2 Timothy 2:18 "SOME SAYING RESURRECTION ALREADY BECAME"

[parousia70]

Full Preterist today say the resurrection is past. Paul was dealing with an early form of this error

Pls see my Post #28 in this thread for the reason why.

 

[Berean Tim]

So it will NEVER be ok to say the resurrection is past? even after it is?

Or is it only wrong to say it if it isn't true?

After the resurrection there will be no reason to say its past everyone will know it. The redeemed will be with Christ. The lost will be judged at the White Throne.

 

[mkgal1]

I think what may be missing from the understanding is what resurrection was tied to in the minds of second-temple, first century Jews.

Quoting N.T. Wright:
Resurrection as Understood in Second-Temple Judaism

How did the hope of resurrection function within Judaism’s view of the world? And where does resurrection belong within second-temple Jewish beliefs about life after death in general?

Hope for resurrection began in Judaism not as dogma but as a story—the story of Israel’s exile and restoration.

Within Judaism the coming kingdom of God meant the end of Israel’s exile, the overthrow of a pagan empire and the exaltation of Israel, and the return of YHWH to Zion to judge and save. as Josephus makes clear, in Jesus’ day the conviction that their “only Ruler and Master” was God was a particular mark of the revolutionaries (Ant. 18:23). For a second-Temple Jew, then, the coming of the kingdom was not about a private existentialists or Gnostic experience but about public events. At its narrowest, it was about the liberation of Israel. At its broadest, it was about the coming of God’s justice and liberation for the whole cosmos. - Christian Origins and the Resurrection of Jesus: The Resurrection of Jesus as a Historical Problem

 

[mkgal1]

More from N.T. Wright:
I have argued elsewhere that Paul retrieved and transformed the ancient Jewish eschatology around his belief that the creator God had inaugurated the new age through the messianic events concerning Jesus and the Spirit.

The climax of Romans 1—8 is the often marginalized passage 8.18–25, expressing the rebirth of creation. Any potential analogy with the Stoic conflagration and cosmic rebirth is superficial and problematic. These verses pick up four earlier strands: Adam, Abraham, the Exodus and the Messiah. The ‘glorification’ of human beings in 8.21 and 8.30 is the reversal of the Adamic loss of glory in 3.23, which looks back to chapter 1 (humans turn away from divine power seen in creation). Abraham, in Romans 4, reverses this by giving God glory and trusting his power, so that he will inherit, not the ‘land’ only, but the whole kosmos (4.13). As in Genesis 15, this is accomplished through the new Exodus: in Romans 6, the slaves are set free by coming through the water; in Romans 7 they arrive at Sinai with all its puzzles; then in chapter 8, heaping up the Exodus-imagery, the Spirit dwells in them, like the pillar of cloud and fire, to lead them to their ‘inheritance’ – not the holy land, certainly not ‘heaven’, but the renewed creation. - How Greek was Paul’s Eschatology?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

And interesting article.........

What About Hymenaeus and Philetus   |  Study Archive 

What About Hymenaeus and Philetus
By Ward Fenley

"Hymenaeus and Philetus, men who have gone astray from the truth saying that the resurrection has already taken place, and thus they upset the faith of some." 2 Tim 2:17,18

Can someone give me a thoroughly reformed, scriptural meaning of what Hymenaeus and Philetus said about the resurrection? Wouldn't the Ephesians know of a spiritual resurrection? Doesn't it imply a physical resurrection? I am a partial preterist, but many new things that I have learned are drawing me towards the full preterist. This is about the only road block I can think of to believing the full preterist view. It would answer my questions about the resurrection. Also, any thoughts on what the millenium in the full preterist view was? I believe it is now, but I would like fully reformed, scriptural thoughts on this.
=================================
Answer:

Believe me, I shared your sentiments. My main concern was not losing friends or popularity. My main concern was not even that the "orthodox" church has not believed in full preterism. My main concern was 2 Tim 2:17,18. Because if I am a full preterist and the resurrection has not happened, then I am a heretic and should be delivered unto Satan and excommunicated from Christian fellowship. That is really hard to take especially considering the fact that the doctrines of grace have already brought enough alienation. So please know that I struggled (and sometimes still do) with that.

However, as those who deny the church of Rome and her impositions upon her adherents concerning the interpretation of Scripture, we as believers in sola Scriptura must test the "church" and use the conscience God has given us. Of course I know guys like Jim Jones and David Koresh claimed to do that too. But does that mean we flock to Rome? Of course I know you do not believe that, since you are a believer in the reformed doctrines of grace.

So then, the question is, here we are-two believers in sovereign grace desiring earnestly to search the Scriptures, and our conscience tells us that the apostles and Christ were not mistaken. Our conscience sees the earnest expectation of Paul. Our conscience sees that Paul promised the church of Corinth under divine inspiration, "We shall not all sleep."

Our conscience tells us to question: How would the church of Corinth have taken that statement? Or the church of Thessalonica for that matter. How did the seven churches in Asia interpret shortly, quickly, at hand, etc.?

At this point my conscience also says, So why were Hymenaeus and Philetus excommunicated? Before I ask that, I have to ask myself the question: Had the resurrection happened yet? No, of course not. Second, I had to ask, why did not Paul correct the Thessalonians in 2 Thess 2:1-3 by saying "Look you guys, if the coming of Christ took place and the resurrection happened (according to the orthodox views of the 20th century), there would be bodies flying out of the graves etc. I know you have thought about this. But how could Hymenaeus and Philetus be so stupid to say the resurrection had passed if everyone's conception of resurrection was bodies flying out of graves? Seriously. Then I had to ask the question, what was the real reason they were "overthrowing the faith of some"? I believe the answer lies in the fact that the resurrection was inseparable from the destruction of the Jewish Temple.

Christ clearly said that that generation would not pass away until every stone was thrown down and all prophecy was fulfilled:

Luke 21:20-22 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. {21} Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. {22} For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Luke 21:27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
Luke 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
Rom 8:18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which is about to be revealed in us.
Rom 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves,
waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.

So what Hymenaeus and Phil were doing was negating the words of Christ and nullifying other VERY important prophecies that had to take place before that day would come (2 Thess 2:1-12). Also interesting is the fact that in 2 Thess 2, the KJV at hand is wrong. It is not the word AT HAND but literally means "has come." There were rumors that Christ had come.
So now we have in two places (if their interpretation of the coming and resurrection was twentieth century orthodoxy) that crazy lunatics were trying to say the resurrection and coming had taken place. Well, quite honestly, I think these guys were smart enough to realize that no one would buy that tale unless they were seeing the physical body of Christ and graves popping open.
But Russ, I believe they were taught an entirely different view of the kingdom/resurrection:

Luke 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
Luke 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

Christ knew exactly what the Pharisees were asking. They were asking exactly the same thing the apostles asked in Acts 1:

Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to
Israel?

Everyone was asking the same question that people are still asking today: When is the kingdom going to come?

Well, check out this comparison:

John 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions (Greek mone=dwelling places): if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
John 14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

compare with:

John 14:22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and NOT unto the world?
John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode (Greek-mone=mansion or dwelling place) with him.

First, Judas knew that Christ said the kingdom would not be obvious but that His people would know it. So naturally he asks Jesus: How will you do this? Christ response is crucial. He was telling Judas that those in whom He would come to dwell were the mansions in the Father's house. Through the Spirit, the deposit of their Inheritance (Christ) the first century church was being built up this spiritual house:

1 Pet 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are being built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable
to God by Jesus Christ.

This building up of the house was the "preparing a place for them" of John 14:2-3. The place was the house or Temple of God that was being built. That house consisted of many dwelling places. At the parousia, Christ came to indwell that house. They then became one with their Husband and dwelt in Him and He in them:

John 17:23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

I always used to be confused about this verse:

Rev 21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

I thought that the NC church was the Temple:

2 Cor 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

But then Revelation says:

Rev 21:3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.

Well Christ's words unify it. His bride is in Him (in Christ) and He is IN His bride. We now KNOW Him as they were, and we are, fully known.

I hope this helps. Check out these articles and let me know what you think:

In heaven,
Ward Fenley

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Berean Tim said: ↑
Full Preterist today say the resurrection is past. Paul was dealing with an early form of this error

Pls see my Post #28 in this thread for the reason why.

Quote from post #28...........

Radagast said: ↑
Back to the OP....
Most likely, they were saying that the Resurrection had already happened, but in a spiritual sense (that is, they were denying a bodily resurrection).[/quote

How us that "Most Likely"?

Why would it matter if Hymenaeus believed that the resurrection had already occured?
Why would this destroy the faith of some?
What precisely is the error of Hymenaeus that Paul is rebuking?

1)Is it timing that Paul has problems with? If yes, why?

2)Is it the nature of the event Paul has problems with? If yes, how do you know this from the passage?

You apparently have chosen #2, the Nature. (They were denying a "Bodily" resurrection)

However, The passage explicitly says it's not about the nature, but it's about timing. (if it had been about the nature of the event, Paul could have simply pointed to unopened graves to debunk Hymenaeus. He does not do this--for he wasn't debating the nature of their claim but rather the timing.)

What damning, faith-destroying error did Paul continuously have to address in his epistles? The answer links right up to the error of Hymenaeus:

Galatians 3:1-2,10
You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith?...as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse

Galatians 2:16,21
Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified....I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly

Galatians 5:2-4
Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

I could post a dozen other Pauline verses that repeat what was damming everyone in that generation, but those suffice. The belief that justification/salvation came from the Law Covenant of Moses was the damning, faith-destroying error Paul continuously had to address in his epistles.

It was for this same error that Hymenaeus was also being condemned by Paul, for Hymenaeus claimed that the release of the OT dead from Hades occurred within the Mosaic Covenant era. Hymenaeus was thus boldly claiming that the OT dead were saved through the Law Covenant of Moses. Hymenaeus was teaching salvation by the works of the Mosaic Law. He thus was "bewitched," "under a curse," had "fallen from grace," and was, in essence, saying "Christ died needlessly."

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

More from N.T. Wright:
I have argued elsewhere that Paul retrieved and transformed the ancient Jewish eschatology around his belief that the creator God had inaugurated the new age through the messianic events concerning Jesus and the Spirit.

The climax of Romans 1—8 is the often marginalized passage 8.18–25, expressing the rebirth of creation. Any potential analogy with the Stoic conflagration and cosmic rebirth is superficial and problematic. These verses pick up four earlier strands: Adam, Abraham, the Exodus and the Messiah. The ‘glorification’ of human beings in 8.21 and 8.30 is the reversal of the Adamic loss of glory in 3.23, which looks back to chapter 1 (humans turn away from divine power seen in creation). Abraham, in Romans 4, reverses this by giving God glory and trusting his power, so that he will inherit, not the ‘land’ only, but the whole kosmos (4.13). As in Genesis 15, this is accomplished through the new Exodus: in Romans 6, the slaves are set free by coming through the water; in Romans 7 they arrive at Sinai with all its puzzles; then in chapter 8, heaping up the Exodus-imagery, the Spirit dwells in them, like the pillar of cloud and fire, to lead them to their ‘inheritance’ – not the holy land, certainly not ‘heaven’, but the renewed creation. - How Greek was Paul’s Eschatology?

Interesting post mkgal.
I haven't read a lot of NT's work............

How Greek was Paul’s Eschatology?

Introduction

Constraints of space dictate a brief summary of complex issues. We must avoid the Hegelian polarizations which played out a zero-sum game between ‘Judaism’ and ‘Hellenism’ either as historical descriptions or as a priori theological evaluations. All second-temple Judaism is, in some sense, hellenistic Judaism. Even when Jewish writers extol the Jewish God and the Jewish way of life, they can use Stoic or Platonic themes, as in Wisdom of Solomon and 4 Maccabees. We must recognise, too, the distinction between derivation and confrontation. To echo a motif is neither to endorse it nor to indicate genealogical descent. Paul ‘takes every thought captive to obey the Messiah’ (2 Cor. 10.5). He borrows ideas from non-Jewish culture, but the power behind his own beliefs remains a narrative: Israel’s God had fulfilled his promises in Messiah and Spirit, generating (not an isolated community with new, ‘pure’ ideas, but) a messianic worldview rooted in ancient Jewish ideas and engaged with the wider culture.

3. Paul: Resurrection
When Paul spoke of the resurrection of those en Christō, he drew on ancient Jewish sources, sharpening up their message. Despite the distant parallels with the Alcestis legend and the like, the obvious pre-Christian evidence for resurrection belief is Jewish. But Paul’s view is not simply derived from such strands. It has reshaped them in (at least) seven ways.

First, like eschatology itself, resurrection has moved from the periphery to the centre. It is not a central topic in Jewish writings. But in Paul it is.

Second, for Paul the event of ‘resurrection’ has split into two. It is no longer a single event for all God’s people at the end. The Messiah is first; his people come later.

Third, it involves neither a resuscitation of identical bodies, as in 2 Maccabees, nor a kind of angelic body, as in 2 Baruch, but a transformed physicality. It is still a body, but has different properties. It is animated by the Spirit. (The famous sōma pneumatikon is a way of referring, not to the composition of the body but to its animating principle. When Aristotle speaks of wombs ‘swollen with air’, he calls them hysterai pneumatikai; when Vitruvius speaks of a machine that is ‘moved by the wind’ he calls it a pneumatikon organon. The womb, and the machine, are not made of pneuma; they are filled with it or driven by it.)

Fourth, the Messiah himself has been raised. This is new. No writings prior to Paul envisaged the Messiah dying. Nor, therefore, do they imagine him being raised. This is a clue to early Christian exegesis, as of 2 Samuel 7.12. No Jews prior to Paul had read that text as a prophecy of the resurrection of David’s son, but the Hebrew vehaqimothi eth-zar‘a was rendered by the LXX as kai anastēsō to sperma sou. The early Christians exploited that opportunity.

Fifth, Paul uses the future resurrection within an ethical argument. Resurrection provokes a re-evaluation of present bodily behaviour. ‘God raised the Lord and will raise us by his power . . . therefore glorify God in your body’ (1 Cor. 6.14, 20).

Sixth, though resurrection was already a metaphor in Ezekiel 37, in Paul it acquires new metaphorical use. It signals what happens in baptism; and it is also used as a metaphor for Jewish restoration to faith in Romans 11.15.

Seventh, Paul describes what one colleague has called ‘collaborative eschatology’. For Paul, the present work of the church is already part of the new world, and hence is ‘not in vain’.

This brief summary highlights the fact that in Paul’s view of future resurrection we are dealing (a) with a thoroughly Jewish view, unknown in the non-Jewish world except in rare poetical imagination, and (b) with a Jewish view thoroughly reworked around the Messiah.

What about 2 Corinthians 4 and 5? Despite many proposals, I believe Paul has not swapped his Jewish view of resurrection for Platonic theory. He uses the metaphor of the ‘tent’, cognate with his regular Jewish image of the believer as the temple of the Spirit. And his promise, as in 1 Cor. 15.53f., is that the future body, at present kept safe in the heavens where future purposes are in store, will be an immortal physicality, put on over the present mortal one. This is the ‘eternal’ state, at present unseen, to which he refers in 4.16–18. The language of Greek philosophy is here employed in order to contest its normal conclusions.

4. Paul: the Parousia

Paul’s vision of the ‘second coming’ of Jesus is modelled on, and again transforms, a Jewish theme: the return of YHWH to Zion. The notion of ‘eschatological delay’ was frequent in the pre-Christian Jewish world long before it reappeared in 2 Peter 3. For Paul, as for the gospel writers, the ‘return’ has happened in the person and accomplishment of Jesus – and now the ‘day of YHWH’ has become ‘the day of the Lord’. There is nothing like this in the Greek world. The Greeks did not tell a story about a god who had abandoned his people to exile but who would one day return in triumph.

Nevertheless, one of the famous words here is almost unknown in the LXX: parousia. (The five LXX uses are theologically innocuous, referring to the arrival or presence of a person or group; compare e.g. 1 Cor. 16.17; Phil. 1.26, etc.) In wider hellenistic culture, parousia had the more specific meanings of (a) the arrival or presence of Caesar or some other high official, and (b) the appearance or manifestation of a deity. For Paul, it had both these connotations. When Jesus ‘appeared’ once more, this would be the arrival of the world’s true Lord, the kyrios of the LXX. These are basically Jewish themes clothed in specifically Greek dress, stressing that Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not.

Conclusion

So to a brief conclusion. The central strands of Paul’s eschatology exhibit an underlying Jewish narrative which, with one important exception, has no parallel in the Greek world. This is the narrative of creation and covenant, of Adam, Abraham, Exodus and Messiah, reshaped around Jesus and the Spirit. But that reshaping highlighted the scriptural theme, that Israel’s coming king would be the lord, not of Israel only, but of the whole world. Paul was not constructing a private worldview away from wider culture and philosophy. The evidences of Greek ideas in his writings, including his eschatology, are signs, not that he was borrowing bits and pieces to stitch together a theological patchwork quilt, but that he was expressing his messianically reshaped Jewish narrative in such a way as to take every thought captive to obey the Messiah.

The one important exception shows that this was no mere intellectual or abstract philosophical exercise. Paul’s eschatology entailed the confrontation between the fulfilled time of the gospel of Jesus and the fulfilled time of the gospel of Caesar.

 

[BABerean2]

I haven't read a lot of NT's work............

Joh 11:23 Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise again.
Joh 11:24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.

.

 

[mkgal1]

Christ clearly said that that generation would not pass away until every stone was thrown down and all prophecy was fulfilled:

Luke 21:20-22 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. {21} Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. {22} For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Luke 21:27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
Luke 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
Rom 8:18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which is about to be revealed in us.
Rom 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves,
waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.

So what Hymenaeus and Phil were doing was negating the words of Christ and nullifying other VERY important prophecies that had to take place before that day would come (2 Thess 2:1-12).

When Jesus ‘appeared’ once more, this would be the arrival of the world’s true Lord, the kyrios of the LXX. These are basically Jewish themes clothed in specifically Greek dress, stressing that Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not.

So to a brief conclusion. The central strands of Paul’s eschatology exhibit an underlying Jewish narrative which, with one important exception, has no parallel in the Greek world. This is the narrative of creation and covenant, of Adam, Abraham, Exodus and Messiah, reshaped around Jesus and the Spirit. But that reshaping highlighted the scriptural theme, that Israel’s coming king would be the lord, not of Israel only, but of the whole world. Paul was not constructing a private worldview away from wider culture and philosophy. The evidences of Greek ideas in his writings, including his eschatology, are signs, not that he was borrowing bits and pieces to stitch together a theological patchwork quilt, but that he was expressing his messianically reshaped Jewish narrative in such a way as to take every thought captive to obey the Messiah.

The one important exception shows that this was no mere intellectual or abstract philosophical exercise. Paul’s eschatology entailed the confrontation between the fulfilled time of the gospel of Jesus and the fulfilled time of the gospel of Caesar.

Just re-quoting a few points for emphasis.

 

[mkgal1]

Joh 11:23 Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise again.
Joh 11:24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.

.

Much like how we can't understand the whole Bible story based on a few quotes - we also can't understand N.T. Wright's theology on the New Creation.....the New Heaven/New Earth....and the ancient Hebrew's perspective with a few quotes either. More from N.T. Wright:

New Heavens, New Earth: The Biblical Picture Of Christian Hope by N.T. Wright

A New Heaven & a New Earth? - N.T. Wright | Closer to Truth

 

[parousia70]

After the resurrection there will be no reason to say its past everyone will know it. The redeemed will be with Christ. The lost will be judged at the White Throne.

When the sun is shining, there is no reason to say to my neighbor, "sure is a nice sunny day" since everyone knows it, But I say it anyway because it's nice and I enjoy conversing with my neighbor about things already evident to us both.

In your scenario, in contrast, It will be faith destroying for anyone AFTER the resurrection is past to say, "Isn't it great that we've been resurrected? Hallelujah!"

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

LittleLambofJesus said: ↑
Why would Paul have to say this to his followers concerning some saying the resurrection has already happened?
[which doesn't appear to occur until Revelation 20:5 "the first resurrection"?]

brinny said: ↑
i agree that the resurrection certainly has NOT occurred, my friend.

LittleLambofJesus said: ↑
Hi brinny.......welcome aboard...

Why would they have even think the resurrection had occurred in the first place? What was told to them to make them think it had occurred?

That is what is baffling me........

2Ti 2:18
who about the truth swerve, saying the resurrection/ἀνάστασιν<386> already to have become/γεγονέναι<1096>
and they are subverting the of-some faith.

Berean Tim said: ↑
Full Preterist today say the resurrection is past. Paul was dealing with an early form of this error

Pls see my Post #28 in this thread for the reason why.

parousia70 said: ↑
So it will NEVER be ok to say the resurrection is past? even after it is?

Or is it only wrong to say it if it isn't true?

Berean Tim said: ↑
After the resurrection there will be no reason to say its past everyone will know it. The redeemed will be with Christ. The lost will be judged at the White Throne.

When the sun is shining, there is no reason to say to my neighbor, "sure is a nice sunny day" since everyone knows it, But I say it anyway because it's nice and I enjoy conversing with my neighbor about things already evident to us both.
In your scenario, in contrast, It will be faith destroying for anyone AFTER the resurrection is past to say, "Isn't it great that we've been resurrected? Hallelujah!"

Good analogy parousia70 [love the username ]

HalleluYah is used in 4 verses of the NT, all in Revelation 19 concerning the 70AD destruction of OC Jerusalem and OC Temple/Priesthood....

The Great City/Harlot/Queen Revelation chapts 17-19

..............................Revelation 19

Hallelujah and Its Hebrew Meaning - Israel Study Center
“Hallelu” (הללו) and “Yah” (יה).

The word “Hallelujah” (הללויה) is actually a compound word (two individual Hebrew words put together): “Hallelu” (הללו) and “Yah” (יה). “Hallelu” is an exhortation to a group people to praise someone or something. The old English translation of “Praise, ye” is, therefore, a very accurate translation.

“Yah” (יה) is a version of “YHVH” (יהוה) – an English transliteration of the covenant name of Israel’s God. Jewish belief holds that this name is too holy to be pronounced at all. In fact, no one really knows how to pronounce it correctly. Ancient Hebrew did not use vowels, but only consonants

3050 Yahh yaw contraction for 3068, and meaning the same; Jah, the sacred name:--Jah, the Lord, most vehement. Compare names in "-iah," "- jah."
===================================
Revelation 19:
1 After these I hear as a great sound of a vast throng in the heaven, saying,
"HalleluYah! the salvation and the glory and the honor, and the power of our God; 2 That true and righteous His judgings, that He judges the great harlot who corrupts the earth in Her whoredom, and avenges<1556> the blood of His bond-servants out of Her hand".
3 And a second time they have declared<4483> "HalleluYah! and the smoke of Her is ascending into the ages of the ages!"
4 And fall the twenty four Elders and the four living-ones,
and they worship to the GOD the One sitting upon the Throne, saying, "Amen! HalleluYah!"
5 And a Voice came out from the Throne saying: "Be ye praising to the GOD of us, all ye bond-servants of Him, and those fearing Him, the small and the great".
6 And I hear as sound of a throng, much, and as a sound of waters, many, and as sound of thunders, strong saying: "HalleluYah! that reigns Lord the God *of-us, the Almighty".
=======================================
Exodus 15:
1 Then sang Mosheh and the sons of Yisra'el this song unto Yahweh, and they spake saying,--"I will sing to Yahweh for He is exalted exalted,--The horse and his rider hath He cast into the Sea.
2 My might and melody is Yah, and He became mine salvation/y@shuw'ah.--This is my 'El and I will glorify Him, 'Elohiym of my father and I will set Him on high".

Revelation 15:3 [Exodus 15]
and They are singing the Song of-Mosheh, the bond-servant of the God, and the song of the Lambkin, saying, `Great and marvelous the works of Thee, Lord! the God, the Almighty, just and true the ways of Thee, the king of the [*Ages/Saints] Nations''
=========================
A favorite song of mine..........