Question on, Matt.27:52-52.

[cubinity]

Mt. 9:25 But when the people were put forth, he went in, and took her by the hand, and the maid arose.

So, you think Jesus took her hand and the maid's dead body arose, still dead, and He presented it to her parents, since after all, Matthew failed to fill in assumptions that she was alive.

v26 And the fame hereof went abroad into all that land.

The fame of levitating a dead body. Not unreasonable at all (the wink means sarcasm)

Your sarcasm only demonstrates meanness, not the invalidity of my point.
I think the people were animated by life. I don't understand why you aren't listening in all the ways I've said that over and over and over again. I agree with you about what you think went on that the passage is describing. Your failure to appreciate that only reinforces that you are not in the habit of paying attention to what is actually written, by me or by the authors of the Bible.

But, whatever.

You continue to ask me what I think, and you continue to argue for why your interpretation of the description is reasonable, and you are going with arguments like these because the one argument you and I know you can't make is the one that would actually prove me wrong. Our interpretations simply are not in the text. As much as you may not like the implications of that fact, it is and will always be true.

Why does it matter so much to me to make that point? Is it because I disagree with your interpretations? No, as I've repeatedly said I agree with them! Is it because I think this particular issue of people climbing from graves two thousand years ago is so important when it comes to the fundamental difference between what is actually in the text and what we assume is happening as we interpret the text? No, not really in this case.

It matters because all the time people, like this OP, flip open the Bible, read a passage, interpret its meaning, only to read another passage and interpret its meaning, and come away asking something like, "Are these contradictory?" At other times, well-meaning believers will read a passage and interpret its meaning, and then read another passage that totally contradicts it, interpret it in a way that conveniently makes the words mean something non-contradictory, and then argue that the Bible never contradicts itself.

It also matters because people tend to make their Christian dogma based on what they think the Scriptures are saying rather than what they actually say, using as you so shamelessly do, human reasoning. They then tout their reasoning around as divinely inspired truth when it is really just opinion.

In this case, for example, is it divinely inspired truth that those folks were alive? No. Is it a very reasonable assumption that the divine truth we have in our possession is implying that those folks were alive? Sure. What is the divine truth? Bodies rose from graves and went into the city, appearing to people. Is there a difference between the divine truth that the bodies arose and the very reasonable assumption that they rose because they were alive? YES!!! Is a difference like that significant to a believer that has to deal with dogma formulated by others? ABSOLUTELY!!!

It is important to know the difference between what is actually present in the text versus what you and I think it means, so that we can address these types of circumstances maturely and respectfully (to the text and to each other).

Think you can appreciate that on some level?

 

[patience7]

And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

Sorry. How many times did I sit here and read this and didn't pay attention to that?There is something else interesting regarding these verses - they are not recorded in any other gospel, only here. It makes you wonder - why?

 

[Standing Up]

Your sarcasm only demonstrates meanness, not the invalidity of my point. -snip-

Frustration over what is so obvious.

Mt. 9:25 But when the people were put forth, he went in, and took her by the hand, and the maid arose.

So, again, since Matthew doesn't spell out that the maid arose physically alive, you're telling people to think Jesus merely levitatated a dead body. Rigor mortis hadn't set in, so that was quite the trick. If not, why not?

 

[Standing Up]

Sorry. How many times did I sit here and read this and didn't pay attention to that?There is something else interesting regarding these verses - they are not recorded in any other gospel, only here. It makes you wonder - why?

Supposedly he was writing to a Jewish audience. They would appreciate the nuances of ties to festival types, like first fruits. These OT saints arose as part of that presentation to the Father.

I don't agree with everything Philo of Alexandria (c50ad, a hellenized Jew) says, but this provides a certain Jewish perspective.


THE SIXTH FESTIVAL
There is also a festival on the day of the paschal feast, which succeeds the first day, and this is named the sheaf, from what takes place on it; for the sheaf is brought to the altar as a first fruit both of the country which the nation has received for its own, and also of the whole land; so as to be an offering both for the nation separately, and also a common one for the whole race of mankind; and so that the people by it worship the living God, both for themselves and for all the rest of mankind, because they have received the fertile earth for their inheritance; for in the country there is no barren soil but even all those parts which appear to be stony and rugged are surrounded with soft veins of great depth, which, by reason of their richness, are very well suited for the production of living Things.
Philo, The Special Laws, II

If accurate, one might easily understand that Abraham, as an example, was part of that group.

 

[Zeena]

It is quite plausable that when the earth shook, God was preparing the bodies to be raised. Even as He annointed His Christ for buriel.

But we know that Jesus was quite alive in the grave, Spiritually, though He was dead, physically. For He went and preached to those in prison, and loosed the bonds of death.

1 Pet 3:18-20
For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

Eph 4:9-10
(Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

Acts 2:24
Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.

 

[cubinity]

Frustration over what is so obvious.

Mt. 9:25 But when the people were put forth, he went in, and took her by the hand, and the maid arose.

So, again, since Matthew doesn't spell out that the maid arose physically alive, you're telling people to think Jesus merely levitatated a dead body. Rigor mortis hadn't set in, so that was quite the trick. If not, why not?

Unlike you, actually, I'm not telling people to think anything.
I am stating one obvious point, which is so physically real that not even you have been able to deny it.
The text says one thing, and we interpret it to say more.
We are not wrong in doing so, but we are doing so.
Are you going to continue to make false assertions about me all week, or are you going to open your eyes?

 

[cubinity]

It is quite plausible that...

See. Now this is the right way to approach the subject. If only more people could respect the text the way you have, Zeena.

 

[patience7]

Supposedly he was writing to a Jewish audience. They would appreciate the nuances of ties to festival types, like first fruits. These OT saints arose as part of that presentation to the Father.

I don't agree with everything Philo of Alexandria (c50ad, a hellenized Jew) says, but this provides a certain Jewish perspective.


THE SIXTH FESTIVAL
There is also a festival on the day of the paschal feast, which succeeds the first day, and this is named the sheaf, from what takes place on it; for the sheaf is brought to the altar as a first fruit both of the country which the nation has received for its own, and also of the whole land; so as to be an offering both for the nation separately, and also a common one for the whole race of mankind; and so that the people by it worship the living God, both for themselves and for all the rest of mankind, because they have received the fertile earth for their inheritance; for in the country there is no barren soil but even all those parts which appear to be stony and rugged are surrounded with soft veins of great depth, which, by reason of their richness, are very well suited for the production of living Things.
Philo, The Special Laws, II

If accurate, one might easily understand that Abraham, as an example, was part of that group.

Are you explaining the "why?" of the why this is the only occurrence of this incident being recorded? Weren't all the gospels written to Jewish audiences? So are you saying that the OT saints rose as an offering of the firstfruits? For the OT saints to rise, wouldn't they had to have been born again? In Corinthians there is a sequence as to the resurrection: But every man in his own order: Christ being the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming - And this does not happen until Christ's return. (also - the dead in Christ shall rise first)

I still hold to my opinion (which that is all it is!) regarding these verses.

 

[spiritwarrior37]

No, the scriptures in question do not tell us that "when Jesus was raised, they came out with Him".


The quake had been three days earlier?

Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And behold the veil of the temple was rent in twain form the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake and the rocks rent; Matthew 27:50,51

There is three days in there? By the above record, he had just died.

The quake happened when Jesus died. The bodies came out of the grave after Jesus was resurrected, three days later!!!!

God bless

 

[patience7]

The quake happened when Jesus died. The bodies came out of the grave after Jesus was resurrected, three days later!!!!

God bless

I think I apologized for not seeing that in post #62.

Thanks.

 

[cubinity]

Well, that works for me. Are you satisfied?

 

[Standing Up]

Are you explaining the "why?" of the why this is the only occurrence of this incident being recorded? Weren't all the gospels written to Jewish audiences?

Just generally speaking. They were all written for all.

So are you saying that the OT saints rose as an offering of the firstfruits?

That's the idea. God of the living and the dead.

1 Pet 4:6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

For the OT saints to rise, wouldn't they had to have been born again? In Corinthians there is a sequence as to the resurrection: But every man in his own order: Christ being the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming - And this does not happen until Christ's return. (also - the dead in Christ shall rise first)

I still hold to my opinion (which that is all it is!) regarding these verses.

Something like this?

1 Cor. 15:23-24a But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. Then [cometh] the end,

1 Thes. 4:16-17 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive [and] remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Rev. 20:4-5 ... and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This [is] the first resurrection.