Immortality or Resurrection (Updated) by William West (ereader with dictionary .txt) 📕

The Pharisees seem to have believed much of Rabbinic
Judaism, mostly writings that were written between the Testaments that were influenced
by Greek pagan teaching. Some form of an immortal soul was believed by the Greeks and
is in some of the Rabbinical writings. The Pharisees did believe in both the resurrection
79
of the dead, and in spirits and angels [Acts 23:8] and they did believe the teaching of
eternal life was found in the Scriptures and searched the scriptures for proof [John 5:39].
But, what did they believe about the resurrection? The only resurrections in the Old
Testament Scriptures that searched were resurrections of earthly body back to a mortal
life that was no different from the mortal life of those who had not been resurrected. The
New Testament teaching of a resurrection to immortality was unknown to them. Christ
abolished death, and "brought life and immortality to light through the gospel" [2
Timothy 1:10-11]. A resurrection to immortality was unknown in the Old Testament,
therefore, how could the Pharisees or anyone have known about something God had not
made know? They looked for the Christ to restore Israel as a great nation and to set on the
throne of David in Jerusalem, not to be killed and resurrected and set on His throne in
Heaven. They may have thought Abraham, David, and others would be resurrected as
mortals in restored Israel under the savior they looked for. WHATEVER THEY
BELIEVED ABOUT A RESURRECTION, IT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN THE
RESURRECTION TO ETERNAL LIFE IN HEAVEN, WHICH WAS NOT KNOWN
ABOUT BEFORE CHRIST. A resurrection of all after death was unknown to them.
They had many traditions and were rebuked for making the Law void by their traditions.
Jesus said to them, "You hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying, this people
honors my with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me,
teaching as their doctrines the precept of men" [Matthew 15:7-9]. Much of the teaching
of Christ was a rebuke to them. See Matthew 19.
"In the resurrection; therefore, whose wife shall she be of the seven?" [Matthew
22:28. Notice the question or the answer did not mention an intermediate state. Although
there were resurrections of the earthly body back to life just as it was before the death of
the person resurrected in the Old Testament, there is nothing of a resurrection to
immortality life with a spiritual body without the earthly body. The fact that they thought
that if there were a resurrection she would have to be the wife of one of the seven points
out that they were thinking of a resurrection of an earthly mortal body with life on this
earth as it is now with husbands, wives, and children. This reply by Christ is one of, if not
the first suggestion of a resurrection that will not be a resurrection back to a mortal life.
This was a new teaching of Christ that was not known about before He brought it to light
through the gospel [2 Timothy 1:10], therefore, could not have been known about by the
Pharisees.
"The sons of this world (aion - age) marry, and are given in marriage: but they that
are accounted worthy to attain to that world (aion - age), and the resurrection from the
dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: for neither can they die any more; for
they are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God" [Luke 20:34-36]. Jesus is speaking
of life in two different ages, in this age where there is marriage and death, and life in the
next age (Heaven) where there is no marriage or death. The Pharisees view of the
resurrection seems to be a resurrection to life as it now is in this age. Christians, while
living on this earth, are (1) not immortal, (2) not deathless, (3) not spirits.
Today most Jews believe more like the Sadducees did, and do not believe the Old
Testament says anything about an immortal soul or anything about anyone going to
Heaven at anytime after death.
Alexander Campbell said, "1. That before the Captivity, and the Macedonian and Roman
conquests, the Jews observed the most profound silence upon the state of the deceased, as to
80
their happiness or misery. They spoke of it simply as a place of silence, darkness, and inactivity.
2. But after the Hebrews mingled with the Greeks and Romans, they insensibly aided into their
use of terms, and adopted some of their ideas on such subjects as those on which their oracles
were silent." Appendix to "The Living Oracles" Page 59.
The belief of the Greeks was reincarnation back to some kind of earthly life that
would die again; they had no conception of eternal life in Heaven that was made known
by Christ.
The Sadducees did not believe in a resurrection. "On that day there came to him Sadducees,
they that say that there is no resurrection" [Matthew 22:23]. To prove there was no
resurrection they tried to trick Jesus with a question that would prove there was not. The
point of His answer was to prove there is to be a resurrection, not to prove anything about
the state of the dead before the resurrection. THERE IS NOTHING IN THEIR QUESTION
OR IN CHRIST’S ANSWER ABOUT A DISEMBODIED SOUL OR SPIRIT THAT IS
ALIVE BEFORE THE RESURRECTION. Christ was asked, "The woman also died...in the
resurrection; therefore, whose wife of them shall she be" [Luke 20:33]? They did not ask whose
wife she would be at death but in the resurrection; their question was not who now has her
disembodied spirit in the intermediate state. Christ said to them, "but they that are accounted
worthy to attain to that world (aion-age) and the resurrection from the dead...but that THE
DEAD ARE RAISED" [Luke 20:35-37], "But as touching the resurrection of the dead"
[Matthew 22:31]. "For when they shall rise from the dead...But as touching the dead, that they
are raised" [Mark 12:25-26].
THE GOD OF ABRAHAM
Matthew 22:32 “But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have you not read that which
was spoken unto you by God, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the
God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.’” Christ was proving to the
Sadducees that there will be a resurrection, not that Abraham was alive at the time He was saying
this; at that time Abraham was not alive in Heaven, Hell, in Abraham’s bosom, or alive any other
place. IF THE DEAD ARE LIVING IN A DISEMBODIED STATE, FOR GOD TO SAY
HE WAS THE GOD OF ABRAHAM WOULD NOT PROVE THERE WILL BE A
RESURRECTION, BUT WOULD PROVE ONE WAS NOT NEEDED. IF ABRAHAM
WERE NOT DEAD, CHRIST COULD NOT HAVE USED ABRAHAM TO PROVE THE
DEAD ARE RAISED. The dead must be dead to be raised; the living would not need to be
raised, would not need a resurrection to make them alive. The whole point Christ was making
is that there will be a resurrection, not that none are dead to be resurrected. Not that a
disembodied spirit is the only part of a person that will be in Heaven or Hell, and this
immaterial part of a person is now alive in Heaven or Hell while his or her dead body is in
the grave. If this disembodied part of a person were alive anywhere it would make the
resurrection impossible. A resurrection of those who are living would be an empty show, a
fraud, not a resurrection. The belief of many says, "Not so Christ, I was born immortal and
cannot die, therefore, I cannot be dead or raised from the dead"? This theology destroys the
Biblical doctrine of the resurrection.
If Abraham were alive, as many teach he was, then he was never asleep. Many believe we
have an immortal part of us that can never be dead but despite the fact that it is alive, it is going
be resurrected from the dead to be in Heaven? Paul said of Able, "He being dead" [Hebrews
11:4], if language has any meaning, Abel was dead, not alive at the time Paul said this. "For
David...fell asleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption" [Acts 13:36]. If David
were living (awake) at this time, if only his body was in the tomb, Peter had no point or argument.
What he said had no meaning. "From the day that the fathers fell asleep" [2 Peter 3:4] shows that
Abraham and David are still asleep, along with all other's that "are fallen asleep" [1 Corinthians
15:6]. To say that Abraham has been raised is to say the resurrection is past, and Christ was not
81
the "first fruits" [2 Corinthians 15:20], or the "first born" [Colossians 1:18, Revelation 1:5]. To
say that an immortal part of Abraham was never dead is to make a resurrection impossible. The
resurrection at the coming of Christ is the subject, and nothing is said about what will be between
death and the resurrection. Abraham "believed, even God, who gives life to the dead, and calls the
things that are not, as though they were" [Romans 4:18]. "For none of us live to himself, and
none die to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; or whether we die, we die unto
the Lord; whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ died and
lived again, that he might be Lord of BOTH THE DEAD AND THE LIVING" [Romans 14:7-9].
How could Christ be LORD OF THE DEAD if no one is dead?
Summary: If the dead are more alive than when they were living, it both takes away the need
for a resurrection and made it impossible. CHRIST'S ARGUMENT THAT THERE WILL BE A
RESURRECTION IS TOTALLY DESTROYED. When this passage is used to prove the dead
are not dead but are conscious then it would proves that there is no resurrection. If the dead
are alive then how would His answer prove there would be a resurrection, and what would
be the need of one? This is a serious problem for those who teach unconditionally
immortality. THEY CANNOT TEACH THAT THE DEAD ARE MORE ALIVE THAN
THE LIVING WITHOUT DESTROYING THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF THE
RESURRECTION. If Abraham, David, Job, and other saints are alive in Heaven, death has
already been destroyed. Death would have been destroyed for all at death, not at Christ's
second coming; and even those in the Old Testament would have had life, eternal life,
without the death of Christ and without the resurrection and judgment. Take away the fact
that Abraham was dead, which is the very thing that those who say a person is born immortal and
can never die are trying to do; and you take away the point of Christ's argument, and make Him
be saying just so many words that say nothing. Christ's argument, that there will be a resurrection,
requires that Abraham is dead at the time Christ made the argument. Abraham being alive would
have requires that he never died or that his resurrection was past before the death and resurrection
of Christ. When did it happen? The resurrection of Christ, Abraham, or anyone requires that they
be dead at the time of the resurrection for they could not be resurrected if they were alive. How
could anyone think that a coming back of the living from Heaven is a resurrection of the dead? If
David were not still in the tomb then he had been raised the same as Christ, but before Christ,
therefore, Christ was not the first fruit. Today's theology has changed this to read, "But that the
dead are not dead to be raised," or "But that the separated are not