Should you die before Christ returns will you need to be resurrected? Do you mistakenly believe you are resurrected the moment after you stop breathing never to breathe again?
Being resurrected- Jesus was resurrected. Jesus' body disappeared from the tomb. If I open your grave the day after you're buried would you still be in that grave? Yes. You were not resurrected. But we know there will be a day of resurrection.
Joh 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
Joh 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
The HOUR is coming … ALL that are in the graves…
This plainly teaches that there will be a time when ALL that are in the graves will be resurrected. ALL who have died will be resurrected! You aren't resurrected upon dying, yet ask most people and they'll immediately reassure you that your loved ones are in heaven right now, as if they'd already been resurrected! It's not true!
Our benevolent God has designed this part of our lives so perfectly as the God of LOVE He is! God would NOT want our loved ones in heaven instantly upon dying, to remain there for thousands and thousands of years while others are born and die, born and die, born and die and they get to watch from their heavenly perch ALL the evil forced upon their loved ones. Tell me SERIOUSLY, could your loved ones be happy watching you in and out every day with every single thing you have ever done since their death? They watch every time you are sick, every time you face heart break, every time you tell a lie, every time you do anything at all whatsoever- that is embarrassing, or heart wrenching to them. They get to watch you die, and this is something you believe is a good thing, a loving thing? When you stop and truly examine the word of God, more than at a cursory glance, you realize a loving God would NOT allow such horrors to be witnessed since the first death till now by those who are His in heaven. God designed death to be an end of all cognitive thinking, and calls it a sleep. Why, because when we sleep we know nothing but the next time we wake up. In this case, after we wake up from death's sleep we WILL wake up and rise to meet our LORD in the air, if we are His! We will be resurrected! Such perfection. We have the reassurance our loved ones are sleeping peacefully, truly sleeping without any worries! We aren't disappointing them in any way, we aren't worrying them in any way, because they aren't watching us now. They won't see us die, they won't see any suffering at all that we must go through. They won't watch us make mistakes, they won't see any of it. You protest that you want them to witness the joys, but ask yourself this… does your idea of heaven contain heartaches or only joy? To imagine that our loved ones witness our lives here on earth is to comprehend they see it all, every moment, you can't have them just witnessing our happy times and not the bad if they are a witness to all the things in our lives.
I'm extremely grateful to know my loved ones are sleeping death's sleep peacefully, extremely grateful. It fills my heart with joy to know they are in a peaceful sleep knowing nothing. There will be a time for a reunion when our Savior calls us to meet Him in the air to forever more be with Him, and that reunion with Him and our loved ones will be amazing! Our dead loved ones will not know they missed our lives, they will only know they have us with them now and forever with Christ Jesus, and there will be NO pain, NO heartache, NO tears, NO death.. Just joy in celebrating all. Just think of the generations of family members meeting for the first time all in the love of GOD!
All through the love of our LORD and SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST now and forever! AMEN!!!!!!!
*******
Act 24:15 And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.
*******
(EXCERPT)
The unjust will be resurrected, though some object to this truth. The article we've been studying is vindicating the truth of the resurrection of the unjust- scripturally, logically.
A Vindication of the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Unjust
By J.H. Waggoner
CONTINUING STUDY….
In examining the Scriptures, I will arrange the texts under certain propositions,
to give a better view of my objections to the non-resurrection theory; giving,
however, as my first serious objection, that--
IV. It contradicts the plain teaching of the Bible in regard to the resurrection of
the unjust.
First, I appeal to the words of the Saviour in John 5:28, 29. "The hour is coming in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil to the resurrection of damnation." In the verse preceding, he said the Father had "given him authority to execute judgment," and we have already seen when the judgment will be executed,-in that great day of wrath unto which the unjust are now "reserved," and unto which they are eventually to be "brought forth." Every attempt to avoid the force of this plain, positive testimony of the Son of God, so far as I have seen, is only an evasion. It is contended that the prophets declare they shall not rise, and of course the Saviour does not contradict them, so he cannot mean what we claim on his language. Suppose we turn it in this manner.
The prophets testified of Christ, who came into the world to bear witness to the truth; and of course they could not contradict his testimony; and therefore, inasmuch as he says the unjust shall come forth from the graves to a resurrection, any construction of their language which would make them contradict him is inadmissible. And two important considerations sustain me in this position.
1. It is a just principle of criticism that the words of the prophets are to be explained by the declarations of the New Testament, for, in many respects, the New Testament is a commentary on the Old
2. There is not so clear evidence in the prophets against the resurrection of the unjust as there is in the New Testament in its favor. The strength of evidence lies on this side of the question. The truth of this statement will be seen, I trust, when we carefully examine the texts.
In the Saviour's words in John 5:28, 29, we notice:
1. There can be no reasonable dispute in regard to the nature of the resurrection in this passage, as it is introduced by his authority to execute judgment.
2. Before he divides them into two classes he speaks of them collectively as being in one place, thus, "all that are in the graves."
3. He affirms of them all alike that they "shall come forth."
4. The words immediately following explain that this coming forth is the resurrection; that is, they shall come forth from the graves. The same expression the Saviour used when he raised Lazarus from the dead. Chap. 11:43.
5. Having fixed the fact that they shall all, come forth from the graves, he next divides them that come forth into two classes.
6. He says that they that have done good [shall come forth] unto the resurrection of life. That this is a literal, actual resurrection, cannot, with any show of reason, be denied; for if the coming forth from the graves to the resurrection of life, is not the literal resurrection of the just, what can it mean? or what language can describe that event?
7. He also says they that have done evil [shall come forth] unto the resurrection of damnation. The statement concerning the evil-doers, is identical with that concerning the welldoers, except as to the object of their respective resurrections.
Both classes are in the graves; both come forth from the graves; both have a resurrection. I pity the person who attempts to array the Scriptures against these words of the Son of God. But plain as are these words, there are objections urged against them. These I must notice. It is objected that the term resurrection has sometimes a figurative meaning, and therefore this resurrection of evil-doers is not a literal resurrection. We admit that the term is sometimes used figuratively, and so are most all other words.
"Life" and "rise" are also used figuratively; why may we not apply their remark to their proof texts, and so remove their objection to the Saviour's words? Surely the word is not always used figuratively, and if I were left to select a text where it is not so used, John 5:29 would be that one. The objection is an unreasonable one. If this text does not refer to a literal resurrection of the saints, how shall that doctrine be proved? But the same facts are predicated of both classes. They are all in the graves. Does this mean that the righteous are in literal graves, and the wicked in figurative graves? And they shall all come forth. Can this mean that a part come forth literally, and a part figuratively? Such interpretations are no less than trifling with the plainest declarations of the Scriptures. Prove that this means
a figurative resurrection and you easily prove that there is no literal resurrection taught in the New Testament. In proof that it is a figurative resurrection, reference is made to Eze. 37, the vision of the valley of bones, which, it is said, is a figurative resurrection. But this claim I deny. That the vision itself embraces figures, I admit. But the Lord gave an explanation of the vision; if the explanation is also figurative, it amounts to no explanation at all, as another explanation of its figures would be necessary to an understanding of it. See the parable of the wheat and tares in Matt. 13. The parable itself is in figurative language, but the Saviour's explanation is in literal terms, otherwise it is no explanation When the Lord explained the vision to Ezekiel he said; "These dry bones are [represent in figure] the whole house of Israel." Is the "house of Israel" a figure of speech? If so, what does it represent? Away with such pretended expositions of the word of God. But what shall take place as represented by the vision? "Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel." Will the promise to Abraham ever be fulfilled that he shall possess that land? See Acts 7:4, 5. It will.
How? Just as is here promised to all the Israel of God, by opening his grave, and bringing him up out of his grave. They who make the Lord's words in Eze. 37:11-14, figurative, destroy all of God's promises to Israel. It is again objected that Eze. 37 proves that it is not necessary that the wicked shall be made alive to fulfill these scriptures, as the dry bones heard and were moved before there was any life in them. That was in the vision; but how is it in the actual resurrection? Do they come forth from the graves dead? Yes, replies the objector, Rev. 20 says the dead stand before God. What will men not do to sustain a theory!
Listen to the words of Jesus: "Go and show John again those things which ye do hear and
see: the blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up." The deaf heard, not in their deafness, but by being cured thereof. The lame walked when their lameness was removed; and the dead were no longer dead when they were raised up. Yet it plainly says, "The deaf hear," "the lame walk," and "the dead are raised up." Let our Saviour's words explain Rev. 20, and there is no difficulty. And again, this criticism is shown to be invalid by 1 Cor. 15:15, etc.: "Whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not." Do "the dead" rise up as dead bodies? "How are the dead raised up?" This shows what the Scriptures mean by the dead being raised up. Why force a
construction on Rev. 20 which they know is not justified by common sense, nor admissible in any other part of the Bible? There will be no necessity for making the Bible teach absurdities if we keep absurd theories out of its way. But when these plain statements of Christ are referred to, we are met, as a last resort, with the declaration that "established principles" do not admit of such a construction of his language as we claim. If any are yet shaken by this declaration, I invite them to turn back, and read again the examination of the
so-called "principles" laid down by that class of expositors, and then say if there is any necessity for turning aside the plain testimony of the Lord, or making it teach that which in its obvious import it never can teach.
TO BE CONTINUED…
No comments:
Post a Comment