Mark 12:18-27 (ESV)
And Sadducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection. And they asked him a question, saying, [19] "Teacher, Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife, but leaves no child, the man must take the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. [20] There were seven brothers; the first took a wife, and when he died left no offspring. [21] And the second took her, and died, leaving no offspring. And the third likewise. [22] And the seven left no offspring. Last of all the woman also died. [23] In the resurrection, when they rise again, whose wife will she be? For the seven had her as wife."
[24] Jesus said to them, "Is this not the reason you are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God? [25] For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. [26] And as for the dead being raised, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the passage about the bush, how God spoke to him, saying, 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? [27] He is not God of the dead, but of the living. You are quite wrong."
I think too many take this thing about us being like the angels just a bit too far. Today, most think we become angels when we die. But this isn’t Jesus meaning. Then angels are not married. Neither will we be. That is about as close as we are going to get to being angles. We will be like them in that only. Of course the people asking the question would have found Jesus answer to be quite preposterous, because they didn’t believe in angels either. The Sadducees would have just laughed at what Jesus had to say. Jesus pins them down though. If they believe in God at all, the they have to believe in the resurrection. God is the God of the living.
What I find curious about this, is according to the logic then, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are already resurrected! I leave it to the mysteries of eternity that we will never be able to fully understand. But it seems to me, if that were true, even as their bodies are buried, then perhaps I am already resurrected to, though I’m not even dead yet. I don’t think that is true. I think death though must some how bring us to meet eternity in a new way. The relationship between time and eternity to perhaps be figured out on the other side of glory. It’s something more than time going on forever, and yet I’m not always sure that the pre-incarnate Jesus wasn’t actually pre-incarnate.
I mean I get Jesus is in eternity, but the controversy comes in, that today people want to say Jesus was crucified already when he came to Adam and Eve in the garden after they had sinned. From an eternal perspective I’m sure it was as good as done. But I do think there is a very real sense in which the pre-incarnate Jesus was infact pre-incarnate. That the play between time and eternity is a mystery we will never fully understand, not here. Much more than we can imagine. But something happened to God when he was incarnate in Jesus.
2 comments:
Part of the trouble with this, and other logical constructs such as Calvin's on one side and Arminians on the other in light of paradox is that "in time" demands the logical construct that it demands and anything else looks as to be nonesense as it where (e.g. "There goes God (Jesus) walking down the street", "Mary is the mother of God", "this is My body", etc...).
Time itself is a creature of God just as much as is space and material therein. Time in its one directional necessity requires a certain logic, that the philosophers have developed, to operate. Basic things like law of non-contradiction, excluded middle, identity, etc... These are dictated by the "flow" of created time.
That being said, revelation from the eternal must of necessity offend and look like foolishness to time-logiced folks so created. E.g. God died on the Cross. This violates "logic" (and for example logic driven religions such as Calvinism for such are fine with "Jesus (the man) died on the cross" but not the statement "God died on the Cross" (something I found out in my old PCA SS class from an elder). Such will not allow the communication of attributes between the two (the critical divide from orthodox confessions and heterodox confessions).
Larry
Part of the trouble with this, and other logical constructs such as Calvin's on one side and Arminians on the other in light of paradox is that "in time" demands the logical construct that it demands and anything else looks as to be nonesense as it where (e.g. "There goes God (Jesus) walking down the street", "Mary is the mother of God", "this is My body", etc...).
Time itself is a creature of God just as much as is space and material therein. Time in its one directional necessity requires a certain logic, that the philosophers have developed, to operate. Basic things like law of non-contradiction, excluded middle, identity, etc... These are dictated by the "flow" of created time.
That being said, revelation from the eternal must of necessity offend and look like foolishness to time-logiced folks so created. E.g. God died on the Cross. This violates "logic" (and for example logic driven religions such as Calvinism for such are fine with "Jesus (the man) died on the cross" but not the statement "God died on the Cross" (something I found out in my old PCA SS class from an elder). Such will not allow the communication of attributes between the two (the critical divide from orthodox confessions and heterodox confessions).
Larry
Post a Comment