the Dead in Christ? Do they exist?

So Jesus really should have said that God WILL BE the God of Abraham. Because by saying I AM the God of Abraham would lead Moses to believe that Abraham was alive at his time. So really God was saying "I WILL BE the God of Abraham" to Moses, right?

Neal

 

John 5:19-24 teaches the church that Christ brings about in our lives, because of our faith in Him, a resurrection of spiritual life in our hearts.

In John 5:29 the apostle points us to the fact of a general physical resurrection of the dead for both the Christian/saint and sinner.

In John 6:39,40 and 54 there is referenced for us the reality of our physical resurrection from the dead as Christians. Notice there is no hint in these verses as to the lost and unjust sinners. Thus we have a separate resurrection for the Christian and John says that it will be ' . . . at the last day.' God does not mean the last day of human history but rather the rapture of the church into Heaven as most clearly indicated in I Thessalonians 4:17 where Jesus comes for His saints in the clouds. This will not be a quiet or secret event because Paul says that ' . . . the Lord will descend to the clouds with a personal shout, plus there will be the voice of the archangel who will accompany Christ. Notice in verse 16 Paul tells us that only 'the dead in Christ will rise . . . 'at this physical resurrection and translation into Heaven. The term 'to be in Christ' is reserved only for Christians and not sinners/the unsaved. This will be the next major eschatological event in the Lord's plan for the ages. During the next seven years all Christians will be evaluated before the Judgment Seat of Christ [Romans 14:10 &II Corinthians 5:10]

During the seven years of the Judgment Seat of Christ in Heaven, on the earth will take place the Great Tribulation [Matthew 24:21] {not merely a general tribulation of saints but a world wide trial that has never happened in its magnitude or as a universal world wide time of terror}. After this Jesus will come down to earth with His saints who have gone before and through the Judgment Seat of Christ. Whereas, before Jesus came to the clouds for His saints, He now comes as a Warrior along with us as His victorious army of the Lord. [Revelation 19:11-18] It is said that He will 'smite the nations' most strongly suggesting His entry into our sinful, world.

Please, let me use this example. If I tried to tell Catholics that Purgatory and the Rosary were the same thing, you would quickly call me on your carpet for my blatant mistake. By the same token, there is a reason why God speaking though the Apostle Paul teaches about His Judgment Seat of Christ and also why John the Apostle points to His Great White Throne Judgment for sinners. One does not have to be a Rhodes scholar to understand this concept and truth.

In Revelation chapter twenty you will find several references to the 1,000 year reign of Christ on the earth. The Revelator tells us that the resurrection of the lost [Revelation 20:5] will take place after this 1,000 year--Millennial reign of Christ on the earth called the Kingdom Age. In other words, the resurrection of the unjust and the Great White Throne Judgment, which is the tribunal of Christ against the lost or unsaved will not take place for at least 1,007 years from now, if Jesus came for us in the rapture this year. Let me say that God tells us that no person knows the day or the hour {the time} when Jesus will return in the clouds for His waiting universal church.

By way of conclusion, there are two separate human, bodily resurrections and two unique, separate judgments which are the Judgment Seat of Christ for the saved and the Great White Throne Judgment for the eternally lost ones.

Those who are caught without Christ and His forgiveness enter Hell at the moment of their physical death, but will await their bodily resurrection until after the Kingdom Age.

Remember in your study that if there was just one final judgment it would be superfluous for the Apostle Paul to say in I Thessalonians 4:16 that only ' . . . the dead in Christ and the living saints will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air.

 

quote:Bob
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And Christ is pointing out that IF there is NO future resurrection (the very thing that the Sadducees deny when they ask the question "SO IN the Resurrection whose wife WILL she be") - then God should say to Moses "I WAS the God of Abraham while he lived".

But since God said "I AM the God of Abraham" and we ALL agree that Abraham is dead at that time, and we ALL agree that "God is NOT the God of the dead" then the ONLY way out - is that God is GOING to raise Abraham in the future.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exegesis means (among other things) understanding the view of the primary audience. Christ is speaking "to the Sadducees". They accept that God called Abraham "The Father of many nations" BEFORE Abraham WAS the "Father of many nations" - while he had no son of the Promise.

The audience understood their Bible's and knew that this was "accepted practice". They were not trying to edit that out - rather they accepted it.

So although someone today - who is less familiar with the Genesis text might consider that God should have told Moses "I will some day be the God of Abraham" (to be technically correct) - since "As Christ said - God is NOT the God of the Dead", But God had already taught His people the Romans 4:17 principle "God counts those things that are not (yet) as though they are".

Christ point to the Sadducees was for the "direct and explicit purpose" of proving the resurrection.

Clearly - given the fact that they know Abraham to be dead when God is talking to Moses AND they KNOW that God is not the God of the dead (facts that are asserted in the story of Matt 22 not disputed) - the "only solution" the Sadducees had left for the puzzle Christ handed them - was a "future resurrection for Abraham and Isaac". The VERY thing Christ was "debating" in order to "prove".

This was so obvious - that the Pharisees "saw that Christ's argument silenced the Sadducees".

Surely we too can "get the point".

Hostile audience. Debate format. No "trust me I am right" form of "proof" works in that format.

In Christ,

Bob

 

So he wasn't alive in spirit?

Neal

 

If he HAD been alive in spirit - THEN

#1. God IS the God of the dead - since the dead worship him and continue to live in spirit. This would make Christ a liar in Matt 22.

#2. It would totally undermine His point which is that the ONLY SOLUTION to the problem of saying "I AM the God of Abraham" to Moses - is the future resurrection of Abraham JUST as calling Abarham the Father of many nations while as yet he had no children ONLY works based on Rom 4:17 seeing the future as though it IS. A fact that the Sadducees readily admitted.

Sticking with the point and context (you know, exegesis) of Matt 22's debate.

In Christ,

Bob

 

What??? I take death to be separation, not cessation like you. We have already been over this in another long thread. If he was alive in spirit then God is the God of the living and no, it would not make Christ a liar.

Neal

 

Christ said "God is NOT the God of the Dead". This was the "Common Ground" from which to stage the debate with the Sadducees unlike your "trust me I say so" approach above.

So Christ showed FROM their position that the ONLY way to solve the problem was for there to be a "Future resurrection".

You on the other hand propose another solution - a non-resurrection solution by arguing the point "God is not the God of the dead but of the living and Abraham is still alive while dead so NO NEED FOR A RESURRECTION to solve the puzzle of God saying I AM the God of Abraham after his death".

By making that short-sighted argument (that could never have been a compelling point to the Sadducees - but would simply have been viewed as a vacuous claim without any substance by them) - you defuse the entire brilliant point of Christ and reduce it to "I say I am right so I must be right".

Such a "debate tactic" would never have been hailed by the long time opponents of the Sadducees (the Pharisees) as "wise" or "brilliant" or "putting the Sadducees to silence".

They recognized an iron clad argument when they saw one - and the ONLY way to make the iron clad case FOR the resurrection TO the Sadducees was to TRULY DEAL with COMMON Ground.

(unlike the shot in the dark option which would totally undermine His point -- which is your claim that Christ said in essence

"God said He is not the God of the Dead YET He is the God of Abraham even after Abraham dies - because dead people are not really dead and God IS the God of everone after death because they are really still alive - surely you go for that Idea fellas - right?".

No such weak and vapid argument was flopped in front of the Sadducees. Rather Christ gives them an iron clad stream of logic they can not escape EVEN by their OWN rules).

Sticking with the point and context

(you know, exegesis) of Matt 22's debate.

In Christ,

Bob

[ June 12, 2003, 11:04 PM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]

 

I know, Bob, you can't allow for the spirit to be alive after the death of the physical body. Have fun, I am not getting into this again. 3AM wore me out last time and I just get frustrated with it all. Have fun!

Neal

 

quote:Bob
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
His entire argument for the resurrection ends SINCE the dead are in fact ALIVE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The point has been "repeatedly" made that in Matt 22 we need to "actually Follow Christ's OWN argument" rather then trying to "get Catholicism to hold up". But that challenge is very difficult for those whose practice is "eisegesis at all costs".

This is the amazing part. Christ HIMSELF is entering into debate and there are Christians today who "fail to get the point" that EVEN the Sadducees got - as hostile and opposed to Christ's every argument as they were.

How in the world - can any Christian today claim to be more "devoted to the dark" than the Sadducees WITH all the Bible light and example that we have as Christians today?

It "seems in impossible" and yet - as Neal points out - refusal to even look at the Argument that was presented to the Sadducees - is not beyond many Christians today.

Fascinating example of our world today.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob, I do not deny that Christ's argument was a nail in the coffin for the Sadducees' argument against the resurrection. I am not ignoring that. But I also see it as Abraham was still alive even though he was physically dead. I do not buy into the idea of soul sleep. Anyway, have fun!

Neal

 

I realize you differ with "Those who are Asleep" as Paul said in 1Thess 4.

My point is in Matt 22 - "SHOW" how Christ made his argument to the Sadducees USING your view "the dead aint dead".

Try as you might - the point debated in Matt 22 only works for Christ - ONE way when you START with the perspective of the Sadducees (exegesis - the PRIMARY audience).

Try it - see "if" you can get your view into the text and STILL be "convincing to a Sadducee".

It doesn't work.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I am glad I don't know any Sadducees. I understand and even agree with your argument, Bob. But I also understand that Abraham did not cease to exist when he died. I won't read it into this text, if you like. I will just understand that from exegesis of the rest of Scripture.

Neal

P.S. Not trying to offend you, Bob. Just trying to lighten it up in here.

 

Neal,

No offense taken.

You seem to be saying that you have a belief that does not work in Christ's argument in Matt 22. I would agree.

I also agree with your taking that position up front. Sometimes the best way to work through a puzzle is to put the pieces on the table and clearly identify each one.

Thanks.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I agree that the primary purpose of Christ's argument was to show the Sadducees' erroneous belief about the resurrection. However, I also beleive that the spirit is very much alive after physical death. But that is for another thread. I concede this current dispute over Matt. 22 to you.

Neal

 

The Sadducees did not believe in Angels, or the living dead, or the resurrection.

So when the question is asked "Do the dead in Christ exist as living souls capable of worshipping God and serving Him" - the response of Christ is that in the strictest sense "God is not the God of those who have died" - (if you are just looking at their condition prior to resurrection).

Paul says "The Dead in Christ rise first" 1Thess 4 and he says in that same chapter these are those "who have fallen asleep".

These are arguments and terms that God uses - that Christ used and that he inspired Paul to use.

To be honest - these are arguments and descriptions of those who have died - that the more popular views would never use to make the same case. (And this is probably true of both Catholic and non-Catholic positions).

For example - many would have preferred it if Paul had said "now regarding those who have died - they did not fall asleep - they are in fact the Alive in Christ. And when Christ returns the Alive in Christ will rise from their graves and we are are Alive in Christ and have not died will rise with them in the air".

In other words it would be interesting to see how these texts would be reworded for that other view to work in making the same argument - in the same contexts.

In Christ,

Bob

 

For some reason, Bob, you are taking a euphemism literal. Did David rest (i.e. get refreshed) with his fathers? What about when a man laid with a woman? Were they just laying there, maybe sleeping? Or how about Joseph and Mary? Did he all of a sudden get some knowledge of her because he overlooked her? Or is it something else it is talking of in Matt. 1:25? Or were the Corinithians really concerned with just touching a woman in I Cor. 7? What if someone accidently brushed up against one? Or what about when Joseph fell on the face of Jacob? Maybe that is what killed him? Or what about Jesus being in His father's bosom? Was He literally in His chest?

At least be consistent. If you are going to take one euphemism literal, take them all to be literal.

Neal

 

In the case of "Those who have fallen asleep" -

No one believes that they are literally asleep. After all when Christ made this claim about Lazarus in John 11 "Our friend Lazarus SLEEPS I go that I may wake him" the disciples went for it literally saying "IF he is sleeping then he is well" - thinking of literal sleep. And to this Christ said clearly "Lazarus is the ALIVE in Christ" (oops I mean) "Lazarus IS dead".

The only conclusion possible - is that the "sleep" is a kind of condition that is descriptive of "the dead" - but is not the same thing as literal sleep of the living.

-------------

In the same way - the Matt 22 debate forces a singular view of "God is not the God of the dead" - because ONLY ONE view would work to "force" the ONLY solution to be "the Resurrection".

There are many other ways to "turn that phrase" so that "other things might be found as a solution". But none would have worked with the Sadducees. Once we have their perspective AND the desired conclusion that Christ is trying to force in the debate (proving the resurrection) it is like "two points determining a line" - the line is absolutely determined without devation. Multiple line solutions don't work. Multiple interpretations can't be forced into Christ's example in the context of the primary audience - which makes the underlying view of the dead crystal clear.

Only one works in that debate. Even by your own admition.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob, I am past talking about Matt. 22. I told you it was over, I concede. I was addressing how you understand euphemisms. Yes, Jesus said that Lazarus was dead, because he was. Physically dead, that is. Good try, but that is apples and oranges. I don't disagree that Lazarus was dead. He was! He spirit was separated from his body, thus he was physically dead.

Neal

 

"Our Friend Lazarus SLEEPS I go that I may WAKE him".

Is it your argument that Christ was speaking of "our friends BODY is asleep".

Were they thinking the body of lazarus "As their FRIEND"?

It makes more sense to see that Christ is speaking of the PERSON "Lazarus" in John 11.

In Christ,

Bob