third-day language occurs throughout historical narratives (Genesis 22:4; Genesis 42:18; Exodus 19:11, 16; Joshua 9:16-17; 1 Samuel 30:1; 2 Kings 20:5). Thus, Jesus' Jonah comparison shouldn’t be isolated from the ordinary biblical manner of counting days or from Christ's repeated declarations that He would rise "the third day" (Matthew 16:21; Luke 18:33; 24:46).

Conclusion

The third day being equivalent to the three days and three nights phraseology was a normal expression in biblical accounts when there was a three-day sequence, even when three complete 24-hour periods had not elapsed. With this in mind, the Friday crucifixion and Sunday resurrection makes the most sense biblically and can be easily defended without contradiction.

"Three days and three nights" is best understood according to biblical Jewish reckoning rather than a modern stopwatch calculation of exactly 72 hours. Most importantly, the debate over the precise number of hours shouldn’t overshadow the doctrine on which Scripture is unmistakably clear: Christ truly died, was buried, and "rose again the third day according to the Scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15:3-4, NKJV).

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist defending 6-day creation and opposing evolution since 1998. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.

Mr. Hodge earned a Bachelor and Master of Science degrees from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught at SIUC for a couple of years as a Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of undergraduate engineering and running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did research on advanced ceramic materials to develop a new method of production of titanium diboride with a grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test Engineer for Caterpillar, Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.

His love of science was coupled with a love of history, philosophy, and theology. For about one year of his life, Bodie was editing and updating a theological, historical, and scientific dictionary/encyclopedia. Mr. Hodge has over 25 years of experience in writing, speaking and researching in these fields.

*Image by generative program as requested by Bodie Hodge

 

---

[1] I’ve commented on this before with my colleague and brother in Christ, Paul Taylor: Was Jesus In The Grave For Three Days And Three Nights? Paul Taylor and Bodie Hodge, Biblical Authority Ministries, April 19, 2025, https://www.biblicalauthorityministries.org/2025/04/was-jesus-in-grave-for-three-days-and.html; Paul Taylor and Bodie Hodge, A Matter of Days, Biblical Authority Ministries, March 20, 2026, https://www.biblicalauthorityministries.org/2026/03/a-matter-of-days.html;

The Islamic Dilemma

The Islamic Dilemma

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, October 5, 2026 (Donate)

Islam is the largest cult of Christianity in the world.[1] Some try to list it as a world religion, and I understand this distinction. But it is technically a cult that has deviated from biblical teaching and changed the nature of Christ, added alleged “new Scripture” (e.g., the Qur’an/Koran and authentic Hadiths) and deviated on who God is, while paying lip service to the Bible.

Where some Christian cults openly change the Bible (to their detriment) to conform to their “new” theology (e.g., the New World Translation or the Joseph Smith Translation) while adding their alleged “new Scriptures” (e.g., Watchtower publications, Studies in the Scriptures, Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrines and Covenants), those in Islam affirm the Bible is true without changes. 

Qur’an, Surah 4:136 O ye who believe! Believe in God and His Apostle, and the Book which He hath sent down to His Apostle, and the Books which He hath sent down aforetime. Whoever believeth not on God and His Angels and His Books and His apostles, and in the Last Day, he verily hath erred with far-gone error. 

The Qur’an repeatedly affirms that biblical texts are the Word of God and thus true in its chapters that are also called Surahs or Suras (e.g., Qur’an 2:40-42,126,136,285; 3:3-4,71,93; 4:47,136, 163; 5:43-51, 66-72; 6:91; 10:37,94; 17:55; 21:7, 105; 29:45-46; 35:31; and 46:11.

The Bible is the collection of books sent down aforetime; Image requested by Bodie Hodge*

This suddenly causes a big problem because the teaching in the Islamic new Scriptures—the Qur’an/Koran—contradict the Bible in many places. In other words, it places the Qur’an (and thus Islam) on two horns of a dilemma. Thus, the famous Islamic Dilemma arises:

·       If the Qur’an is true when it affirms the truth of the Bible, then the Qur’an is false because the Bible contradicts it.

·       If the Qur’an is false when it affirms the truth of the Bible, then the Qur’an is false.

On both horns of this dilemma, the Qur’an is false. Note the devastation of this argument. This isn’t a new argument but has brought for ages. And when Muslims fully grasp this dilemma, they must, if they truly wish to follow God, question the Qur’an. I’ve discussed this dilemma before but this time I wanted to draw it out in detail.[2]

The Islamic Dilemma Response

Many Muslims aren’t taught the devastation of this argument. And if they are taught about the Islamic Dilemma, then they are likely told the solution is to say what certain Muslim scholars say, that “the Bible has been corrupted”. For the astute person, this now causes even more problems! Let me explain.

First, it means that the professing Muslim isn’t a Muslim because they disagree with the Qur’an which says the Bible in Muhammad’s day was true. We have thousands of ancient manuscripts of the New Testament affirming it is the same today. And the Dead Sea Scrolls, Church father quotes, and ancient copies and ancient translations are an amazing confirmation that the Old Testament has been preserved. The Bible we have today is the same as the Bible in Muhammad’s day and is the same as about 2,000 years ago.

So, it should be pointed out a professing Muslim isn’t a Muslim when switch and don’t follow the Qur’an or what Muhammad said. If the professing Muslim will openly disagree with the Qur’an, while professing it is true, then there is a big problem for that person—they have dilemma of their own if they realize it!

Furthermore, the Qur’an says that no one can change the Word of God (Qur’an in Surah 6:34; 10:34).[3] Since the Bible is the Word of God according to the Koran, then it can’t be changed. So again, they are arguing the Qur’an is wrong. See how the problem just keeps getting deeper when someone holds to the position that the Bible has been corrupted?

Note something else, when a professing Muslim takes the position that the Bible has been corrupted, they no longer hold to the Qur’an or Muhammad as being authoritative. Did you catch that? So the logical question to ask what authority have they replaced the Qur’an and Muhammad with?

It was Islamic scholars. It was men! Of course, these scholars do attempt to garner support from the Qur’an but it also fails. Apologist Sam Shamoun points out that Quranic passages commonly used to support corruption claims actually refer to people twisting, concealing, or misinterpreting Scripture rather than rewriting and corrupting the biblical text.[4] Former Muslim turned Christian, Daniel Shayesteh writes:

“The Qur’an itself confirms and defends the Bible, as it existed in the seventh century, as the Word of God.”[5]

When a professing Muslim holds to the position of these men who agree that the Qur’an isn’t accurate with its straightforward declarations about the Bible, they have elevated them to the position of being the supreme authority on the issue. Now, whenever man is elevated to that position, it is called “humanism”.

The Muslim, in an effort to dismiss the Bible, must appeal to fallible, sinful man as a supreme authority to supersede the Bible (and the Qur’an)—this is humanism. The Muslim is no longer a Muslim but a humanist when they do this. They have essentially jumped religions.

A true Muslim must acknowledge the Bible is true from its first to the its last verse, and must conform to it, as the Qur’an says. They should be defending the truth of the Bible, if they want to be consistent with the Qur’an. The problem then comes when the professing Muslim look back at the Qur’an from the perspective of the Bible being true: the Qur’an can’t be true then.

Again, either way you look at it, the Qur’an isn’t true and if one tries to salvage the Qur’an by appealing to the scholars (man) as the greatest authority—you’ve given up Qur’an in even more places and appealed to the religion of humanism to do so! It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that man can err and humanism is full of errors and contradictions.

So, what’s left after all this? The Bible. The Bible is true regardless of the Qur’an. It was true before Muhammad and is to this day. The Bible is the absolute truth because it is the revelation from an absolutely true God.

If a professing Muslim isn’t following the Bible and defending it, then they aren’t a true Muslim because they are openly affirming that the Qur’an and Muhammad were false. Let’s look more closely at the Islamic Dilemma and the biblical divisions to understand this better.

Biblical Divisions

The Qur’an doesn’t simply acknowledge that God once gave revelations that subsequently disappeared or were corrupted. Instead, it repeatedly speaks positively about the book (the Bible), Torah, the writings associated with the prophets, the Psalms, and the Gospel, while claiming that the Qur’an confirms these previous revelations.[6] Before I go any further, let me explain these divisions further.

The Torah is also called the Pentateuch or the Law of Moses—it is the first five books of the Bible (Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy). The Torah makes up the foundational aspect of the Bible.

There are three division of the Old Testament—the Law/Torah/Pentateuch, the Psalms/writings (Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon) and the Prophets. Jesus appealed to all three of these divisions as authoritative

Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.” (Luke 24:44, NKJV)

The Gospel [or Injil/Injeel (the Islamic name)] is the New Testament. The Gospel is broken into two parts—the historical accounts of the Gospel and then the explanation of the Gospel. The four Gospel accounts (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) and the book of Acts make up the historical aspects of the Gospel and its initial historical expansion. The second part is the explanation of the Gospel which consists of the epistles to churches explaining the Gospel in sufficient detail.

So, the Bible is broken into four parts: The Torah, The Prophets, the Psalms/Writings and the Gospel (New Testament). The Koran appeals to all four as authoritative.

Islamic Dilemma

The Torah and the Gospel

Qur’an 5:43-48 (se also Qur’an 7:157) refers Jews and Christians to their respective Scriptures—the Old and New Testaments. The Qur’an tells the people of the Gospel (i.e., Christians) to judge according to what Allah revealed in it based on our Christian Scriptures (5:47).[7]

This command is presented in a context addressing Jews and Christians and their Scriptures. Qur’an 5:66 and 5:68 likewise say that the People of the Book (i.e., the Bible[8]) should observe the Torah and Gospel. Such commands would be difficult to explain if the Torah and Gospel available in Muhammad's time had already become textually unreliable.[9] Robert Morey also points out this dilemma as terrible problem for the Muslim.[10]  

 

This is one aspect of the Islamic Dilemma because the Qur’an teaches that the earlier Scriptures are true. This goes for both the Torah and the Gospel (but the others as well). The argument becomes powerful because the Qur’an speaks of the Torah and Gospel as Scriptures still available during Muhammad's lifetime. Former Muslim turned Christian Sam Shamoun argued that this makes no sense if those previous Scriptures had already been textually corrupted and could no longer be trustworthy.[11] Ankerberg and Weldon point out:

“If Allah does not contradict himself, then everything that has purportedly ‘come down from him’ (the Bible and the Quran) must be in agreement. The Muslim must believe in the doctrinal unity of the books of Allah—the Bible as originally given and the Quran. But we have just seen they conflict. Muslims counter this by asserting that the Bible’s text has been corrupted, but without supplying any credible evidence to back their claims.”[12]

So, if the Torah and Gospel were available and authoritative in Muhammad's day then they were indeed preserved, true, revelations from God—even from the Islamic perspective. Thus, the biblical teachings should be accepted and defended by the professing Muslim.

Yet the Bible contradicts major Quranic teachings. The New Testament teaches that Jesus is the Son of God, was crucified, died for sins, and rose from the dead. Meanwhile, the Qur’an denies Jesus' crucifixion (Qur’an 4:157). Therefore, if the Bible is preserved and true, the Qur’an contradicts Scriptures that it claims to confirm—therefore, the Qur’an is false.[13]

Also, Qur’an 5:43 asks why the Jews were coming to Muhammad for judgment when "they have the Torah," which contains God's judgment. Qur’an 5:44 says that the prophets judged the Jews according to the Torah. Thus, according to Shamoun's argument, the Qur’an speaks of the Torah as an authoritative Scripture actually possessed by Jews in Muhammad's time, not merely as a lost book once given to Moses. See also Qur’an 3:3-4; 5:43-45.[14]

Muslim apologists dispute this argument, especially whether the Qur’an actually confirms the canonical Old and New Testaments rather than merely the original Torah and Gospel revelations. Thus, the central debate is over what Scriptures the Qur’an is actually affirming and whether those Scriptures had been textually corrupted by Muhammad's time. Nevertheless, Muhammad didn’t think so, and the textual support from ancient manuscripts show the Bible hasn’t been corrupted.

The Psalms

The Qur’an specifically recognizes the Psalms, or Zabur, given to David. Koran 4:163 states,

"to David We gave the Psalms"[15]

Qur’an 17:55 repeats that the Zabur was given to David. Qur’an 21:105 even appeals to something written in the Psalms concerning the righteous inheriting the earth. Therefore, the Qur’an's affirmation of earlier revelation extends beyond the Torah and Gospel to David and the Psalms.[16] It this generally the book of Psalms—which is largely the work of David, but others as well, or is it for the general Psalms/writings, which include the book of Psalms? Regardless, when “the book”, which is the Bible, is in reference, it includes all these canonical books.

The Prophets

The Qur’an also recognizes revelation associated with the biblical prophets. Muhammad believed himself to be in the same category. Although Christians would dispute this on biblical grounds as the Revelation from God in the 1^st Century was sufficient once for all (Jude 1:3). And the gift of prophecy was sealed up after the New Testament was written.

Qur’an 2:136 commands belief in what was given to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Jesus, and "the prophets." Qur’an 4:163 similarly refers to revelation given to Noah, Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, Solomon, and David.

Qur’an 5:44 says that the prophets themselves judged according to the Torah. Thus, the Koran places itself within a claimed succession of earlier prophetic revelation rather than presenting all previous revelation as unavailable or unusable.[17]

The Dilemma Restated

Apologist Ron Rhodes writes:

“Muslims face a dilemma when dealing with the Christian Bible. According to the Quran, believers in Allah are not supposed to reject any of Allah’s Scriptures. If they obey the Quran, they are forbidden from accepting only a part of Allah’s revelation to mankind (a revelation that includes the Bible)—see Sura 4:136). Muslims are even commanded to consult the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures for confirmation of Muhammad’s revelations (Surah 10:94). However, if they accept what the Bible teaches—including such doctrines as Jesus being the Son of God, Jesus being God in human flesh, God being a Trinity, salvation being by faith in Christ, and so forth—then they must reject what the Quran teaches. In that case, they would no longer be Muslims.”[18] (emphasis in original)

The repeated affirmations of the Bible being truth in the Koran, leaves the Muslim with an insurmountable problem. If the Torah, Prophets, Psalms, and Gospel (e.g., the Bible) available in Muhammad's time were substantially preserved and true revelation from God, then their teachings are absolute and 100% true according to the Qur’an.

The Qur’an has major contradictions, especially concerning the identity, crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. But if those Scriptures had already been textually corrupted and were false, then the Qur’an's repeated assurance of them, description of them as "guidance and light," make the Koran wrong from that angle. So it is a no-win scenario for the Qur'an. 

If the previous Scriptures (i.e., the Bible) were preserved and true, the Qur’an contradicts Scriptures it claims to confirm, thus the Qur’an is false..

If the previous Scriptures were already corrupted, the Qur’an appears to affirm and direct people toward corrupted Scriptures, thus the Qur’an is false.

Naturally, Muslim apologists dispute this argument, particularly by maintaining that the Qur’an affirms the original revelations given to Moses, David, Jesus, and the prophets rather than necessarily endorsing the entire biblical canon as it existed in Muhammad's time. But this doesn’t hold up as a valid excuse. Shamoun points out that Qur’an 5:43-48 and 5:68 speak of Scriptures actually possessed and used by Jews and Christians—which is the whole of Scripture.[19]

When the dust settles, the Bible is true any way you look at it. The Qur’an is false any way you look at it. The Islamic Dilemma is devastating when properly understood—but only for the Muslim, whom we invite to stand on the authority of the Bible and consider the claims of the true Christ in the Bible and His death, burial, and resurrection. It has eternal consequences in either heaven or hell. If you want to be obedient to God, then you need to read and follow the Bible.  

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist defending 6-day creation and opposing evolution since 1998. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.

Mr. Hodge earned a Bachelor and Master of Science degrees from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught at SIUC for a couple of years as a Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of undergraduate engineering and running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did research on advanced ceramic materials to develop a new method of production of titanium diboride with a grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test Engineer for Caterpillar, Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.

His love of science was coupled with a love of history, philosophy, and theology. For about one year of his life, Bodie was editing and updating a theological, historical, and scientific dictionary/encyclopedia. Mr. Hodge has over 25 years of experience in writing, speaking and researching in these fields.

*Image by generative program as requested by Bodie Hodge

---

[1] Bodie Hodge and Roger Patterson (gen. eds. and co-authors), World Religions and Cults, Volume 1, Chapter 6, Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2015, pp. 141-162.

[2] Ibid; Bodie Hodge and Roger Patterson (gen. eds.), World Religions and Cults, Appendix A [The Bible Versus Other Alleged Holy Books—Bodie Hodge], Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2016, pp. 259-277.

[3] Interestingly, the Qur’an says that its words have been changed! See Qur’an, Surahs 2:106; 15:90-91; 16:101.

[4] Sam Shamoun, "Tawraat (Torah) and Injeel (Gospel) Are Not Changed: So Say Muslim Sources," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026; Sam Shamoun, "The Incorruptibility of Allah's Words and the Charge of Biblical Corruption," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026.

[5] Daniel Shayesteh, The Difference Is The Son, Castle Hill, NSW, Australia, 2004, p. 92.

[6] Sam Shamoun, "The Qur’an on Biblical Authority Revisited," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026.

[7] Sam Shamoun, "The Challenge of the Qur’an & Its Implications for the Muslim Corruption Charges," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026.

[8] Bible literally means “the book”.

[9] Sam Shamoun, "Revisiting the Issue of What the Qur’an Says about the Torah Again!," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026; Sam Shamoun, "Salvation According to Christianity and Islam," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026.

[10] Robert Morey, The Islamic Invasion, Christian Scholars Press, Las Vegas, NV, 1960-1977, pp. 133-137.

[11] Sam Shamoun, "The Qur’an Confirms—The Two Testaments of the Holy Bible Are the Torah and Injil!" Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026.’

[12] John Ankerberg and John Weldon, Fast Facts On Islam, Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, OR, 2001, p. 40.

[13] Sam Shamoun, "The Challenge of the Qur’an & Its Implications for the Muslim Corruption Charges," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026.

[14] Sam Shamoun, "The Qur’an Confirms the Bible Has Never Been Corrupted, Part 1," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026; Sam Shamoun, "The Qur’an Confirms: The Two Testaments of the Holy Bible Are the Torah and Injil!," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026.

[15] Note the plural “We”.

[16] Sam Shamoun, "The Qur’an on Biblical Authority Revisited," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026.

[17] Sam Shamoun, "Salvation According to Christianity and Islam," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026; Sam Shamoun, "The Qur’an on Biblical Authority Revisited," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026.

[18] Ron Rhodes, Reasoning from the Scriptures with Muslims, Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, OR, 2002, p. 185.

[19] Sam Shamoun, "The Qur’an's View of the Holy Bible Revisited, Part 1," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026; Sam Shamoun, "The Qur’an Confirms the Bible Has Never Been Corrupted, Part 2," Answering Islam, accessed October 2, 2026.

What Types Of Crosses Were Used In Roman Crucifixions?

What Types Of Crosses Were Used In Roman Crucifixions?

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, September 28, 2026 (Donate)

People argue about everything—it gets annoying sometimes. But even crosses become a debate when talking to some people. Some insist that the cross of Christ broke some of His bones, some insist it was stake without a crossbeam, some want Christ on the cross in their imagery, and others don’t.

Then there are those who argue the Petrine cross (upside down cross) is a Satanic cross. Sometimes, it seems like there is an endless supply of debates in the world! Nevertheless, let’s set our crosshairs on the cross discussion (pun intended).

The Romans, about 2,00 years ago, didn’t use just one standardized form of cross. Several served their purpose. So, when we read about Greek words used in the New Testament such as crux or even stauros broadly, and Roman executioners could adapt the instrument to circumstances—even using nearby trees that might be handy. Several forms became traditionally associated with Roman crucifixion—likely for ease of use and reusability.

Types of Crosses Used by the Romans

1. Crux Simplex - I-Shaped Stake

The simplest form was a single upright post or stake, shaped like an I. IN this instance there is no cross beam, so some suggest this isn’t a proper cross and they have a point.

Even so, a condemned person could be bound or nailed to it with their hands above their head. The Latin term crux simplex is actually a later description as opposed to a Roman technical name. The problem with a stake like this is that it isn’t reusable for long. Once you start nailing into the top, you ruin the entire pole or spend time cutting it shorter and shorter.

Crux simplex; Image requested by Bodie Hodge*

Hence, why the T or t shape is much more adept. You only have to replace a crossbeam from time to time when it gets worn out. So, for efficiency, time, and durability, stakes weren’t the best, but would do if that was all that was available (e.g., a crossbeam was unavailable for instance).

2. Crux Commissa - T-Shaped Cross

This cross resembled a capital T and is often called the Tau cross, after the Greek letter tau. The horizontal crossbeam was positioned at (or near) the very top of the upright post. This configuration is one common possibility for Roman crucifixion.

If the upright isn’t very high, the soldiers could literally lift the person who was attached to the cross beam to the top and fasten it in. Then they attach the foot nail. So, the upright pole could stay intact the whole time if necessary.

But the restriction here is that it doesn’t lift the person up very high for everyone to see to humiliate them further in their death. A lower cross also allows potential rescuers an easier target to save.

Tau cross (crux commissa); Image requested by Bodie Hodge*

A T shaped cross could still be tall, and the crucifiers just get the pole out to affix the crossbeam and the soldiers could stand the entire cross with attached person back into place.

Nevertheless, this surely wasn’t the type of cross for Christ because the Bible revealed that there a plaque placed above Christ’s head saying He was the King of the Jews (in various ways and in 3 languages per Matthew 27:37; Mark 15:26; Luke 23:38; and John 19:19).

3. Crux Immissa - Traditional T-Shaped Cross with an Upper Extension

This is the familiar Christian cross found in Christin imagery and symbolism throughout the world. The upright extended above the horizontal crossbeam. Early Christian tradition strongly associated this form with the crucifixion of Jesus. It also accommodates the Gospel description of the inscription being placed "over His head" (again, see Matthew 27:37; Mark 15:26; Luke 23:38; and John 19:19).

The traditional crux immissa; Image requested by Bodie Hodge*

The condemned person may have carried the horizontal beam, or patibulum, to the execution site rather than carrying the entire assembled cross. The beam could then be attached to an upright post already waiting at the site that could be removed and put back into place once the person and crossbeam are attached. This method like the crux commissa have easily reusable stakes. This was the standard cross that Christians tend to use when depiction the crucifixion of Christ.

4. Crux Decussata - X-Shaped Cross

This cross was shaped like an X. Its name comes from the Roman numeral ten, which was represented by X. Christian tradition associated the X-shaped cross with the Apostle Andrew who was put to death on the X-style crucifixion method, giving rise to the name "St. Andrew's Cross." St. Andrews Cross, also called the Saltire, is what is represented on the Scottish Flag and in part, the Union Jack.

Crux decussata; Image requested by Bodie Hodge*

Evidence that X-shaped structures could be used for punishment exists, but we should be cautious about assuming that this was a common standardized Roman crucifixion form. This was likely a rarer form.

5. Inverted Cross - Petrine Cross

An upside-down traditional cross (Crux Immissa) became known as the Cross of Peter or Petrine Cross. According to early Christian tradition, Peter was crucified upside down because he considered himself unworthy to die in precisely the same manner as Christ.

The New Testament doesn’t explicitly state that Peter was crucified upside down. John 21:18-19 does, however, record Jesus predicting the manner of Peter's death. The tradition of Peter's inverted crucifixion appears in later Christian sources, particularly Origen as quoted by Eusebius.[1]

Petrine or Inverted cross; Image requested by Bodie Hodge*

Thus, the Petrine cross is primarily associated with a particular manner of crucifixion for a specific instance rather than being a separate standard Roman cross design. But having the pole extend above Peter (as the Crux Immissa does) allows the entire cross to be inverted and placed easily into the foundational connection in the ground.

It was Emperor Nero that sentenced both Peter and Paul to death (Paul by beheading) as afforded by the church fathers.[2] This was in AD 68 before Nero killed himself. His hatred for Christians and persecution of them is well documented, and yet, there were even Christians in his own household (Philippians 4:22). 

6. Trees and Improvised Structures

Romans didn’t necessarily require a carefully manufactured cross. Trees, posts, beams, and other available structures could be incorporated into executions. The Latin word crux covered a range of instruments used for execution and torture.

Which Cross Was Used For Jesus?

Scripture doesn’t provide a technical diagram of Jesus' cross (which was going to be used on Barabbas). The traditional crux immissa (t-shaped) is perfectly reasonable. Matthew 27:37 specifically says:

And they put up over His head the accusation written against Him: THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS. (NKJV)

The reference to the inscription being "over His head" fits naturally with an upright extending above the crossbeam, although it doesn’t by itself conclusively establish the exact shape but makes the most sense of the options.

Arms Stretched Out

Although the Bible never explicitly says, "Jesus' arms were stretched out horizontally on the cross," several passages are consistent with His hands or arms being extended. Most significantly, Psalm 22:16 prophetically says, "They pierced My hands and My feet" (NKJV), while Zechariah 12:10 speaks of looking upon "Me whom they pierced."

Jesus Himself foretold Peter's crucifixion with the words, "you will stretch out your hands" (John 21:18-19, NKJV), showing that "stretching out" the hands described crucifixion—in Peter’s case, it was upside down of course.

In the resurrection accounts, Jesus also drew attention to the wounds in His hands (Luke 24:39-40; John 20:25-27). Isaiah 53:12 says that the suffering Servant poured out His soul unto death. Scripture clearly teaches that Christ's hands were pierced and connecting stretched-out hands with crucifixion, so the crux immissa is consistent with this.

Early Christians Unanimously Used A Cross

The earliest surviving Christian references explicitly connect Christ's cross with a t-shape. For instance, the ancient the Epistle of Barnabas [which isn’t a Scriptural book but written soon after the Apostolic age], generally dated to the late 1^st or early 2^nd century, and certainly before about AD 135 mentions it as a T shape.

In brief, Barnabas 9:7-9, the author of Barnabas interprets the T (tau) as representing the shape of the cross. Thus, very early in the post-apostolic period, a Christian writer was already associating the instrument of Christ's crucifixion with the shape of a capital T.

By about AD 150-160, the evidence becomes even clearer. Justin Martyr[3], discusses the shape of the cross and compares it with objects having both an upright and a transverse element. His examples include a ship with its sail, a plow, certain tools, and Roman military standards.

Most significantly, Justin compares the cross with the human body when a person stands upright with his arms extended. This shows that second-century Christians understood Christ's cross as having a horizontal crossbeam rather than merely being a single vertical stake.

Justin's testimony is interesting because he was born around AD 100, placing him relatively close to the apostolic period—potentially learning from those who saw the crucifixion directly. His writings show that the crossbeam of Christ's cross was already well established among Christians by the middle of the 2^nd century.

By the later 2^nd and early 3^rd centuries, the cross (crux immissa) was increasingly recognizable as a Christian symbol. Tertullian, writing around AD 200, described Christians as repeatedly tracing the sign of the cross upon their foreheads during ordinary activities.

Did Christ Carry The Crossbeam Or The Full Cross?

The Bible says that Jesus "went out, bearing His cross" (John 19:17), while the Synoptic Gospels record that Simon of Cyrene was compelled to carry it after Jesus (Matthew 27:32; Mark 15:21; Luke 23:26). However, Scripture doesn’t specify whether Jesus carried the entire assembled cross—which aren’t little flimsy things—or only the horizontal crossbeam (called a “patibulum”).

Historically, there is good reason to think the crossbeam, or patibulum, is what was carried.[4]

·       Roman sources indicate that a condemned person could be required to carry the patibulum to the place of execution, where it would be attached to an upright post. Plautus, writing centuries before Christ, refers to a condemned man carrying the patibulum through the city.

·       Seneca likewise describes condemned men stretching out their arms upon the patibulum. This fits the Roman practice of publicly forcing a condemned person to carry part of the instrument of his execution.

These historical accounts are consistent with what we read in the Bible. The Greek word stauros, translated as cross, could refer to the execution instrument as a whole or only one component of it—i.e., the “cross”-beam. Thus, when John says Jesus was "bearing His cross" (John 19:17), it doesn’t necessarily mean that He carried the entire massive, assembled structure.

Luke 23:26 is also important in that they laid hold of a certain man, Simon a Cyrenian. On him, they laid the cross that he might bear it for Jesus. Again, Luke calls the object the "cross" without describing its construction.

Simon the Cyrene caring the patibulum or crossbeam; Image requested by Bodie Hodge*

Another point needs to be made—Jesus and Simon, were able to carry it. This is reasonable even with a heavy and durable crossbeam/patibulum, but an entire cross shouldn’t be a carriable. It would be drug across the ground (not carried) due to the immense weight and the awkward imbalance of it.

As seen, Roman history makes carrying the horizontal crossbeam, or patibulum reasonable to a person being executed as in Jesus' (or Simon's case when he helped carry it). Jesus carried this beam toward Golgotha until Simon was compelled to carry it. Jesus has been up all night, sweating blood, beaten by the Romans and flogged immensely (the Romans could care less about limitation of the 40 minus 1 lashes in Jewish tradition). Jesus being in such a horrible physical state should be obvious.

At the execution site, the crossbeam was then attached to an upright post of the traditional cross-shaped structure upon which Jesus was nailed and crucified.

Conclusion

Roman crucifixions could involve the simple stake, T-shaped (Tau) cross, traditional cross with an upper extension (crux immissa), X-shaped cross, and variations or improvised structures. The soldiers just wanted to get the job done effectively. 

The inverted Petrine cross describes the manner of Peter's execution. The Romans' objective was punishment, public humiliation, pain, and deterrence, not conformity to one universal cross design.

Even so, we can ascertain that the likely cross of Christ has been accurately transmitted down through the ages and based on careful Scriptural description, it was surely the crux immissa or t-shaped cross.

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist defending 6-day creation and opposing evolution since 1998. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.

Mr. Hodge earned a Bachelor and Master of Science degrees from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught at SIUC for a couple of years as a Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of undergraduate engineering and running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did research on advanced ceramic materials to develop a new method of production of titanium diboride with a grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test Engineer for Caterpillar, Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.

His love of science was coupled with a love of history, philosophy, and theology. For about one year of his life, Bodie was editing and updating a theological, historical, and scientific dictionary/encyclopedia. Mr. Hodge has over 25 years of experience in writing, speaking and researching in these fields.

*Image by generative program as requested by Bodie Hodge

 

 

 

---

[1] Origen of Alexandria (c. 185–253 AD), as quoted by Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Book 3, Chapter 1.

[2] Tertullian (c. 200 AD), The Prescription Against Heretics and Scorpiace; Eusebius of Caesarea (4^th century), Ecclesiastical History (II.25).

[3] Justin Martyr, First Apology, 55

[4] Plautus, Carbonaria, fragment 2, preserved by Nonius Marcellus (c. 254-184 BC); Seneca, De Consolatione ad Marciam 20.3, 1^st Century AD; see also Seneca De Vita Beata 19.3 and Fragment 124; Ruben van Wingerden, "Carrying a patibulum: A Reassessment of Non-Christian Latin Sources," New Testament Studies 66 (2020), pp. 433-453.