When does the resurrection of the dead take place?

[YSam44]

not being sarcastic, just going by what the bible says!

Hebrews 11:39-40(KJV)
39And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
40God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

you said "So they slept until Christ and rose with him".

i find no scriptural support for that statement!

and then you say it "All those who were before Christ did not receive the promise of resurrection because God didn't want them made perfect without us"!

but look at what you say next "So they slept until Christ and rose with him", which would mean that they rose with Christ and was made perfect but we weren't there because we weren't even born yet!

so that would mean that they were made perfect "without" us and would go against the verse!

the verse clearly states that we will be made perfect at the same time which is in line with jn 5:28-29, 1thess 4:15-16, and rev 20:4-6!

I like that... but look here concerning Matt 16 looking to 1 cor 15... 27Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Some standing which will not taste death, TILL they see.... that twinkling of an eye here !!!!

 

[ewq1938]

I think JohnRabbit laid it out perfectly in his post... The time line and scripture nails it... It was simply a vision as Christ said it was a vision...

It was a vision because people SAW it happen. It happened in real time obviously.

 

[JohnRabbit]

It was a vision because people SAW it happen.

correct!

that's generally the purpose of a vision!

It happened in real time obviously.

you have been shown through scripture how that couldn't be the case!

 

[expos4ever]

Genesis 1:26(KJV)
26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

this is saying that man's apprearance, when you look at him, is no different than if God was standing in front of you.

just imagine the shape of a shadow of a man on a wall.

that same shape would be on the wall if God were standing there.

you with me?

I think you are over-reaching. If you are suggesting that God has a body (i.e. with arms and legs), I will point out that I believe this is a position that has never really been embraced in the church. That does not mean you are mistaken, but it does raise a red flag.

In short, for the writer of Genesis 1 to say that man is created "in the image" of God is too vague a characterization to allow us to conclude that God has a body, especially in light of the following:

1. God created all of the physical universe;
2. Therefore, God created the "dust of the earth";
3. God made the body of man from that dust;
4. Therefore man's body is a "created" things;
5. But God is surely not a created thing;
6. Therefore, it seems implausible that God has a body.

 

[expos4ever]

if not, then take a look at these verses:

Deuteronomy 4:14-18(KJV)
14And the LORD commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it.
15Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire:
16Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image (a physical representation, i.e. a statue.), the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female,
17The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air,
18The likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth:

I think this is simply an instruction against idolatry - against worship "the created" instead of the creator.

 

[expos4ever]

I like that... but look here concerning Matt 16 looking to 1 cor 15... 27Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Some standing which will not taste death, TILL they see.... that twinkling of an eye here !!!!

I think that all that is being said in Matthew 16 is what Jesus' words plainly mean: the kingdom of God was initiated 2000 years ago. Some of the people Jesus was talking to lived to see it.

I find it odd that so many people think that the Kingdom is not here yet despite this and other texts that rather clearly show that it is.

But perhaps that is another debate.

 

[All4Christ]

@JohnRabbit - Here is one of the writings I spoke about earlier. On the Ressurrection by St Justin Martyr in the early to mid 2nd century: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0131.htm

 

[All4Christ]

@JohnRabbit - here is another. Tertullian had some interesting writings that were not always orthodox (He leaned towards Montanism at the end of his literary activity), but has some very interesting points. Besides his later leanings towards Montanism, he wrote some brilliant apologetic treatises. It is also helpful for learning the mindset of the second to very early third century of the Christian Church. Most of what he writes in this particular treatise is fairly consistent with the general Christian beliefs at the time.

He was writing this in response to a movement promoting what was considered to be a heresy at that time. The heretics against whom this work is directed, were opposed to the supreme God. They associated inherent corruption and worthlessness to all God's creation and works— among the rest, to the flesh or body of man; claiming that it could not rise again, and that the soul alone was capable of inheriting immortality.

On the Resurrection of be Flesh -http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0316.htm

 

[JohnRabbit]

I think this is simply an instruction against idolatry - against worship "the created" instead of the creator.

it is.

but i thought the language it used in it's depiction of the likenesses of the images was relative to the discussion.

 

[JohnRabbit]

@JohnRabbit - here is another. Tertullian had some interesting writings that were not always orthodox (He leaned towards Montanism at the end of his literary activity), but has some very interesting points. Besides his later leanings towards Montanism, he wrote some brilliant apologetic treatises. It is also helpful for learning the mindset of the second to very early third century of the Christian Church. Most of what he writes in this particular treatise is fairly consistent with the general Christian beliefs at the time.

He was writing this in response to a movement promoting what was considered to be a heresy at that time. The heretics against whom this work is directed, were opposed to the supreme God. They associated inherent corruption and worthlessness to all God's creation and works— among the rest, to the flesh or body of man; claiming that it could not rise again, and that the soul alone was capable of inheriting immortality.

On the Resurrection of be Flesh -http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0316.htm

thanks for the info!

 

[JohnRabbit]

I think that all that is being said in Matthew 16 is what Jesus' words plainly mean:

yes, he meant what He said in matthew 17:9!

it was a vision!

look at this:

Daniel 7:1-3(NKJV)
1In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon, Daniel had a dream and visions of his head while on his bed. Then he wrote down the dream, telling the main facts.
2Daniel spoke, saying, “I saw in my vision by night, and behold, the four winds of heaven were stirring up the Great Sea.
3And four great beasts came up from the sea, each different from the other.

now of course these events haven't even happened when he saw the events in vision.

the bible's language is consistent.

 

[All4Christ]

thanks for the info!

You're welcome! If you ever need any more resources on early Christian writings, just let me know!

CCEL is great (http://www.ccel.org/fathers.html) for a wide range of resources and New Advent has a wide selection (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/).

That said, if you want recommendations of who to read for specific subjects, send me a PM and I'll be happy to help.

 

[expos4ever]

yes, he meant what He said in matthew 17:9!

it was a vision!.

Disagree, Jesus means exactly what He says at the end of 16: Some standing there will be alive when Jesus becomes King. You appear to restrict, without justification, the scope of what Jesus says in the last verse of chapter 16. He is not talking about a vision there; He says what He say! - the Kingdom of God will be initiated before all his audience have died.

 

[JohnRabbit]

1. God created all of the physical universe;

check!

2. Therefore, God created the "dust of the earth";

check!

3. God made the body of man from that dust;

check!

4. Therefore man's body is a "created" things;

check!

5. But God is surely not a created thing;

check!

6. Therefore, it seems implausible that God has a body.

read rev 1:12-18, maybe that will help.

 

[JohnRabbit]

Disagree, Jesus means exactly what He says at the end of 16: Some standing there will be alive when Jesus becomes King. You appear to restrict, without justification, the scope of what Jesus says in the last verse of chapter 16. He is not talking about a vision there; He says what He say! - the Kingdom of God will be initiated before all his audience have died.

i agree that what He said was fulfilled in the vision.

they were given something tremendous and that was a look into the kingdom to come!

that kingdom will be established on earth when Christ returns as per jn 5:28-29!

besides all of that, i don't see how you just toss out jn 7:37-39 like it's not even there!

 

[All4Christ]

check!


check!


check!


check!


check!




read rev 1:12-18, maybe that will help.

I always read that to show the union between Christ (fully man / fully God) and God (the Father). It uses the imagery from the vision of Daniel for the Ancient of Days, but also shows the preexistence and eternal divinity of the Son. There is a lot of symbolism in that account.

When you say that God has a body - do you mean as Christ God or as the Father? Or both?

 

[JohnRabbit]

I always read that to show the union between Christ (fully man / fully God) and God (the Father). It uses the imagery from the vision of Daniel for the Ancient of Days, but also shows the preexistence and eternal divinity of the Son. There is a lot of symbolism in that account.

When you say that God has a body - do you mean as Christ God or as the Father? Or both?

both.

 

[All4Christ]

both.

Could you clarify that - as in both sharing one body, or two separate bodies? It gets tricky considering that they are One. [emoji846]

 

[expos4ever]

read rev 1:12-18, maybe that will help.

Oh c'mon man. That is clearly metaphor - do you really believe God has a sword coming out of his mouth?

I think I am safe ground in asserting that I have never heard anyone assert that God (The Father) has a "body". Again, the fact that almost no one believes what you believe does not prove you are mistaken. But, again, it seems mighty suspicious to suggest that you are right about this and the legions of Christians over the centuries are mistaken.

 

[All4Christ]

Oh c'mon man. That is clearly metaphor - do you really believe God has a sword coming out of his mouth?

I think I am safe ground in asserting that I have never heard anyone assert that God (The Father) has a "body". Again, the fact that almost no one believes what you believe does not prove you are mistaken. But, again, it seems mighty suspicious to suggest that you are right about this and the legions of Christians over the centuries are mistaken.

I've heard of people "representing" God as the elderly man, based on the vision in Daniel. However, the Bible clearly states that God the Father is spirit. I guess one could argue for a "spirit body" (though I don't necessarily agree with that - seems like that gets to be more and more like multiple Gods if you have multiple bodies), but only God the Son was made incarnate with a physical body.

In my tradition, we have iconography, but we cannot depict God the Father on an icon, as He was not made incarnate and does not have a physical body. We cannot validly make an image of God the Father.

Here is an example of a painting that depicts God the Father with a body.