Proving a resurrection

[Stewartnz]

By re-opening the thought about the state of the dead, I mean Soldieroftheking no dishonor. He has authority over the thread he started, and I believe we must all acknowledge that. But I return breifly to a thought from the Book of Luke on the subject.

"For He is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him." (Lk 20:38)

This thought is part of Jesus' response to the Sadducees, "which deny that there is any resurrection" (Lk 20:27).

"Now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he called the Lord, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For He is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto Him." (20:37-38)

Moses' statement is cited [by Jesus] as proof that a resurrection must take place.

In Moses' day, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were all dead, and the Lord is not their God while they are dead. So for Moses' words to be true, there must come a day when they will be raised from the dead.

This was presented by Jesus as proof that a future resurrection must occur, it is not proof that the soul of man is immortal.

There were some in Paul’s day that were "saying that the resurrection is already past" (2Tim 2:18), but this was, and is still to this day, an error. If a person died two months ago, we may be sure that their resurrection has not yet taken place.

(Of course there were “many” that rose from their graves with Jesus, but that event should not be equated with the great resurrection, in which all the dead in Christ shall be raised up “at the last day”.
(See Jn 6:39,40,44,54.)

____________
Stewart.

 

[k4c]

By re-opening the thought about the state of the dead, I mean Soldieroftheking no dishonor. He has authority over the thread he started, and I believe we must all acknowledge that. But I return breifly to a thought from the Book of Luke on the subject.

"For He is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him." (Lk 20:38)

This thought in Luke is part of Jesus' response to the Sadducees, "which deny that there is any resurrection" (Lk 20:27).

"Now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he called the Lord, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For He is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto Him." (20:37-38)

Moses' statement is cited [by Jesus] as proof that a resurrection must take place.

In Moses' day, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were all dead, and the Lord is not their God while they are dead. So for Moses' words to be true, there must come a day when they will be raised from the dead.

This was presented by Jesus as proof that a future resurrection must occur, it is not proof that the soul of man is immortal.

There were some in Paul’s day that were "saying that the resurrection is already past" (2Tim 2:18), but this was, and is still to this day, an error. If a person died two months ago, we may be sure that their resurrection has not yet taken place.

(Of course there were “many” that rose from their graves with Jesus, but that event should not be equated with the great resurrection, in which all the dead in Christ shall be raised up “at the last day”.
(See Jn 6:39,40,44,54.)

____________
Stewart.

The verse that speaks of those being resurrected with Jesus is suspicious to me because for such a big event as that and yet nowhere else is it mentioned.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

The verse that speaks of those being resurrected with Jesus is suspicious to me because for such a big event as that and yet nowhere else is it mentioned.

Hi K4C... welcome back!

I know you are a Bible only kind of guy but check out the Ellen White quote in the previous mentioned thread to understand why this 'special' resurrection was not only possible but followed in the fulfilment of the type of the feast of the wave sheaf.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

By re-opening the thought about the state of the dead, I mean Soldieroftheking no dishonor. He has authority over the thread he started, and I believe we must all acknowledge that. But I return breifly to a thought from the Book of Luke on the subject.

"For He is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him." (Lk 20:38)

This thought is part of Jesus' response to the Sadducees, "which deny that there is any resurrection" (Lk 20:27).

"Now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he called the Lord, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For He is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto Him." (20:37-38)

Moses' statement is cited [by Jesus] as proof that a resurrection must take place.

In Moses' day, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were all dead, and the Lord is not their God while they are dead. So for Moses' words to be true, there must come a day when they will be raised from the dead.

This was presented by Jesus as proof that a future resurrection must occur, it is not proof that the soul of man is immortal.

There were some in Paul’s day that were "saying that the resurrection is already past" (2Tim 2:18), but this was, and is still to this day, an error. If a person died two months ago, we may be sure that their resurrection has not yet taken place.

(Of course there were “many” that rose from their graves with Jesus, but that event should not be equated with the great resurrection, in which all the dead in Christ shall be raised up “at the last day”.
(See Jn 6:39,40,44,54.)

____________
Stewart.

Consider also Acts 2:29,34

Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day...

For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,

 

[k4c]

Hi K4C... welcome back!

I know you are a Bible only kind of guy but check out the Ellen White quote in the previous mentioned thread to understand why this 'special' resurrection was not only possible but followed in the fulfilment of the type of the feast of the wave sheaf.

Thanks for the welcome back...

Maybe you can asnwer these questions for me.

1. Why, with such a miraculous event as the graves opening up, is there no mention of this anywhere else in the gospels?

2. Where did these people go once they were raised? Did they go to heaven before Jesus and who were the many people they appeared before?

3. Will they have to die again such as we see with Lazarus?

I believe this preresurrection was added based on a preconceived theology, like several other verses throughout the NT, to justify a belief system that is unbiblical.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Thanks for the welcome back...

Maybe you can asnwer these questions for me.

1. Why, with such a miraculous event as the graves opening up, is there no mention of this anywhere else in the gospels?

2. Where did these people go once they were raised? Did they go to heaven before Jesus and who were the many people they appeared before?

3. Will they have to die again such as we see with Lazarus?

I believe this preresurrection was added based on a preconceived theology, like several other verses throughout the NT, to justify a belief system that is unbiblical.

1) While obviously not having the absolute answer, I suppose we only hear of this account once, just as other accounts of miracles were only accounted once. Lazarus' being resurrected for example... pretty big demonstration by Jesus of God's power yet only John recorded it.

2) The Bible tells us that they went into Jeruselem... see the sister White quote in the 'What remains After Death' thread.

3) No, they were resurrected to be translated as Christ's first fruits offering of the harvest before the Father. See again the SOP quote...

Some have theorized that they are the 24 elders spoken of in Revelation but we have no confirmation of that.

We have to be careful to not discount a passage as being 'added to justify a theological position' just because we don't currently have an understanding of it. This event fits perfectly with the antitypical fulfilment of the wave sheaf offering.

 

[k4c]

1) While obviously not having the absolute answer, I suppose we only hear of this account once, just as other accounts of miracles were only accounted once. Lazarus' being resurrected for example... pretty big demonstration by Jesus of God's power yet only John recorded it.

2) The Bible tells us that they went into Jeruselem... see the sister White quote in the 'What remains After Death' thread.

3) No, they were resurrected to be translated as Christ's first fruits offering of the harvest before the Father. See again the SOP quote...

Some have theorized that they are the 24 elders spoken of in Revelation but we have no confirmation of that.

We have to be careful to not discount a passage as being 'added to justify a theological position' just because we don't currently have an understanding of it. This event fits perfectly with the antitypical fulfilment of the wave sheaf offering.

I've heard of the first fruit offering application to this event, it can make sense in light of your comment regarding Lazarus only being mentioned once. Thanks for the insight...

 

[Joe67]

Here is the testimony of Jesus.

Eph 4:8
8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high,he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. KJV

As the Lord gives gifts unto us, then we know that he leads captives into his captivity.

We are the Lord's prisoner.

Joe

 

[OntheDL]

1) While obviously not having the absolute answer, I suppose we only hear of this account once, just as other accounts of miracles were only accounted once. Lazarus' being resurrected for example... pretty big demonstration by Jesus of God's power yet only John recorded it.

2) The Bible tells us that they went into Jeruselem... see the sister White quote in the 'What remains After Death' thread.

3) No, they were resurrected to be translated as Christ's first fruits offering of the harvest before the Father. See again the SOP quote...

Some have theorized that they are the 24 elders spoken of in Revelation but we have no confirmation of that.

We have to be careful to not discount a passage as being 'added to justify a theological position' just because we don't currently have an understanding of it. This event fits perfectly with the antitypical fulfilment of the wave sheaf offering.

In John's vision of the 24 elders in Rev 5 of whom were redeemed from the earth, it was the scene of inauguration.

Jesus' immediate ascension after speaking to Mary not to touch/defile Him was to fulfill the 1st and 2nd entries into the Most Holy Place preparatory to the Day of Atonement service. In His ascension 40 days later, 10 days prelude to the Pentecost, He brought with Him His specially resurrected group, His trophies to summon to the door the tabernacle as a 'cloud of witness' for dedication of the sanctuary and His priesthood on the Pentecostal day.

Christ's ascension to heaven was the signal that His followers were to receive the promised blessing. For this they were to wait before they entered upon their work. When Christ passed within the heavenly gates, He was enthroned amidst the adoration of the angels. As soon as the ceremony was completed, the Holy Spirit descended upon the disciples in rich currents, and Christ was indeed glorified, even with the glory which He had with the Father from all eternity. The Pentecostal outpouring was Heaven's communication that the Redeemer's inauguration was accomplished. According to His promise, He had sent the Holy Spirit from heaven to His followers, as a token that He had, as priest and king, received all authority in heaven and on earth, and was the Anointed One over His people" (AA 38-39).

 

[Cribstyl]

By re-opening the thought about the state of the dead, I mean Soldieroftheking no dishonor. He has authority over the thread he started, and I believe we must all acknowledge that. But I return breifly to a thought from the Book of Luke on the subject.

"For He is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him." (Lk 20:38)

This thought is part of Jesus' response to the Sadducees, "which deny that there is any resurrection" (Lk 20:27).

"Now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he called the Lord, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For He is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto Him." (20:37-38)

Moses' statement is cited [by Jesus] as proof that a resurrection must take place.

In Moses' day, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were all dead, and the Lord is not their God while they are dead. So for Moses' words to be true, there must come a day when they will be raised from the dead.


This was presented by Jesus as proof that a future resurrection must occur, it is not proof that the soul of man is immortal.

There were some in Paul’s day that were "saying that the resurrection is already past" (2Tim 2:18), but this was, and is still to this day, an error. If a person died two months ago, we may be sure that their resurrection has not yet taken place.

(Of course there were “many” that rose from their graves with Jesus, but that event should not be equated with the great resurrection, in which all the dead in Christ shall be raised up “at the last day”.
(See Jn 6:39,40,44,54.)

____________
Stewart.

Stew, respectfully, I disagree with your understanding of these scriptures.

Luk 20:37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
Luk 20:38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.

Stew, In His argument to the Sadducees, Jesus is referencing what Moses wrote in Exodus3:6 not what Moses said at the burning bush.
The major argument that Jesus is making is. God is the one who said "I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, Isaac and Jacob.." not "I WAS THE GOD OF......" So the point that Jesus is making is that ALL IS ALIVE UNTO HIM

Exd 3:6 Moreover he said, I [am] the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.

I find your commentary in pink above questionable and unsupported as truths.

Respectfully
CRIB

 

[Cribstyl]

Consider also Acts 2:29,34

Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day...

For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,

Be careful how you rightly devide the word to make faulty arguments.
That text is only talking about the flesh of David.
The contextual argument being made by Peter is that David had spoken a prophecy about the "The Lord said unto My Lord". Peter helped to decern that the prophecy was not about "Lord" (King) David but rather, the Lord Jesus Christ.
Act 2:31He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.