A BETTER RESURRECTION
By
In
Hebrews 11, the hall of faith, we read in verse 35 that “women received their dead raised to life
again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that the might
obtain a better resurrection.” What is the better resurrection? Is it merely a
resurrection of the same kind these women received of their dead except that in
this better resurrection it is a body that sees death no more?
The
traditional futurist view embraces that idea. They say that since these dead, probably a reference to 1Kings 17:22, saw death again, a better
resurrection would be one that is of the same nature, the resuscitation of the
physical body. But is that in fact what we have here and in the rest of
Scripture? As we read on in this 11th chapter of Hebrews we read in
verse 39 “and these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received
not THE PROMISE: God having provided better things FOR US, that they without US
should not be made perfect.”
What
we see here is that the better resurrection is directly connected with the promise
of which the Old Testament saints would not receive without the US the writer
speaks of. If one reads the Scriptures without any preconceived notions and
takes the recipients of the epistles into account it will shed much more light
on many verses than previously thought. Lets look at what the promise was and
see if the Lord is pleased to give us more light in doing so.
In
Acts Paul has stated a number of times why we was “called into question.” It
was for the hope of Israel and the resurrection of the dead as stated in
chapter 23:6 as well as 24:21. In both instances he says that is was for the
“resurrection of the dead” that he was called into question. In chapter 26 he
is a little more specific. There in verse 6 and following he says “And now I stand
and am judged for the HOPE OF THE
PROMISE made of God unto our fathers: Unto which promise our twelve tribes
instantly serving God night and day, hope to come. Which hope’s sake, king
Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews. Why should it be and incredible thing with
you, that God should raise the dead?”
There
are a few things to note in these verses. First the promise which was a hope
for national Israel, was the resurrection of the dead. This verse should
be compared to the verse in Hebrews 11
we quoted “ and these all, having obtained a good report through faith,
received not THE PROMISE: God having provided better things FOR US, that they
without US should not be made perfect.” The promise was the better
resurrection.
The
first thing that should come into our minds when thinking of the promise these
Old Testament saints waited for was Christ and His resurrection. There must be
a connection between what Christ has provided at the cross and the receiving of
the promise. In Romans 15:8-9 we read “Now I say that Jesus Christ was a
minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made
to the fathers And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy…..” Jesus
WAS a minister of the circumcision and
so if he has not fulfilled the hope of Israel then there is still a
promise made to the fathers that is incomplete. If that is the case the gospel
in its full proclamation could not come to the Gentiles as Paul says in that
verse. The Gentiles can only glorify God for his mercy if indeed he has
confirmed every promise made to the fathers. Most would agree forgetting Acts
26:6-8 where Paul says that the resurrection of the dead was the promise.
The
second thing to note in Acts 26:6-8 are the words “hope to come.” In the Greek
the word “hope” is a present tense verb and the word translated “to come” is an aorist infinitive. This is action that is ongoing with the hope
of attaining unto the promise. What is
interesting about these words is that Paul uses the same word translated “to come” in Philippians 3 where he talks about how he
“might ATTAIN (there is the word) unto the resurrection of the dead.” Just as
these OT saints were seeking to obtain the resurrection of the dead so was
Paul.
But
is this resurrection of the dead merely the bringing back together the dead
corpse to life never to die physically again? Does anyone think that Paul
was writing of seeking to attain to a
bodily resurrection in Philippians 3? If so then he must have had some part of
his phyisical body glorified since verse 16 he makes such a statement. There he
says that some have attained to it in some degree “whereunto we have attained
let us so walk.” We hope to show that Scripture will not support that and for
those that do believe that must embrace soul sleep for all of the faithful that
have left this life.
How
can we prove such a statement? That brings us to the third thing in relation to
Acts 26:6-8 that we must note. In verse 8 Paul says “Why should it be thought
an incredible thing with you that God should raise the dead.” Note that he did
not say “that God should raise the physical body.” Now at first this seems like
splitting hairs but one can search the Scripture through and will not find the
term “resurrection of the body” anywhere in the whole of Holy Writ.
Does
it really matter? It does when one sees
the connection between the promise Paul says the twelve tribes instantly
serving God were hoping to come. Paul said these words after the cross so
wouldn’t these twelve tribes have received some part of that promise in the
resurrection of Christ? If they were to die is it not the belief of most in
Christendom that at death the soul goes to be with Christ awaiting the
resurrection of the body? Well if the hope of Israel is the promise of the
resurrection would not then those that have already died not have received the
promise as the writer to Hebrews stated in 11:39? How could that be that they
died not receiving the promise? Are they not with Christ? Are they not looking
upon the face of Christ? “Yes!” some will exclaim. But then if they are seeing
Christ and he is the focal point of the “hope of Israel” they how can they hope
for what they see “for what a man seeth, why does he yet hope for? But if we
hope for that which we see not, then
with patience wait for it.”
Some
will say that the hope not seen at death only Christ is seen. But isn’t
that separating Christ from the very
zenith of the promise in the Old
Testament. If Christ is not connected to the hope of Israel then we have
separated the fulfillment of the hope from the cross as well as deferred it to
a point when the age which Christ died to establish is ended. This forces one that holds to the hope being
a future resurrection of the body to believe that all true believers are not
yet in Christ’s presence but are in a state of soul sleep. If not they what are
they yet hoping for? How is their state then going to be different in relation
to Christ?
One
of the main arguments thrown against those that hold to a fulfilled eschatology
is that it takes away one’s hope. How can that be if one believes they go
immediately to be with Christ at death? Even if that presence of Christ is not
in the glorified body it is nonetheless a seeing of him face to face so how is
hope deferred beyond death?
But
it was for those that died in the Lord prior to the consummation of the Old
Covenant at the fall of Jerusalem. It was then that Christ returned a second
time without sin unto salvation to bring the salvation that was ready to be
revealed in that day, 1Peter 1:5. This salvation was for the end of their faith
the “salvation of their souls” vs.9. We read in verse 11 of 1Peter 1 that the
Old Testament prophets were searching “what manner of time the Spirit of Christ
which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of
Christ and the GLORY THAT SHOULD FOLLOW.”
It
is commonly believed that this glory that should follow was the resurrection
but we don’t think it stops there. The context is the salvation ready to be
revealed vs.5, the salvation of their souls vs.9 and the grace that is to be
brought to them at the revelation of Jesus Christ vs.13. So the very context is
not the resurrection of Christ standing apart from the second coming when he
fulfilled the resurrection of the dead out of the place of the dead so that it
can be said at that time “blessed are the dead that die in the Lord FROM
HENCEFORTH” Rev. 14:13. There is no
long a time of waiting for the work to be complete but the dead at that time
did attain to the resurrection and Christ at that time confirmed the promises
made to the fathers.
Jesus
spoke of this in John 11. There we read a very know verse that Jesus spoke at
the tomb of Lazuras.” I am the resurrection and the life: he that believeth in
me, though he were dead yet shall he live: and whosoever liveth and believeth
in me shall never die.”
When
reading this most believe the first part is talking about physical resurrection
and the second part is talking about one never seeing spiritual death. But is
there a biblical warrant to change the type of death spoken of in the same
verse? First of all if the death the believer never sees is physical death we
have a problem because Christians have been dying for 2000 years. If spiritual
death is meant there and physical death is meant in the first part “he that
believeth in me though he WERE DEAD” also raises a problem. Besides being
contextually forced since it is clear the death to the one alive is not
physical another problem arises. The word believeth is present tense so one must
believe a physical dead person is still living by faith not sight. That again
proposes a problem to the one that says that one that dies in the faith go
immediately with Christ. But if we say the “though he were dead” means
spiritual death then we also have a problem for this would then support the
notion that a spiritually dead man is
capable of believing on Christ and then upon that act will be given spiritual
life.
What
do we do with this verse then? We have a dilemma that needs to be rectified and
we believe there is only one solution. The believers that are dead are those
that have gone the way of all flesh but the death spoken of is the sin death
that held the soul in sheol or hades, called paradise or Abraham’s Bosom, and
that because they are Christ’s at the appointed time they will be brought to
the resurrection of the dead and be brought into the immediate presence of God
at the consummation of the Old Covenant.
The
second half of that verse is consistent with that because those that die under
the New Covenant never see the death that the Old Testament saints had to
experience waiting for this resurrection.
A belief that there is a future
resurrection of the physical body because physical death is the result of the
fall must say that this physical death finally brings about the victory over sin and death
as per 1Cor 15:54. This assumes that
to die and rise "in the likeness" of Christ's death and resurrection as
per Romans 6:5, and our Lord’s words in John 11:26 falls short of that death and resurrection to deliver one from
the dominion of sin and death. Those that say this say there is more to come in terms of physical death and resurrection
even though Christ said he that lives and
believeth in me shall NEVER DIE.
But, if the believer, in addition to dying and rising with
Christ in Romans 6, and the promise of never dying (also stated in John 8:51)
must die again because of sin and be
raised again from sin it follows that death and resurrection with
Christ in Romans 6 falls short of being in the likeness of His death and resurrection and Jesus then would have
had to mean something else when he said we would never die. It is clear that
Paul in Romans 6 says the believer's
deliverance from the dominion of sin and death is because , “Christ
being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over
him" (v.9). If the
same holds true for the believer, which is what Paul meant when he said , "in
the likeness of his death ... in the likeness of his resurrection:'
it follows that the believer, as Christ, is raised from the dead to die no more, death having no more dominion over him"
(vv.5,9). This is the force of our
Lord’s words in John 11. Therefore, the need for more death and more
resurrection in order for death to be "swallowed up in victory" (I
Cor. 15:54), is contrary to our Lord’s words as well as Paul’s in Romans 6. The
better resurrection that was
"preached through Jesus:' and is in the likeness of his death is adequate
for victory of death so much so that Christ can say we will never see death.
Why would we think it should take more than that?
What they are doing is saying that the New Covenant is unable to fulfill the hope of Israel so Christ has to come to put an end to it in order to fulfill the rest of Scripture. Keep in mind this one thing and that is that salvation is NOT complete till Christ returns. It is not the physical body that is spoken of as being saved at his return but the soul (1Peter 1:9) as we stated before. So if he has not returned then no Christian can say they are saved they can only say that they have a hope of salvation. We are told that there is one hope and hope that is seen is not a hope for we don’t hope for what we see. But that eternal life is a hope Titus 1:2; salvation is a hope 1Thes 5:8; justification by faith is a hope Gal 5:5; the second coming is a hope Titus 2:13 as well as the resurrection of the dead. So if he is yet to return at the end of the age of everlasting covenant instead of the end of the old covenant then these hopes are not fulfilled and we are not in possession of eternal life, do not have righteousness by faith nor do we have salvation. That is what we are left with if Christ has not returned and he is then an absent king and the New Covenant is still a time of unfulfillment.
Please direct your comments to Mike
Krall.