SOMEBODY'S IN TROUBLE

 Recently, I discovered another primitive sect of Baptists in northern Alabama. They are officially titled the Towns Creek Association of United Baptists of the Primitive Faith and Order, founded in 1870. I had not known of any United Baptists that far south until recently. They were formed from churches out of the Will's Creek Association, which was founded in 1836.

Of course,as a historian, I always want to see articles of faith, especially the originals if there has been any change.The main thing I look for is the article on election, or predestination, or atonement. The Towns Creek article on the subject reads as follows:

"We believe in the doctrine of election by grace in Christ, and that God according to His foreknowledge, purpose and grace, chose His people in Christ, before the foundation of the world, thru sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the Truth. (article 6) and "We believe the saints will persevere in and be preserved by grace and never finally fall away nor be lost." (article 7)

Now let's compare this to the Wills Creek article on the same subject, which states:

"God working all things after the counsel of His own will, and all His works from the beginning being known unto Him, of course all that the Father hath given to Christ, through sanctification of the Holy Spirit, and belief of the truth will come unto Him, so that none of them will finally be lost." (article 8)

Both Wills Creek and Towns Creek taught/teach general atonement. If you have followed mine and Stephen's articles of the Eastern District Association of Primitive Baptists, you'll certainly notice that both of these articles share something in common with the Eastern PB association articles, which is the statement "through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth."  This phrase seems to be the "code word" for general atonement beliefs. The Eastern District PB's came out of the Mulberry Gap Association of United Baptists. All three associations mention the statement above, along with foreknowledge (from the beginning being known to Him). This (to me) seems to support the idea of corporate election, as those who are chosen are those who "believe the Truth". It definitely rules out any notion that someone could be saved without hearing the gospel. The Wills Creek article seems more calvinistic to me than the Towns Creek. Perhaps this was an example where there was a mixture of Regulars and Separates,as it does seem more deterministic, yet there is no "certain number" clause, but neither is there any mention of perseverance. If this was the case, then the churches that came out of it to help from the Towns Creek Association, seems to have toned it down further. Wills Creek was formed at the height of the missionary/anti missionary split.

Any historian of Baptist history knows that United Baptists came about as an attempt to unite the Regular and Separate Baptists. There are now two kinds of Uniteds, both of which are general provisionist, one holding to eternal security, the other being totally Arminian. This seems to show that the Uniteds were not always a "mixture" of Regulars and Separates, as much as it was a recognition and acceptance of each others baptisms, ordinations, and church status. It seems that most associations kept their distinctive theologies. Many, such as the Mulberry Gap and Old Bethlehem associations have an article that specifically states the general nature of the atonement.This would also seem to show that the Separates had total Arminians within their camp. This would beg the question as to why are there no totally Calvinist Uniteds? Of course my theory is that the more Calvinistic Uniteds either became Primitive Baptists and dropped their tolerance of general provisionist Baptists, as they may have viewed them to be more in sympathy with missions, or took up the with the Missionary Baptists if they fell on that side of the issue. The Uniteds could still operate under the "United" banner, as there were still two distinct views which were tolerated.

So what are the current practices of Towns Creek? Have they changed over time? It's really hard to tell. The Uniteds were always "tolerant" of things like music, Sunday Schools, revivals and missionary support, although against "boards". Today, Towns Creek practices all those things, but still rejects boards. However, their members send support as individual families to various missionaries. The signs on their churches do not even say "United" they simply say "Baptist". However, they do love acapella singing and practice it often. One elder I spoke with told me his church had a piano, but he can't even remember the last time it was played. The other churches use it unashamedly. One thing all Uniteds have in common is the "mourner's bench" where people pray when they feel burdened or seek salvation, as all Uniteds give an invitation at the end of preaching. They practice foot washing as well. One practice that was new to me, is that of "setting aside" of someone who wished to join, unless it is through baptism. This practice states that one is "set aside" not becoming a member until some time has passed to prove you will be faithful. Preaching is done extemporaneously, like most other primitive groups, and may involve two or more preachers at any one service.

Since Towns Creek is only about an hour and 20 minutes away, I decided to visit one of the churches. The first thing I noticed, was there were plenty of younger people. That is encouraging. Like the Primitives, they practice family integrated worship. Summer is the "revival" season, and each church has a week long revival, so the association has a revival going on somewhere for about 8 weeks straight. I had watched some of their videos before visiting. Throughout all the services I kept hearing the phrase "somebody's in trouble."  It didn't take long for me to realize this was their way saying someone was under conviction, and they hung in the balance. I like the term. I heard testimonies of how when someone came to Christ for salvation, how they had been miserable, couldn't sleep, some fighting Him, yet realizing if they died without Him, they were doomed. At the end of the service, the preacher said once again, "for the last few weeks, I have known that somebody's in trouble. You don't have to be, but you are." Then he gave an invitation, and two precious souls responded, and are candidates for baptism. Are you in trouble? If you don't know Him, you are. We are all in trouble before coming to Jesus. A savior rescues folks who are in trouble. If you are a sinner, you are in trouble. I know I was. What about you?  If not, then sleep well for Jesus said "I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance." However, if you are not righteous, and in trouble, call on Him and be saved!

Beliefs about the Afterlife (LXXVIII)

In the previous two chapters we have given further evidence from the new testament that there is a resurrection of the dead. We have seen how the NT, through the apostle Paul chiefly, affirmed that the resurrection of the crucified body of Jesus Christ was an example of both resurrection and glorification. His resurrection and glorification tells us something of the nature of that stupendous transformation. It was indeed amazing and remarkable that he appeared after his resurrection in the same body that was beaten and flogged with stripes, scarred and wounded, by the Roman soldiers. It was the same body, but yet was not the same body, a seeming paradox. But, more on that as we proceed. It will likewise be the same with "the sons of the resurrection." His resurrection was "the firstfruits" of the resurrection of the righteous dead.

Bodily Transformation

"For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform ('change' kjv) our lowly body that it may be conformed to ('fashioned like' kjv) His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself." (Phil. 3: 20-21 nkjv)

This is a good text to complete our look at those new testament texts have to say about the resurrection of the dead, especially of the righteous; It is also a good text to introduce our deeper study of First Corinthians chapter fifteen. 

This text affirms that the resurrection of the righteous dead will occur when Christ comes again, and that believers in Christ "eagerly wait" ("look for" kjv) for him to come and to transform their mortal bodies and to repay them for all their labors on behalf of him, his people, and his kingdom. 

The text also affirms that the bodies of the risen saints will be transformed so as to be like the resurrected and glorified body of the Lord Jesus Christ. So, it is very important for us to discern what the scriptures say about the risen body of the Lord, about what changes occurred to his physical being.

The resurrection of the righteous dead, or the rapture and translation of the bodies of living saints, will involve a transformation or transfiguration. The Greek word for "transform" is "metaschēmatisei" ("shall change" kjv) and "conformed" is from the Greek word "symmorphon" ("fashioned like unto" kjv). The former word literally means "change the schematic." The latter word has the Greek root word "morph" which means to change the shape and appearance. 

There are several words in the new testament that are closely related, perhaps being even synonyms. Further, we must distinguish between transforming our minds, or thinking, or souls, or spirits, and transforming our bodies. The former is under consideration in this passage:

"And be not conformed (syschēmatizesthe) to this world: but be ye transformed (metamorphousthe) by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." (Rom. 12: 2 kjv)

All these words denote a change in the form (morphe), shape, essence, substance, state or condition, etc. 

Transform (metaschematizo from metá = exchange or change of place or condition plus schematízo, meaning to form, from schema meaning shape, outward form or fashion, the form that is seen) so that the compound word means to change the outward form or appearance of something, or too alter the outward appearance (sometimes in such a way so as to deceive or to feign to be what one is not; see II Cor. 11: 13-15)

Bodily transforming or transfiguring is seen today in people who have had drastic changes in their bodies, such as occurs in facial plastic surgery. It also occurs when actors are given "make up" and other means to disguise their natural appearance so as to look like another person. 

Said one commentator (See here) citing Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest:

"Wuest explains that metaschematizo means "to change one’s outward expression by assuming from the outside an expression that does not proceed from nor is it representative of one’s true inner nature.” The word “masquerade” is an exact English translation."

In other words, the outward appearance of the physical bodies of saints will be transformed and transfigured so that they do not look as they did prior to being resurrected. The words or concept are used in a negative way when used to refer to Satan and his ability to give a false appearance. So we read: 

"For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works." (II Cor. 11: 13-15 kjv)

Thus, we see how the idea of being "transformed" is how one appears to others. Some translations use the words "disguised" or "masqueraded" for their appearance because the transformation of Satan's appearance is not his actual form or state. Also, the transformation of the ministers of Satan in the above text does not seem to be so much in their physical appearance or bodily features as in their personas, or faces, and in what they say and do and in how they present themselves. 

However, the resurrected body of Christ was not a disguise, for his outward appearance was a reflection or image of what he was inwardly. That is not the case with Satan, false ministers, nor with actors. Hence we get the wise proverb that warns "looks can be deceiving." In other words, things are not always as they seem to be. In the above passage the word "false" and "deceitful" are used to describe the changing of appearances of Satan and his ministers. 

The text affirms that the "angels of light" have their proper appearance, as do those who are "ministers of righteousness."  On that we may have more to say later. Other verses that allude to how people are able to change their appearances, in a way of disguise, are these:

“Moreover, when you fast, do not be like the hypocrites, with a sad countenance. For they disfigure their faces that they may appear to men to be fasting. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward." (Matt. 6: 16 nkjv)

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness. “Even so you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness." (Matt. 23: 27-28 nkjv)

The transformation of the risen body of the Lord, however, was no fake or superficial transfiguration, no masquerade or disguise. The outward glorified body was an outward expression of Christ' inner glory and beauty. So it will be with the risen saints.

Another verse that is a companion text to Philippians 3: 21 are these words of the apostle John:

"Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is." (I John 3: 2 nkjv)

The bodies of the risen saints will be transformed and conformed to the glorious body of the Lord Jesus Christ and so they will be like him in body as well as in soul or spirit. 

In discussing "what we shall be" as far as our resurrected body is concerned, we do not have a detailed description. The best description is in first Corinthians chapter fifteen, a passage we have yet to examine in detail, but even with that chapter to help us, we are still left with many questions about the nature of the resurrected and glorified bodies of the saints. So, the apostle says "it has not yet been revealed what we shall be," meaning it has not yet been fully revealed. Certainly Paul revealed much about what we shall be in that chapter. John does say that "we know" some things about it, saying "we shall be like him." So, as previously stated, the more we can discover about the risen and glorified body of the Lord Jesus the more we can know about the risen and glorified bodies of saints.

What is the definition of "glory" (noun) or "glorious" (adjective)? Some of the better synonyms for "glorious" are illustrious, excellent, outstanding, magnificent, having a striking beauty or splendor. It is from the Greek word for "glory" which is "doxa." W.E. Vine says of this word: "primarily denotes "an opinion, estimation, repute;" in the NT, always "good opinion, praise, honor, glory, an appearance commanding respect, magnificence, excellence, manifestation of glory;" hence, of angelic powers, in respect of their state as commanding recognition, "dignities," 2 Pe 2: 10; Jud 1: 8." 

In first Corinthians chapter fifteen Paul will speak of "glory" in regard to the resurrected bodies of the saints and speaks of how "one star differs from another star in glory" and says "so also is the resurrection." He also says there is the sun's glory, the moon's glory, etc. So, how does one star excel another star in glory? It is in the star's brightness, or what is called "magnitude." It involves degrees of brilliance, or effulgence, or radiance (shining forth). The glory of these celestial bodies resides in their magnificence, splendour, and beauty. 

In our opening text the apostle Paul draws out a distinction between "our body of humiliation" ("vile body" kjv) and Christ's "body of glory" (glorious body). This is quite interesting and needs to be further unpacked. First, it implies that the glorified body is no longer a humble, lowly, inferior, or debased body, but an exalted, superior, lofty body. 

The text leads me to ask 1) did Christ have a body of humiliation? 2) Did Adam have such a body before he sinned? 3) What constitutes or characterizes a body of humiliation? 

In his commentary on this passage Albert Barnes wrote:

"The original words, which are rendered here as "vile body," properly mean "the body of humiliation;" that is, our humble body. It refers to the body as it is in its present state, as subject to infirmities, disease, and death. It is different far from what it was when man was created, and from what it will be in the future world. Paul says that it is one of the objects of the Christian hope and expectation, that this body, so subject to infirmities and sicknesses, will be changed."

Dr. Barnes seems to suggest that Adam when created did not have a humble body. He thinks that sin made the body of Adam (and ours too) a humiliated body and that it being weak, sickly, and mortal was a result not of original creation but of sin. No doubt the entrance of sin humiliated the body first given to Adam. But, that is not to say that his original body is as lofty as the body that the saints will have after the resurrection. Further, Christ had a humble body, though it was without sin. Christ got tired in his body, and so did Adam no doubt prior to his sin. But, that was natural. Resurrected bodies, however, will not tire. Of that we will have more to say later. In the text "OUR bodies of humiliation" excludes Christ for it is contrasted with his "body of glory." However, when one looks at that famous passage in Philippians about the humiliation of the Son of God in becoming human, he may well see how Christ did have a humble body, albeit not as lowly as those bodies which have become sinful. Notice the text:

"Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross." (2: 5-8 nkjv)

Is this not taking on a humble human body? Yes, not humbled by sin, yet humbled because he was made in "the likeness of sinful flesh." But, more on that shortly. Yet, to be in "the form of God" and then to be in "the form of a slave," and to be "in human likeness," or "in the appearance as a human," is to take on a body of humiliation. The text plainly says "he humbled himself," and thus had, like we do, sin excepted, a body of humiliation.

Jesus also had his body of humiliation. However, his body of humiliation is not in every respect like the body of humiliation of fallen sinners. The body of Christ, during his lifetime, and prior to his death and resurrection, was not sinful, corrupt, nor experiencing the effects of sin. He was without sin and his body was more like the body of Adam before Adam sinned. So, can we call the body of Adam as it came from the hand of God a body of humiliation? Answer: Yes and No. It was a natural body and not a supernatural body. It was however without sin or defect. But, when he sinned his body changed, and became utterly debased and lowly, in humiliation. 

Paul says that the sinless body of Christ was nevertheless "in the likeness of sinful flesh." Said he:

"For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the flesh." (Rom. 8: 3 niv)

If his body was in the likeness of sinful flesh, then his body was a body of humiliation, at least in appearance. This body became a body of glory however when he came forth from the grave and ascended to the Father. His body was not glorious prior to his resurrection. His body was not superior to any other man, except that it was without sin and not growing old and perishing. If a superior body has no ugliness, then it certainly was not superior for he was not a handsome man (even though pictures of Christ show him to be so). Isaiah said of him: "...he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him." (Isa. 53: 2 kjv) 

It is to me a valid inference to believe that Christ, in his resurrected and glorified body was no longer ugly but only a picture of beauty. This is perhaps why many of his disciples did not recognize him after his resurrection. He appeared to Mary Magdalene and at first she thought he was the gardener (Jhn. 20: 11-20). He appeared to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus. During their walk and conversation they did not recognize him, but when he broke bread for them they knew that it was the Lord (Lk 24:13-35).

So, though more negatives are involved in the bodies of humiliation of sinful humans, yet Christ himself may be said to have a body of humiliation because he was human and because he was made in the likeness of sinful flesh. In many ways we see how the internal glory of the person of Christ, as the eternally begotten Son of God, was veiled by his human flesh. Notice this text:

"For he was crucified in weakness, but lives by the power of God. For we also are weak in him, but in dealing with you we will live with him by the power of God." (II Cor. 13: 4 esv)

That weakness was part of his body of humiliation. Notice in this text and in the preceding one (where he says "He is able even to subdue all things to Himself") how both ascribe the resurrection and glorification of the bodies of the saints to the omnipotence of God ("by the power of God") which reminds us of the words of Christ to the Sadducees "you err not knowing the power of God." 

The power of the Son of God, the power of divinity, was veiled, like his inner glory, by his weak human body. Nevertheless, as we will see, there were times when this glory and power were unveiled as it were. Notice this text:

"And the Word became flesh, and did tabernacle among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of an only begotten of a father, full of grace and truth." (John 1: 14 Young's Literal Translation)

The glory of God was in Christ, just as the Shekinah glory (or presence) was in the tabernacle (or tent). The tabernacle was a temporary house for God until the Temple was built. Peter and other Hebrews used it to typify the human body. Peter said of his coming death - "shortly I must put off this my tabernacle" (II Peter 1: 14 kjv). Paul also wrote the following (a verse we analyzed in earlier chapters on the intermediate state):

"For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens." (II C0r. 5: 1 kjv)

The outside of the tabernacle was quite dull and drab. The curtains which surrounded the structure were made of goats' hair, which is not very attractive. The tent was covered with ram skins dyed red, and over that was a covering of badger skins. (See Jeremiah 10: 9) The real beauty was on the inside of the tent, with the fine fabric for veils, the golden furniture, etc. So too with the Lord Jesus Christ in his incarnate state, in his body of humiliation. Every miracle he performed was a manifestation of his divine glory and broke through the veil. Every precious word he spoke was also a case where the glory shined through the veil of his flesh. Also, on the mount of transfiguration it broke through in a great way. In "Christ the Glory of God" by Ligonier ministries, we have these good words (See here emphasis mine):

"After all, did not the Son of God veil His glory when He took on human flesh? If we are talking about the revelation of divine glory as blindingly pure light, then the answer is yes. Apart from Peter, James, and John at the transfiguration, no one who saw Christ during His earthly ministry saw the light of divine glory (Matt. 17:1–2). Yet while Jesus veiled the light of His glory, He did exercise other divine attributes such as His sovereignty over creation when He calmed the storm (Mark 4:35–41). Since we have also seen that God’s glory is in one sense the summation of His attributes, anytime Jesus exercised divine attributes, people saw something of the divine glory."

John Wesley understood this when he wrote in his famous Christmas song “Hark! the Herald Angels Sing” the line that says “Veiled in flesh the Godhead see.”

Said the great C.H. Spurgeon in his sermon "The True Tabernacle, and Its Glory of Grace and Peace":

“We beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” In Jesus Christ all the attributes of God are to be seen; veiled, but yet verily there. You have only to read the gospels, and to look with willing eyes, and you shall behold in Christ all that can possibly be seen of God. It is veiled in human flesh, as it must be; for the glory of God is not to be seen by us absolutely; it is toned down to these dim eyes of ours; but the Godhead is there, the perfect Godhead in union with the perfect manhood of Christ Jesus our Lord, to whom be glory for ever and ever."

In our next chapter we will continue our look at the changes that occurred to the body of Christ after he was resurrected and glorified. This will also entail a more detailed definition of the meaning of "glory." 

Beliefs about the Afterlife (LXXVII)

In this chapter we will continue to examine how the new testament scriptures affirm the doctrine of the resurrection of the bodies (that have even become dust and ashes) of both the righteous and the wicked. We will look at some other texts before our analysis of First Corinthians chapter fifteen, which is the most detailed account of the resurrection of the body. We will also look at what the bible says about the final glorification of the saints when they are resurrected. We will begin with those other new testament texts that affirm the doctrine of the resurrection of believers at the second coming of Christ. But first let us notice these words of the apostle in that great chapter on the resurrection.

"If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable." (I Cor. 15: 19 nkjv)

This was said in the context of Paul's elaborate homily on the doctrine of a bodily resurrection. If there is no life after death, no resurrection of the dead, then Christians are deluded and cling to a false hope. That is the apostle's firm assertive conclusion. Further he reasons, saying that they who deny a bodily resurrection ought to become hedonists and do whatever feels good, if there is no physical existence in the afterlife; And if no physical retribution in the afterlife also. So Paul says: "If, in the manner of men, I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantage is it to me? If the dead do not rise, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die!” (I Cor. 15: 32 nkjv)

Thankfully however Christ was raised from the dead by the omnipotence of the Deity (by the Father, Spirit, and by himself as the Son of God) and thus produced "a good hope through grace." (II Thess. 2: 16) By the resurrection we have a living hope rather than a dead hope. So testified the apostle Peter:

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead." (I Peter 1: 3 nkjv)

A slightly better translation would be "a hope living through the resurrection." Without "the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead," without him being "the resurrection and the life," without "the power of his resurrection," the Christian hope would be dead, and his life for Christ would be vain, useless, false, and of no lasting benefit. The entire Christian faith rests on the truth of Christ's resurrection and of the resurrection of the Christian dead at his second coming.

Other NT Texts

"But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you." (Rom. 8: 11 nkjv)

The bodily resurrection of Christ not only proves that there is resurrection of the physically dead but also guarantees the resurrection of the righteous dead to glory, immortality, and eternal life. Notice how clear is the statement about bodily resurrection. The apostle says "will also give life to your mortal bodies," and such language cannot be understood figuratively but only literally. Following the resurrection their bodies will no longer be mortal but immortal and immutably so. In the same chapter Paul also says:

"And more than that, we ourselves, though we possess the Spirit as a foretaste and pledge of the glorious future, yet we ourselves inwardly sigh, as we wait and long for open recognition (adoption kjv) as sons through the deliverance (redemption kjv) of our bodies." (Rom. 8: 23 Weymouth)

The resurrection of the dead mortal bodies of believers, though they have become dust and ashes, will be their redemption or deliverance, the price for it being paid by the death of Christ, by his blood. Redemption is an ongoing process. Redemption begins with the Redeemer, or kinsman redeemer, paying the price for the redemption of a relative who has become a prisoner, or slave, or captive, after a ransom being paid. After this comes the actual deliverance from that condition and in the salvation of a sinner this effect of paying the ransom begins with the salvation of the soul or spirit and then is completed in the resurrection of that sinner. So, redemption is complete in that the price has been paid, but it is not complete because the deliverance ensuing is not realized fully in body and spirit. 

Wrote the apostle Paul, the one who said so much about the resurrection of the dead:

"Yes, we had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves but in God who raises the dead." (II Cor. 1: 9 nkjv)

The faith of the Christian cannot be divorced from his belief in "God who raised the dead." In both testaments, it was part and parcel of that faith. So we read of the faith of Abraham:

"By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, of whom it was said, “In Isaac your seed shall be called,” concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead, from which he also received him in a figurative sense." (Heb. 11: 17-19 nkjv)

Abraham determined to kill Isaac, his only begotten son, though it tested his faith, because he believed that though he slew Isaac, God would raise Isaac up from the dead and in this he foreshadowed the death and resurrection of Christ. It was also the faith of godly Hannah, the mother of Samuel the prophet, who confessed her faith in God who raises the dead, saying:

“The Lord kills and makes alive; He brings down to the grave and brings up. The Lord makes poor and makes rich; He brings low and lifts up." (I Sam. 2: 6-7 nkjv)

The apostle Paul says further:

"knowing that He who raised up the Lord Jesus will also raise us up with Jesus, and will present us with you." (Vs. 14)

The resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the glorification of his human body, was both a picture and a guarantee of the resurrection and glorification of the bodies, yea, of the entire person, of the chosen and called. This text, along with others we have cited from the new testament, state that the resurrection of saints is yet future, that it will occur when Christ comes again. Yet, one group of professing Christians in the time of the apostles contended that the resurrection had already occurred. Wrote the apostle Paul:

"And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some." (II Tim. 2: 17-18 nkjv) 

Commentators give various possible meanings to the belief of Hymenaeus and Philetus as respects the resurrection. Some say that they believed in a spiritual resurrection, that is, that they believed Christians are resurrected spiritually or symbolically when they are baptized in water. I think, however, that they may have had the idea that the resurrection of Christ was the only resurrection. They may have also thought that the resurrection of "many bodies of the saints" who arose after Christ was raised (Matt. 27: 52) was that resurrection which is already past. It may be that these two erring brothers were like some in the church of Thessalonica who thought that the coming of the Lord had already occurred. Paul wrote of them saying:

"Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come." (II Thess. 2: 1-2 niv) 

Repaid At The Resurrection

"And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you; for you shall be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” (Luke 14: 14 nkjv)

This is a wonderful thought; God is going to repay (recompense kjv) believers on the resurrection day for all their labors for Christ and for his kingdom. The "they" who "cannot repay you" are the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind, people who were helped by believers in Jesus. Christians do not, like worldly sinners, only help those who they think will return the favor, but help those who cannot repay them for their help. But, Jesus assures his people that God will repay them for every good deed they did and for every time they were a help to others. That grand payday occurs when Christ returns and raises the dead. A verse we cited in the previous chapter from the sayings of Christ agree with this. Recall that he said - "those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment." (John 5: 29)

It is also similar to another time where we have this exchange between Peter and the Lord Jesus:

"Then Peter said, “See, we have left all and followed You.” So He said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or parents or brothers or wife or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, who shall not receive many times more in this present time, and in the age to come eternal life.” (Luke 18: 28-30 nkjv)

Believers who help others do get many rewards in their lives, but yet the full reward for all their labors will occur when they are resurrected and receive their "full reward" and "inherit all things." When that happens they will surely say "it was worth it all." 

“And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to his work. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.” (Rev. 22: 12-13 nkjv)

So, we may say with the apostle Paul - "your labors are not in vain in the Lord" (I Cor. 15: 58). This was said in the context of the resurrection of the righteous dead. He also said these words to the Hebrews:

"For God is not unjust to forget your work and labor of love which you have shown toward His name, in that you have ministered to the saints, and do minister." (Heb. 6: 10)

God will forever reward his people for their "work and labor of love" that they have shown to others, especially "to the saints." We saw this earlier when we mentioned the judgment of the sheep and goat nations and how the sheep nations were blessed to enter the kingdom of God and new heavens and earth for having kindly treated the brothers of the Lord Jesus Christ. In sum we say to all those who weary themselves in serving the needs of the people of God - "Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompense of reward." (Hebrews 10:35) The time to receive this great reward is in the time of the resurrection from the dead. Another text that affirms this is found in the book that details the second coming of the Lord. In the Apocalypse of Christ we read:

"The nations were angry, and Your wrath has come, And the time of the dead, that they should be judged, And that You should reward Your servants the prophets and the saints, And those who fear Your name, small and great, And should destroy those who destroy the earth.” (Rev. 11: 18 nkjv)

This rewarding of the servants of the Lord occurs at "the time of the dead." And, a great reward it is! 

Beliefs about the Afterlife (LXXVI)

In this chapter we will continue to establish the fact of the resurrection of the dead from the new testament scriptures. We have already seen how it was clearly taught in the old testament, though it was denied by the Sadducees and by the Greeks and Gentiles. We have also seen how the scriptures teach that the Messiah, Jesus the Christ, was raised from the dead, and how he was the first to rise from the dead, never to die again, and that his resurrection proves the proposition that there is a resurrection of the dead. It is a fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith. Wrote Paul:

"Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this we will do if God permits." (Heb. 6: 1-3 nkjv)

Here the apostle affirms that the doctrine "of the resurrection of the dead" is an "elementary principle" and a "foundation" of the teachings of Christ. The apostle John says that "Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son." (II John 1:9 nkjv)

Though it is not known whether the genitive doctrine "of" Christ always means doctrine concerning Christ (thus dealing with what is called "Christology") or doctrine taught by Christ, nevertheless I think it is true that whoever denies the resurrection of Christ and of the dead "does not have God," neither "the Father" or "the Son." In the above text it is obvious that the "elementary" or "foundational" "principles" "of the doctrine" includes the things enumerated above. One of those things has to do with the "resurrection of the dead." Further, there is no Greek preposition "ek" (or "ex") in the text, and so it deals with both the resurrection of the righteous and of the wicked. When the resurrection of the righteous dead are strictly in view it is resurrection "out from among" the dead, but when both righteous and wicked are in view it should be resurrection "of" the dead. More accurate translations make this distinction.

It is also evident that the enumerated doctrines deal with soteriology (doctrine of salvation) and eschatology (doctrine of last things) and also with Christian initiation and ritual. When a person becomes a Christian these doctrines form the ABC's of the Christian religion. That is not to say that a novice understands all that is embraced in soteriology or eschatology, etc., but he at least understand the foundational principles of these areas of bible doctrine. 

New Testament Teaching

"Now Martha said to Jesus, “Lord, if You had been here, my brother would not have died. But even now I know that whatever You ask of God, God will give You.” Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.” Martha said to Him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.” Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?” (John 11: 21-26 nkjv)

Martha was in league with the Pharisees in her belief of the resurrection of the dead. She believed the old testament texts which we cited in the previous chapter that affirmed it. Christ then tells her how he is "the resurrection and the life," an amazing testimony. Notice the present tense "I am," rather than "I will be." For this reason, he assures Martha that he can raise the dead at any time he pleases. In other words, Lazarus does not need to wait till the last day to be raised from the dead. However, the resurrection of Lazarus was not of the same kind as that which will occur on the last day, or of the "better resurrection" when he shall never die. 

When will the righteous dead be raised? "The last day," says Martha. Further, Christ agrees with this. He said on another occasion:

“This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. “And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.” (John 6: 39-40 nkjv; see also verses 44 and 54)

This affirmation overthrows the view of many who believe in a pre-tribulation coming of Christ (along with the rapture and resurrection of the righteous dead), for they teach that seven years follow this resurrection before the end of the present age, thus making the resurrection to not occur on the last day, but seven years before the last day.

Jesus himself taught the doctrine of the resurrection and even enlarged upon it, either in his teaching while on earth, or in his teaching through the apostles. So, let us notice additional texts where Christ asserts the resurrection of both righteous and unrighteous.

"Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation." (John 5: 28-29 nkjv) 

Here Christ, like Daniel, speaks of both the resurrection of the righteous (those who have done good) and the unrighteous (those who have done evil). Again, this cannot be a spiritual resurrection (which occurs in being converted) for this was what was already stated in verse twenty five and in the above it involves the resurrection of physical bodies which "are in the graves." 

Some who believe that the righteous and the wicked will be raised simultaneously in one general resurrection will argue that it is in the same "hour" that those in the graves come forth. But, this is not a good or cogent argument. Notice how the word "hour" is used in verse twenty five, which all admit has reference to a spiritual resurrection in conversion.

“Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live." (nkjv)

Notice how "hour" is not the same hour for all who are converted. The hour Paul was raised from spiritual death is not the same hour Christians today are raised from spiritual death. Comparing verse 28 (physical resurrection) with verse 25 (spiritual resurrection) we see how "and now is" is absent from the affirmation about physical resurrection on the last day.

Another new testament text which affirms the resurrection of all men, both of the righteous and of the unrighteous is this text:

"I have hope in God, which they themselves also accept, that there will be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust." (Acts 24: 15 nkjv)

So, this is what the prophet Daniel affirmed, what Christ affirmed, and what the apostle Paul affirmed in the above words. By the pronoun "they" he means those Jews who were not of the Sadducees. 

The Out Resurrection

"Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith; that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected; but I press on, that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me. Brethren, I do not count myself to have apprehended; but one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus." (Phil. 3: 8-14 nkjv)

J. R. Graves, in his book "Seven Dispensations," said (emphasis mine): 

"In all passages which refer to the indiscriminate resurrection of the dead it is "en anastasis ton nekron," the resurrection of the dead; but when the resurrection of the righteous is alluded to, it is "ex ton nekron," the resurrection from or out of the dead. That the preposition from is never used when the resurrection of the wicked is spoken of. I refer the reader to Acts 17: 23; 23: 6; 24: 21; I Cor. 15: 12, 13, 21, 42."

"Sometimes the preposition ex is prefixed to resurrection, when referring to the resurrection of Christ and believers, but never of that of sinners."

Graves said the following about the text at the heading:

"This is a conclusive passage. Paul gave as a reason why he was so willing to labor and suffer for Christ: "if by any means I may attain the resurrection out from among the dead."

"He could not have referred to a general resurrection here, since he could not possibly escape that, but this special resurrection of the just, so as to enjoy its peculiar blessedness; for "blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection, for over such the second death hath no power," clearly implying that it will have power over all who rise in the second and last." 

"Paul labored with his eye constantly upon this coming event-i.e., a resurrection from out of the dead-that he might be among those who had part in the "first resurrection."

All this is absolutely correct. Paul is expecting to be in the resurrection of the just and the translation at the head of this chapter appropriately translates the text as "to attain to the out-resurrection from among the dead." The resurrection of the wicked dead is not a resurrection "out from among the dead" for the simple reason is that there is no one left dead when they are resurrected. When the righteous are first resurrected they are resurrected out from among the dead because the wicked dead are not raised at that time. Recall the words of Revelation chapter twenty:

"And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years." (Rev. 20: 4-6 nkjv)

There is thus an order to the resurrection. The righteous are part of the first resurrection and the unrighteous are part of the last or final resurrection. To the proofs given already in this chapter we also see it affirmed in that great chapter on the resurrection in First Corinthians chapter fifteen.

The Order of Resurrection

"20 But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming. 24 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power." (I Cor. 15: 20-24 nkjv) 

There are three separate resurrections mentioned in this passage, which three are mentioned in various Old and New Testament passages. There is the (1) resurrection of Christ, and (2) the resurrection of those denominated as "just," and (3) the resurrection of those denominated as "unjust." We have the order, rank, and chronology of these three separate, distinct and selective resurrections; each is special and eclectic.

"But each in his own order" (NKJV) "But each in his own turn" (NIV) "But each in his own rank" (Darby Translation) are some of the translations that show this to be true. 

Christ is of the "first rank" in regard to his resurrection. Believers are of the next "order" and "rank," they constituting those who will be resurrected upon the return of Christ, when they are raised in the "first resurrection," and who are therefore the "blessed" and the "holy." Their special eclectic resurrection is next in "turn."

"Then comes the end..." End of what? Of several things. After the resurrection of the just, after the 1000 year reign of Christ, the "rest of the dead," who were left in their graves when the just were resurrected, and who are the cursed and the unholy, will be last resurrected. The "last" or the "end" denotes the final resurrection. If there is a "first" resurrection, then there is a "second," and if there is a "beginning" resurrection, then there is an "ending" resurrection too. There is no third or fourth resurrection, for the "second resurrection" will be the "last" or "end" or final resurrection. 

J.A. Seiss in his book of lectures titled "The Apocalypse" wrote the following in his lecture on chapter twenty (See here - emphasis mine):

"It is a resurrection which takes place in different stages, and not all at one and the same time. Paul tells us expressly that there is an "order" in it, which brings up some at one time, and others at other times. It starts with "Christ the first fruits;'' afterwards they that are Christ's at his coming; then (still later) the end, "completion, or last." (1 Cor. 15: 23, 24) Christ's resurrection was also attended with the resurrection of others. The Gospel says: "The graves were opened, and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city." (Matt. 27: 52, 53)"

In the next chapter we will continue our look at what the new testament reveals about the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead.

Beliefs about the Afterlife (LXXV)

Having in the preceding chapter seen how the old testament scriptures testify to a general, that is, a universal resurrection of the bodies of the dead, we will now see what the new testament says about it. We will begin by first revisiting a text we have previously cited and examined.

"22 When they had heard these words, they marveled, and left Him and went their way. 23 The same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, 24 saying: "Teacher, Moses said that if a man dies, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. 25 Now there were with us seven brothers. The first died after he had married, and having no offspring, left his wife to his brother. 26 Likewise the second also, and the third, even to the seventh. 27 Last of all the woman died also. 28 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her." 29 Jesus answered and said to them, "You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven. 31 But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, saying, 32 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." 33 And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at His teaching. 34 But when the Pharisees heard that He had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together." (Matt. 22: 22-34 nkjv)

This dialogue with the Sadducees and their theologians is also to be found in the other two synoptic gospels, that of Mark (chapter 12) and Luke (chapter 20). There are a couple of things I want to now point out about this fascinating mini debate between Christ and the resurrection denying Sadducees. First, however, let us prove this fact about their denial. 

In the above text it is plainly declared that the Sadducees "say there is no resurrection." By this they mean no resurrection of dead physical bodies. They may have believed in various kinds of restoration, such as a bringing back to life what has been dead or become extinct, for many thought that the restoration of the Jewish nation to a place of preeminence was a kind of resurrection. Here are two other places where this fact about the dogma of the Sadducees was stated: 

"For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection--and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both." (Acts 23: 8 nkjv)

“The priests and the captain of the temple guard and the Sadducees came up to Peter and John while they were speaking to the people. They were greatly disturbed because the apostles were teaching the people, proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection of the dead. They seized Peter and John and, because it was evening, they put them in jail until the next day.” (Acts 4:1-3)

So, how could the Sadducees deny the doctrine of the resurrection in light of all the old testament affirmations of it (which we referred to in the previous chapter)? 

The chief reason is that the Sadducees did not accept any writings outside of those of Moses (the Pentateuch or Torah proper), being the first five books of the bible. That is not to say that they did not see those other books as having some truth in them, but they did not think they were without error or authoritative as "the law" or Torah. Britannica says (See here - emphasis mine):  

"The Sadducees and Pharisees were in constant conflict with each other, not only over numerous details of ritual and the Law but most importantly over the content and extent of God’s revelation to the Jewish people. The Sadducees refused to go beyond the written Torah (first five books of the Bible) and thus, unlike the Pharisees, denied the immortality of the soul, bodily resurrection after death, and—according to the Acts of the Apostles (23:8), the fifth book of the New Testament—the existence of angelic spirits. For the Sadducees, the Oral Law—i.e., the vast body of post biblical Jewish legal traditions—meant next to nothing. By contrast, the Pharisees revered the Torah but further claimed that oral tradition was part and parcel of Mosaic Law. Because of their strict adherence to the Written Law, the Sadducees acted severely in cases involving the death penalty, and they interpreted literally the Mosaic principle of lex talionis (“an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”)."

Thus, it is interesting that Christ, in his mini debate with them in the text at the head of this chapter, does not defend the doctrine of the resurrection from books of the old testament that are not of the Pentateuch, but from the Pentateuch, or the writings of Moses! Christ could have cited from Job, the Psalms, or Daniel, or Isaiah (as we did in the previous chapter), but he proves it from the Torah. 

In the Torah we have God appearing to Moses and speaks to him out of the burning bush saying: "I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." (Exodus 3:6) Christ says that this statement by God is inconsistent with the idea that those patriarchs were in every respect dead and would never live again, saying God is not a God of the dead but of the living. God does not say to Moses "I WAS (past tense) the God of..." but "I AM" (present tense) the God of..." 

I will mention, however, that some excellent bible teachers do not agree that the Sadducees rejected the authority of the other books of the old testament, as did Dr. John Gill who said this in his commentary on Matthew 22: 29 (emphasis mine):

"it seems to be a mistake of some learned men, who think that they only received the five books of Moses, and that therefore Christ takes his proof of his doctrine from thence; but though they had the greater esteem for the law, and would admit of nothing that was not clearly proved from that; yet they did not reject the other writings, as what might serve to confirm and illustrate what was taught in the law; but then, though they approved of the Scriptures and read them, yet they did not understand them, and so fell into those gross errors and sad mistakes; nor did they attend to the power of God, which, as it was able to make men out of the dust of the earth, was able to raise them again, when crumbled into dust; but this was looked upon by them, as a thing impossible, and so incredible; see Acts 26:8."

However, I think Gill is mistaken here and the "learned men" who he thinks are wrong on the Sadducean view of the authority or inspiration of the non Torah books are actually right. If they did accept as authoritative the other writings of the prophets, then why did they not also believe in angels or disembodied spirits? Evidence for angels and spirits is prevalent in the writings of the prophets. Not only that, but angels are referred to in the writings of Moses. But, even Gill admits that the Sadducees had a "greater esteem for the law," which they could not do if they thought all the old testament canon was equal in inspiration and authority. Yes, the Sadducees might well accept parts of the writings of the prophets that they thought were consistent with the writings of Moses, but they rejected those parts of the writings of the prophets which they thought contradicted Moses. 

The Error of the Sadducees

Christ appropriately says to the Sadducees that they erred in two respects as it relates to the resurrection of the dead. First, they erred not knowing the scriptures. Second, they erred not knowing the power of God.

The Sadducees erred in not understanding the scriptures, and this would include both the Torah and the other books of the old testament canon. They erred in rejecting the writings of the prophets that were outside of the Torah and they erred in not properly interpreting the Torah in several respects. This Christ demonstrated to them in his attempts to disprove their argumentation against the doctrine of a physical resurrection.

They also were badly mistaken in their understanding of the power of God, or of God's attribute of omnipotence. Many of the arguments that resurrection deniers offer as proof of the rightness of their denial are easily refuted if one accepts the fact of God's all mightiness. Some think that it is impossible to raise a dead body that has been cremated and the ashes scattered in the wind, or to a body that has been eaten whole by a bear, shark, etc. But again, the omnipotence of God answers all these objections or rationalizations. 

It was in Genesis, written by Moses and accepted by the Sadducees, that God made the man Adam of the dust of the earth. If they could believe that, why could they not believe that God could take dust, that was once a man, and make him the same man again? This makes us recall Paul's question to king Agrippa when on trial: "Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?" (Acts 26: 8 kjv) By the word "incredible" (Greek apistos) is meant that which is unbelievable, what is not credible. The emphasis in this penetrating question is "God." That it might be incredible to believe one creature may raise the dead, it cannot be incredible for the omnipotent Creator to do so. Also, like in many texts, the definite article "the" is in the text though omitted in many English translations. So, we may read thusly: "why think it incredible for the divinity or deity to raise the dead." 

The Sadducees erred in thinking that the resurrected life would make no changes in the body or in the way life is lived as compared to the life on earth. They did not understand what was involved in that "better resurrection." They seemed to think that a resurrection would be a simple bringing back to life with no changes to the body or the kind of life lived.

Greek Opposition

"Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead." And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked, while others said, "We will hear you again on this matter." (Acts 17: 30-32 nkjv)

The above words are from Paul's apologetic defense before the Greek citizen tribunal in Athens. This text shows how the Greeks, due to their philosophical and theological paradigms, opposed the idea that the physical bodies of the dead had any part in the afterlife or in living an eternal life. Though they believed in the immortality of the soul (as we pointed out in earlier chapters), they did not believe in any immortality to the body. We have also referred to this as a Gnostic idea, wherein they viewed matter and the material world as essentially evil, and that salvation involved entering into a blissful realm as a disembodied spirit. 

Said one source on this sermon on Mars Hill in Athens (See here; emphasis mine):

"Paul has now come full circle, back to his original message: Christ is Lord and the judge of all the earth and the proof of that is his resurrection from the dead. The idea of resurrection, which indicates that the human body is an object of God’s interest, that man would have physical existence in the world to come, was an alien thought in the Greco-Roman world of that time. There was a strong preference for the spiritual and a general dislike of matter and the material world in philosophical and religious thinking. Matter, including the human body, was thought to be the origin of all our problems. It may be that Paul knew of the Greek poet Aeschylus who, in his play about the inauguration of the Areopagus, had the god Apollo deny the possibility of resurrection. Anyway, resurrection was a hard sell to this group. It cut across the grain of their way of thinking, but it was the truth and they had to know it and Christ sent Paul to tell them."

Google AI overview on Greek opposition to a bodily resurrection says:

"Ancient Greeks generally had negative attitudes towards resurrection, and did not believe in a general resurrection of the dead. They believed that once a body was destroyed, it was impossible to return to life, as even the gods could not recreate flesh. They also considered resurrection to be undesirable and incredible, and against the nature of God. For example, in the Iliad, the flesh of warriors devoured by scavengers is described as identical to the warriors themselves, and the disembodied souls that escape to Hades are nothing but shadows."

Interesting is the fact that Muslims believe in a general resurrection of the dead in conjunction with the day of judgment. The church at Corinth, composed for the most part of Greeks and other Gentiles, had some among them who denied a physical resurrection and Paul asks "how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?" (I Cor. 15: 12)

The Resurrection of Christ

The resurrection of the slain body of Christ disproves the negative proposition that says "there is no resurrection of the dead." Further, this resurrection of Christ, the Messiah, was what was foretold in the old testament scriptures. Testified the apostle Paul:

"Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come: That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles." (Acts 26: 22-23 kjv)

"For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve." (I Cor. 15: 3-5 nkjv) 

The old testament scriptures foretold of the resurrection of all men, but where did it specifically speak of the death and resurrection of the Messiah? Well, for one, it is in Psalm 16, a verse we cited in the previous chapter when we looked at the old testament proof texts that affirm it. Recall that the Psalmist said:

"Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth: my flesh also shall rest in hope. For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." (vss. 9-10 kjv)

The apostle Peter in his great sermon on the day of Pentecost cites this text as a prophecy of the resurrection of the Messiah. Peter testified:

22 “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know— 23 Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; 24 whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it. 25 For David says concerning Him: ‘I foresaw the Lord always before my face, For He is at my right hand, that I may not be shaken. 26 Therefore my heart rejoiced, and my tongue was glad; Moreover my flesh also will rest in hope. 27 For You will not leave my soul in Hades, Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption." (Acts 2: 22-27 nkjv)

Though the psalm does include the resurrection of king David himself, it especially applies to the son of David, to Christ Jesus the Lord. Peter proves this by showing that David was buried, and his body decayed (corrupted), and was not as yet resurrected. Peter says David spoke "concerning Him," that is, concerning the Messiah. Notice what Peter said further:

29 “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, 31 he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. 32 This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses." (vss. 29-32) 

So, when the apostle Paul says that the resurrection of Christ was according to the scriptures (OT), the words of David in Psalm sixteen is one of them. Notice again how Christ went to Hades, a fact that we elaborated upon in earlier chapters on the intermediate state. 

What did Paul mean when he said that the Messiah would be "the first to rise from the dead"? Well, obviously, he is speaking of a resurrection that drastically changed the body into a glorious body and made it incapable of dying. He was not the first to be restored to life, as we have seen, for several were raised to life again in the old testament. 

If Christ was the first to rise from the dead so as never to die again, then what about the appearance of Moses on the mount of transfiguration wherein he appeared with Elijah? Moses died and so the appearance on the mount cannot be in the body which was buried by the Lord or else Christ would not have been the first to rise from the dead as Paul affirmed. We conclude that the body that Moses appeared in was his temporary body that he was clothed in when he died, as we spoke about in earlier chapters. 

Notice also how Christ is said to "rise from the dead." The Greek preposition "ek" (or "ex"), translated as "from," literally means "out from among the dead." This is important to understand. The inference is that Christ was 1) among the dead, and 2) that he came out from among the dead, and 3) that this implies that others were left dead. This is the same language used to refer to the first resurrection (Rev. 20), or of the resurrection of the righteous, and shows that the righteous and the wicked are not raised at the same time. On this point we will enlarge upon later.

We will have much to say in upcoming chapters about Paul's elaborate discourse on the resurrection of the body in first Corinthians chapter fifteen, but let us at least notice these introductory words from that chapter:

"12 Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. 14 And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. 15 Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up--if in fact the dead do not rise. 16 For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. 17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!" (vs. 12-17)

Here Paul indicates that many of the Corinthian believers, who were mostly Greek or other Gentiles, were saying "there is no resurrection of the dead." Paul then begins to argue reductio ad absurdum against that proposition. What is that?

"Reductio ad absurdum is a method of argumentation that attempts to prove a claim by showing that the opposite scenario would lead to contradiction or absurdity. It's also known as argumentum ad absurdum or apagogical arguments. The phrase comes from Late Latin and literally means "reduction to the absurd". Reductio ad absurdum is primarily used in deductive reasoning, but can also be used rhetorically in inductive reasoning. It assumes that a position is true for the sake of argument, then disproves it by demonstrating that it leads to logical contradictions." (AI search response via Google)

Paul shows that the proposition cannot be true because of the absurd or untrue consequences that it would lead to. He says if the proposition is true, then one of the consequences would be a denial that Jesus Christ was raised from the dead. But, it is a fact that he was raised from the dead. Ergo, that fact disproves the proposition. Next, he mentions what consequences follow the supposition that Christ did not rise from the dead. He says the gospel message becomes false and the faith of Christians becomes false (vain or empty). He says it makes him and many others into false witnesses, to be liars. Finally he says that all are still in their sins if it be true that the dead, including Christ, do not rise from the dead. All this shows how it was absolutely necessary for Christ to be raised from the dead for anyone to be saved from sin and damnation. He also goes on to show how Christian baptism becomes a falsity. Said he:

"Otherwise, what will they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead do not rise at all? Why then are they baptized for the dead?" (vs. 29)

Many have struggled to understand this text. But, behind all the difficulty, I think Paul is saying that Christian baptism becomes worthless if Christ be not raised, or if there be no resurrection of the bodies of the dead. Baptism is a symbolic picture of dying, being buried, and being raised from the dead. So, if there is no resurrection of the dead, then the picture becomes worthless and a falsehood. He is simply giving another adverse consequence for denying the resurrection of the dead.

The difficulty with this passage lies in two things. First, Paul's use of the preposition "huper" (translated as "for") instead of "eis" (meaning unto or with reference to). Huper means "on behalf of" and denotes substitution, a word often used of Christ dying "for" sinners. Second, Paul speaks not in the plural first person but in the plural third person when he says "what will they do" and "why then are they baptized." Why did he not say "what will we do" or "why then are we baptized"? These things have caused some to think that Paul is talking about proxy baptism, where people are baptized in place of a person who died without baptism. This is practiced by groups such as the Mormons. But, this one text cannot be made to support such a practice. No other text in the bible speaks of people being baptized for someone else, especially of someone who was already dead. 

I rather think that the Greek word huper carries the idea entailed in the Greek word "eis." Eis has been translated in several places by the English words "with reference to" or "concerning." (See Acts 2: 25) Also, Paul speaks of being baptized for, or on behalf of the dead, meaning it is a symbol of resurrection of the dead. Further, it is not on behalf of a single dead person, but of the dead in general. "Dead" is plural in the Greek text and literally means "the dead ones." So, if the text taught proxy baptism, it would not be for one dead person, but for all the dead ones. 

In any case, it is another reason why a denial of the resurrection of Christ or of the dead makes baptism invalid. Water baptism involves a death and a burial in water (thus an immersion). So Paul wrote: 

"Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." (Rom. 6: 4 nkjv)

Baptism symbolizes dying, being buried, and being risen from death. If there is no resurrection, then the rite of baptism's symbolism is destroyed.

In the next chapter we will continue to see what the new testament has to say about the resurrection of the dead.

Beliefs about the Afterlife (LXXIV)

Beginning with this chapter we will look at what the scriptures teach about the resurrection of the dead. Throughout the previous seventy eight chapters I have made some remarks on the subject by way of anticipation. In the immediate several chapters we looked at the question as to whether the resurrection bodies, especially of the saints, will be male or female, and I have taken the position that the bodies of the resurrected saints will not have any body parts that no longer serve any purpose or use. I also spoke of how saints not having male and female parts, such as genitalia, female breast, ovaries, and wombs, etc., is implied in the words of Christ about them not marrying, which implies that there is no sex and reproduction. I also argued that such reproductive parts would not only be unnecessary but would be a hindrance to the joy of Paradise and therefore would not exist. 

I argued against those who say that the genitals remain for beauty or adornment or for some other such reason and that such arguments were untenable. I failed to mention the question of whether those resurrected in the resurrection of the unjust or unrighteous would have genitalia and reproductive organs. Surely they will not either. If they did, what would keep them from using them in Hell and bringing some pleasure to their time in the prison of Gehenna?

I plan to establish the fact of the resurrection from the old testament scriptures first, followed by looking at what the new testament scriptures say about it. Once we have established the fact of the resurrection, we will then first look at the kind of bodies that the resurrected ones will have, both of the righteous and of the wicked.

Resurrection in the Old Testament

We begin by asserting that there is a difference between a temporary resurrection, or bringing back to life, and a permanent resurrection which involves a drastic change in the body. In the old testament there were several persons who were raised from the dead. Here is the short list of them:

1. Elijah raised the son of the Zarephath widow from the dead (1 Kings 17:17-22). 

2. Elisha raised the son of the Shunammite woman from the dead (2 Kings 4:32-35). 

3. A man was raised from the dead when his body touched Elisha’s bones (2 Kings 13:20, 21).

The writer of the Hebrews epistle speaks of them when he said that by faith "Women received their dead raised to life again." (Heb. 11: 35 nkjv)

These were indeed resurrections but not of the same kind as will be experienced by those who are resurrected in the end time resurrection of just and unjust. For one thing, they were not permanent as all the ones resurrected by Elijah and Elisha died again. Also, there was no change in the body; what was raised to life was still in every way the same body. There was no glorification of the body in those cases, and no transformation into the kind of body that will be had in the final resurrection, a change that becomes immutable and incapable of dying. In the same context the inspired writer says: "Others were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection." (vs. 36) 

By a "better resurrection" is meant that resurrection of the righteous that will occur when Christ returns and translates the bodies of the righteous who are living and the bodies of the righteous who have died. This final glorious resurrection is far better than those temporary resurrections performed by the prophets named above, or of the several resurrections of individuals by Christ and his apostles in the new testament. How is it better? It is better for the reasons enumerated above. Of that better resurrection Christ says "neither can they die any more" (Luke 20: 36), a thing which is not true of those temporary resurrections of the prophets, apostles, and of Christ. Here are those resurrections in the new testament:

1. Jairus' daughter (Mark 5:21–24) 

2. The son of the widow of Nain (Luke 7:1–17) 

3. Lazarus of Bethany (John 11:17–44)

4. Resurrection of Tabitha/Dorcas (Acts 9:36–42) 

5. Resurrection of Eutychus (Acts 20:7–12)

We can also refer to two other resurrections, but a discussion of them will perhaps come later.

1. Resurrection of unknown saints during the crucifixion (Matt 27: 52–53) 

2. Resurrection of the Two Witnesses (Rev 11: 7–11) 

There is some debate about whether the resurrection of the bodies of the saints in Matthew (above) was a temporary restoration to life or a permanent resurrection of the nature and kind of the end time resurrection of the righteous. 

The Fact of the Resurrection

In the oldest book of the Bible, the prophet Job testified of his faith, saying:

"For I know that my Redeemer lives, And He shall stand at last on the earth; And after my skin is destroyed, this I know, That in my flesh I shall see God, Whom I shall see for myself, And my eyes shall behold, and not another. How my heart yearns within me!" (Job 19: 25-27 nkjv)

This cannot be spiritualized to mean a non physical spiritual resurrection. Job believes in a resurrection of his skin and flesh, that is, of his physical body. It is with his physical eyes that he will see God and his Redeemer who will "stand at last on the earth," which tells us when this resurrection of the righteous will occur. Were it a resurrection of the spirit, and not of the body, denoting rebirth, or a quickening, it would be a continuous resurrection, for people are being quickened into divine life every day when a person is converted. Further, Job was already in possession of a resurrected life in the spirit when he uttered those words and yet the resurrection he "yearns" for has not yet been experienced. Also, it is a resurrection that occurs after he has died and his flesh and skin have been destroyed. 

The prophet Daniel also testifies to the resurrection of the dead. He wrote:

"And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, Some to everlasting life, Some to shame and everlasting contempt." (Dan. 12: 2 nkjv)

Again, these words cannot be made to be allegorized so as to speak of spiritual resurrection. "Those who sleep in the dust of the earth" refers to dead physical bodies. Notice also how the text speaks of a two-fold resurrection, one of the righteous and one of the unrighteous. As we have before seen, in earlier chapters citing Revelation chapter twenty, these two resurrections do not occur together at the same time. A thousand years separate the two, with the resurrection of the righteous occurring first, and so we hear the words uttered "blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power..." (20: 6); And, "but the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished." (Vs. 5) 

There are other arguments to show this truth. For instance, the resurrection of the justified ones is said to be "out from among the dead," which language shows that some of the dead exit not the state of dead, these resurrected being the unjustified, who must wait another thousand years to be raised. 

By "resurrection unto everlasting life" is meant the full enjoyment or reception of eternal life in every respect, in body, soul, and spirit, and in state or place. It primarily refers to the body's becoming possessed of eternal life and immortality. On the other hand, by "resurrection to shame and everlasting contempt" denotes not becoming extinct, or annihilated, but to receiving punishment in body as well as in spirit and soul. On this we will have more to say later.

Other old testament texts which speak of the resurrection of the body will now be considered. Isaiah wrote:

"On this mountain the LORD of hosts will make for all peoples a feast of rich food, a feast of well-aged wine, of rich food full of marrow, of aged wine well refined. And he will swallow up son this mountain the covering that is cast over all peoples, the veil that is spread over all nations. He will swallow up death forever; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from all faces, and the reproach of his people he will take away from all the earth, for the LORD has spoken." (Isa. 25: 6-8 nkjv)

The apostle Paul alludes to this passage in his great discourse on bodily resurrection in the fifteenth chapter of his first letter to the Corinthians, which we will examine in detail in upcoming chapters. Isaiah also records these words of inspiration:

"Your dead shall live; Together with my dead body they shall arise. Awake and sing, you who dwell in dust; For your dew is like the dew of herbs, And the earth shall cast out the dead." (Isa. 26: 19 kjv)

What could be clearer about the fact of the resurrection of the dead? Again, this language cannot be accepted as figurative. No, it is literal and pertains to the physical body. "Dead body" of the dead "who dwell in the dust." So, why did many Jews in the time of Christ deny the resurrection of the body, as did the Sadducees? We will address that question shortly when we discuss these resurrection deniers.

Now let us notice some clear proof texts from the Psalms. Said king David, speaking as a prophet of God:

"I have set the Lord always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved. Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth: my flesh also shall rest in hope. For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." (Psa. 16: 8-10 kjv)

Again, we notice how this is a clear and easily understood affirmation of the resurrection of the body. "My flesh shall rest in hope." The resurrection of the body, in which it becomes an immortal spiritual body, without defect or possibility of disease or death, is a thing highly anticipated by believers in scripture.

"This their way is their folly: yet their posterity approve their sayings. Selah. Like sheep they are laid in the grave; death shall feed on them; and the upright shall have dominion over them in the morning; and their beauty shall consume in the grave from their dwelling. But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave: for he shall receive me. Selah." (Psa. 49: 13-15 kjv)

By "in the morning" we are to understand the morning of the last day, the day wherein the righteous dead will be raised, and together with the translated living saints, made immortal and given eternal life in their new bodies. This is when the bodies of the saints will be "redeemed" from "the power of the grave." It will occur in the morning of that day when "the sun of righteousness arises with healing in its wings," the Lord Jesus Christ being that sun. (Mal. 4: 1)

"You, who have shown me great and severe troubles, Shall revive me again, And bring me up again from the depths of the earth. You shall increase my greatness, And comfort me on every side." (Psa. 71: 20-21 kjv)

This is another reference to the resurrection of the righteous dead in the old testament. It is also connected with that time when the Lord will "increase" the "greatness" of his people, a thing we will be writing about in upcoming chapters in this subsection. It will also occur in conjunction with the saints being "comforted on every side." 

We also see the resurrection of the dead in the story of Ezekiel and the valley of dry bones being brought back to life. (Chapter 37) Then there is also a picture of resurrection in Jonah's experience in the belly of the giant sea creature. It is also pictured in Aaron's rod (staff) that budded (Numb. 17). A dead piece of wood living again and bringing forth fruit!

In the next chapter we will begin a look at what the new testament testifies about the resurrection of the dead.

My Title Clear

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." (Heb. 11: 1 KJV)

Wuest translates as: "Now faith is the title deed of things hoped for, the proof of things which are not being seen." 

The commentators at Precept Austin (here) say:

"Hupostasis is a very common word from Aristotle on and was used in Greek to describe that which stands under anything such as a building, a contract, a promise. It is common in the papyri in business documents as the basis or guarantee of transactions or with the meaning of a title deed. Thus one translation renders it "Faith is the title-deed of things hoped for."

A T Robertson on hupostasis: "It is common in the papyri in business documents as the basis or guarantee of transactions." 

There is a thing in law called "Evidence of Title." One legal source defines it as:

"Evidence of title refers to the means by which the ownership of land is satisfactorily demonstrated within a given jurisdiction. It is a legal proof that shows who owns a piece of land or property. There are different types of evidence of title..." (here)

Another text that alludes to this title is this:

"He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God." (John 1: 11-13 NIV)

By "right" we can also see "title deed." 

A song I heard for the first time a few years back has these lyrics:

1 My name is in the book of Life, Oh, bless the name of Jesus; I rise above all doubt and strife, And read my title clear. 

Refrain: I know, I know, My name is there; I know, I know, My name is written there.

2 My name once stood with sinners lost, And bore a painful record; But by His blood the Savior crossed, And placed it on His roll. [Refrain] 

3 Yet inward trouble often cast, A shadow o’er my title; But now with full salvation blest,1 When I can read my title clear To mansions in the skies, I'll bid farewell to every fear, And wipe my weeping eyes. Praise God! it’s ever clear. [Refrain]

Attorneys and title companies know what it means to have a "cloud" or "shadow" on a title. AI says this about clouds on titles:

"A cloud on title, also known as a title defect, is an irregularity in a property's title chain that could make a reasonable person hesitant to accept the title. These irregularities can be claims, encumbrances, documents, or unreleased liens that could impair or invalidate the title. Clouds on title can be caused by a number of things, including: 

Easements or mortgages on the land 

Deed or lien defects 

A dead person's name on the title 

Foreclosure 

Fraud, such as recording a forged deed."

The song may be heard (here).

Only a genuine faith and trust in the true and living God and in his Messiah, Jesus Christ the Son of God, is a clear title without any clouds on it. 

Another good song about this title deed of believers is titled "I hold a clear title." It's lyrics read as follows:

I've heard people talk about heaven and describe its beauty so rare 

So one day I purchased a title to a mansion in that land so fair 

It was given to me without money but it cost my dear Savior His life 

He died on the cross just to save me For me he paid a great price 

 

Now, I hold a clear title to mansion that Jesus has gone to prepare... 

My deed was both signed and recorded the day Jesus saved me from sin...

The Happy Goodmans sing it (here).

Another song is titled "When I Can Read My Title Clear" and is well sung by Michael Lining (here). It was written by Isaac Watts in 1707. 

Friend, do you have a clear title to what God has promised to those who believe? Faith is that title. Make sure your faith is rightly placed in God and in his word and that it is real.