Did Jesus Raise Himself from the Dead?
March 21st, 2012 by Sean
Recently, I was asked by an inquirer how I understand the text where Jesus seems to say he will raise himself from the dead.
John 2.19-22
Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it.” Then the Jews said, “This temple was built for forty-six years, and will you raise it in three days?” But that one spoke concerning the temple of his body. Therefore when he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he said this, and they believed the scripture and the word which Jesus spoke.
Here are a few observations about this text:
- In the book of John, when Jesus is in conversation with hostiles, he does not speak straightforwardly. Taking his words at face value will inevitably result in misinterpretation in these instances. Jesus is intentionally cryptic with the religious experts and unbelievers. Often after they misunderstand him, rather than correcting them he will take their misunderstanding and use it to further befuddle them.
- The word Jesus uses, á¼Î³ÎµÎ¯Ïω, does not necessarily mean rise from the dead, but could just as likely refer to standing up or waking up.
- Jesus’ statement must be understood as an analogy or parallel to the temple statement. On a literal level they understood him to say “knock down the temple and I’ll raise it back up”…taking this through to his own death and resurrection he is saying “knock my body down and I’ll raise it up again.” Think of someone who gets knocked down in boxing. If he does not raise his body back up again he looses. So they knock Jesus down (kill him), on the third day his Father brings him back to life, and then Jesus raises his body back up (or awakes). The action Jesus carries out happens after his Father brings him back to life, but just after (so therefore it is related to resurrection).
- Another option some have put forward is that Jesus is claiming to have a role in his own resurrection based on his routine obedience to the Father. The idea is that Jesus could claim credit for the resurrection even though he didn’t actually perform it, because he did what was necessary to make it a certainty.
- One last observation is that every single other Scripture that touches on Jesus’ resurrection (and there are a lot of them) identifies God (the Father of Jesus) as the one who raised him from the dead.
Would any of you care to add your own thoughts on this subject?
Sean,
As a former Oneness believer, this was a common proof text for me. The logic ran as follows:
1) Jesus said that he would raise himslef from the dead
2) God (the Father) raised Jesus from the dead
Therefore:
3) Jesus is God (the Father)
The problem with this logic is in premise 1), which you have already pointed out. The text does not explicitly mean that Jesus would restore life to himself. It is poor hermeneutics to interpret the multitude of clear passages by the the one unclear passage.
The other difficulty this poses (Jesus restoring life to himself) is that we must redefine death in Platonic terms (the soul survives death) rather than in Biblical terms (death is the cessation of life).
Notice that when the disciples remembered they believed the scripture AND the word which Jesus spoke. Since the only scriptures the disciples had at the time of the resurrection was the Old Testament, we should see a scripture that, to his disciples, would have confirmed Jesus’ statement.
This Psalm, which was applied to Christ in Acts 2:22-28 and clearly describes God restoring life to Christ, was understood by the disciples in a way that confirmed Jesus’ words rather than altering them.
we can see that in Jesus’ words there are various figures of speech involved, among them also some with grammatical implications.
For example, Jesus’ words “Destroy this temple …” are in the imperative mood, however, they were obviously not meant literally as imperative but rather as indicative “You will destroy this temple …”
The same holds true for the phrase “and I will raise it up …” where the active is used in place of the passive “and it [I] will be raised up”.
There is no need to try and find explanations which all almost leave more questions than they answer … because they are based on an attempt to understand Jesus’ words in a literal sense rather than recognizing the use of the figures of speech involved.
It seems to me that Jesus upon his death on the cross went into the holy place of heaven in the Spirit, being clothed by the Spirit, back where he was before he came to this earth, when it was time for his bodily resurrection, in the Spirit of God he came back into his body which was lying dead and that Spirit of God quicked his mortal body, changing it into something of greater glory than it once had.
And yes, he did not stay on the cold damp ground. He did raise it up and again began declaring God on this earth, telling his followers about things pertaining to the kingdom of heaven.
Ray,
According to Jesus, he did not ascend into heaven. That is a myth that developed later.
Thanks, Sean. Your comments got me thinking and I have one other observation. The passage in question says Jesus was talking about his body. Paul spent a lot of effort in 1 Cor and other places to exlain how we are members of the body of Christ, and how we are the temple of the Holy Spirit. John 2:19-22 makes good sense if you think corporately. God raised Jesus from the dead, and Jesus raises the “rest of his body” from the dead. Consider:
Jhn 2:19 Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”
Jhn 6:40 For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”
Hsa 6:2 After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will restore us, that we may live in his presence.
Sean,
According to Jesus in John 20:17, he had not yet ascended to the Father ater his resurrection, which is not to say that he did not enter the holiest part of heaven right after his death on the cross in the Spirit.
I trust that Jesus did present himself to God (perhaps as first fruits?)after his resurrection and before his being taken up in Acts 1.
It seems to me that it could have been as quick as the twinkling of an eye, that his Spirit was in heaven with the Father at the time of his physical death on the cross. And he being in the Spirit would have been in like manner as he was with God before he came to be conceived in the womb of Mary.
I trust there were Old Testament prophets that have beheld the glory of the Lord Jesus as he was not unclothed but clothed upon by the Spirit of God.
Ray,
As Sean pointed out to you, Jesus said he hadn’t gone to heaven. Why do you insist on trying to force heaven going at death? That’s not the way the Bible says it works. When we die we go to the grave only. And that’s just where Jesus went for 3 days and 3 nights – no where else.
Sean,
Have you read the take on this from the guy who has “The Trinity Delusion” website? He explains it quite well.
In short he says that what Jesus says here in John 2:19 is Jesus was speaking a message directly from God the Father to the Jewish Temple rulers – the ones who conspired to kill Jesus and yelled, “Crucify him, crucify him.” By crucifying Jesus, they would literally be destroying God the Father’s temple, the place where Yahweh’s Spirit dwelt, (in the body of the man Jesus). Therefore God the Father’s message spoken to these Jews by means of/through the human embodiment of his Word (Jesus) was: “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.”
Check it out: http://www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/trinity/verses/Jn2_19.html
How is it that when Jesus speaks of the temple he could be speaking of his body or some building, but when he speaks of his going to
the Father, people assume it to mean that he was only speaking of his body, and not of his going in the Spirit?
What’s the difference between the man who says Jesus was speaking of a building when he was speaking of his body, and a man who says Jesus is speaking concerning himself in his body when he may have been speaking concerning himself in the Spirit?
John 17:13
And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.
Didn’t Jesus speak these words just before he was betrayed and was met by a band from the chief priests and Pharisees?
And again,
John 16:5
But now I go my way to him that sent me; and none of you asketh me, Whither goest thou?
John 16:16
A little while, and ye shall not see me; and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.
They saw him when he was raised from the dead because he went unto the Father.
It’s what he said.
If he would not have gone to the Father, do you think they would have seen him resurrected?
How is that some of you are teachers and know not these things?
Sean that is correct. The same word is used of the woman who Jesus resurrected from the dead, when he told her to “arise” (egeiro). It is also elsewhere translated “lift (up), raise (again, up), rear up, (a-)rise (again, up), stand, take up. ” (Strong’s Greek Dictionary). She lifted up (egeiro) her own body, but she obviously didn’t resurrect herself.
Good point Mark,
BTW – Welcome to K.R. I hope you enjoy your visit with us here…
The problem is that Jesus literally said it in John 10:30. I and the Father are one.
Tucker
In my Marriage vows I was ONE with my wife and have said and have been told that “we are ONE in agreement” with many people.
Neither means the same person.
Jesus is very clear he is not God,not equal to God and he is human in every way his brethren are and so does all writers of the NT.
Problem solved!
I supposed I should be amazed at how whatever I say doesn’t mean anything to some people, but whatever they say is supposed to have all spiritual authority to me.
For example, when I say “Son of God”, some seem to think I’m saying “simply an angel of God”, or “simply a well made created being”, or something like that.
It’s as if words have no meaning as long as it’s me who says them.
To me Jesus is God and I say this by way of comparison. He is God to me, for what is any real, practical difference? Yet, I am fully aware that there is a distinction between Jesus and the Father.
I don’t believe that there is any conflict in these things that I say about Jesus being as God is. In fact he really is God, and I hope people can hear how I am saying this.
If they “hear” that I am saying there is never any distinction between Jesus and the Father, or that I am saying that Jesus, being God himself, therefore is not the Son of God, then they are not hearing what I say, but are rather hearing something else, something they imagine that I say.
I believe the real problem they have is pride. I believe they tend to think too much of themselves and not enough of anyone else.
So the next thing to bring up is this: Are we hearing what others say?
And there is this: Do some people simply parrot words, not knowing the meaning of them when they speak them?
Ray
The greatest thing about discussions in a blog is it is impersonal because no one really knows the other. The worst thing is everyone seems to take it personal when their belief is challenged like it is some kind of Judgement. Yes sometimes some do judge but for the most part it is just the sharing of what people have learned. If your belief is challenged don’t get upset ,give some proof and reasoning for your belief. If it is worth believing it should have some proof or atleast a good argument for it. Emotion should not even be apart of the discussion .
Jas, Is it that some people say to themselves, “Let’s see…what can I do to cause people to act out of emotions rather than by thinking things through, and letting the Spirit of God lead them?”
Not only should we take John 2:19-22 to be about the Lord’s body which was crucified, and raised by him (for I do not believe that God necessarily did it without him) but shouldn’t we also think about how the temple of God is connected with the people of God, speaking both of the Lord’s body and the building in which they came together in the Lord’s name, or for his purposes?
I can easily imagine Jesus in heaven with the repentant thief who was crucified with him, along with all of heaven, and the Father telling him that it’s time, time to raise up that body that was killed.
I can also imagine a promise of the Father about Jesus being slain, but that he would also rise from the dead after three days, a promise given before he entered into this world through virgin birth.
What is most tragic is how the standard of commenting and engagement has deteriorated on this site…
Jaco
Unfortunately I think the lack of engagement is probably due to me. I am very critical and demanding for proofs of many doctrines and interpretations which almost nobody likes a critic or sees value in one. I have read many of your post which I have found your reasoning and methods valuable .
I have no problem with criticism if it leads me to a better understanding so feel free to question my beliefs
You Foolish people. You cannot believe what is plainly spoken. Jesus continually said he was sent by God the father as the salvation of the WORLD, He said in John 10: 17-19 God gave him the power to have life in himself. He further stated this was a commandment given to him by GOD the father. Do you think Jesus didn’t really mean what he said. Is it a misinterpretation. No. All the references of God raising Jesus from the dead are either from Paul or from Peter. THey simply did not believe a human could do it. tHET DID NOT UNDERSTAND jESUS WAS MUCH MORE THAM A VISIBLE HUMAN BEING, JUST AS WE would not uncderstand an angel if we saw one. But there it is. Is God a human or a spirit. What do the scriptures say? Who raised Lazarus from the Dead? Did God the Father or Jesus do it. These questions can go on and on.
What did the first century jews/Christians think. Did they fully understand? No. We cannot fully understand the almighty,s power , but we should and must believe and understand what is plainly spoken. It is given to us to understand this one magnificent Fact spoken by Jesus himself. As the christian church was established, this critical point was discussed many times by the early church fathers. That is why God is called the Father Son and Holy Spirit, or the Trinity.
John
God is nowhere called Father,Son and Holy Spirit in the Bible. But God’s Plan did in fact involve The Son(a human) and The Holy Spirit .
Jesus received the anointing as The Son at his baptism and was sent from that point in time as the salvation of the WORLD.
Of all the things a Christian may call God, I think of 3.
Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. That’s from the Bible.
Ray
God gave mankind freewill, Israel had freewill and so do gentiles of which all has exercised that liberty to disobey GOD, create Gods,worship false Gods and even interpret the bible the way they see fit .
Jas,
Part of the disobedience of man is to try to control others into complying to their own religious views (legality of carnal man) and take away the liberty of Christ which is given them.
The answer to this sin is the cross and repentance.
Mat 5:20.
Ray
In the OT God setup Priest to teach the people the truth and in the NT Jesus setup disciples . You do not have liberty to make your own truth as the early church fathers did and the 30000+ denominations do. Non-Israelites have the liberty to enter a relationship with God or to accept Grace which allows them to conquer remaing in the grave with no hope of receiving eternal life at judgement . Eventhough most christians have been deceived, great multitudes will be raised from the grave and still get their shot at eternal life and enter heaven on earth because they loved God’s creation .
Christian legality is where Christians withhold Grace from multitudes of loving non christians .
Jas,
You sir do not have any God given authority to tell Christians it’s wrong to refer to Jesus as God, or accuse them falsely of making up a doctrine that is contrary to God if they view God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as 3 which they may rightly call God.
To make up such a thing on your own is a sin which you should take to the cross and by repentance get free of.
It’s also hypocrisy for you to accuse others of doing the thing you yourself are guilty of while they are not. It’s deceitful and backwards.
The truth sir, is that I have the liberty in Christ Jesus to call the Father, the Son, and the holy spirit, together, God. I certainly have the righteous liberty in Christ to do so, and you have no authority here to tell me otherwise.
I perceive you as a man who promotes his own doctrines of carnal man upon others as if they were the truth when they are not.
So I say to you, Repent in Jesus’ name.
Ray
You have liberty to say anything,think anything you want but that does not make it the truth. As for myself I do not exalt myself above anyone because what truth I do have is not the whole truth and does not profit me no more than any gentile. I am not spiritual Israel,your not and doubt any exist at present day but hope I am wrong.
Jas,
Don’t glory in yourself you say?…..Consider others better than yourself you say?…
Have you been a Christian long? Been traveling this way since you first surveyed the cross I’ll bet.
If you happen to see the cross ahead, go unto it, and don’t waste any time.
Ray
All i am seeking is the truth which “orthodox” Christianity certainly does not know when they claim Jesus is God or God is 3 equal persons.
I was a so called christian for 50+ years of my life till I actually read what the bible says by translating myself instead of just letting someone tell me what it says. Unfortunately your brand of christianity is manmade while mine is biblical but still a work in progress and still have a way to go.
No I dont glory in myself or condemn anyone because Grace is a gift which All mankind receives not just christians
Jas,
I am in no way making up a doctrine simply by referring to God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the holy spirit as God sometimes.
How in the world does that make up a doctrine?
Worshipful words is what it is.
It seems to me that Jas has made up a doctrine that says a Christian may not perceive 3 things in this world that he may call God, namely the Father, the Son, and the holy spirit, or that a Christian may not view 3, the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, as being God to them.
It seems to me that this is Jas’ doctrine which he has made up, and it’s not in the Bible. It’s not anywhere in the Bible.
Christians have been worshipping Jesus and God for centuries and have also perceived the Holy Spirit as being something they may view or perceive as being on par with God also.
It’s nothing new. I didn’t make it up, though I have gone along with it at times.
Interesting how those who accuse others of making up doctrines are guilty of making up their own, even doctrines which the scriptures will in no way support.
I believe we as Christians have liberty in Christ Jesus, and that liberty is spoken of in the gospel writings. In how we perceive God, the Father, Jesus and the Spirit of God, we really do have some liberty which some would try to limit, or take away from us in order that we might some how conform unto their image and likeness as if they were the true standard God has set up or something, when of course, they are not.
They are not even something to be followed as they walk in a manner that is contrary to our liberty in Christ.
Do you suppose they come to the cross often?
Suppose Jesus is with God the Father in heaven right after his death on the cross, and a few days later the Father tells him (Jesus who is eternal life and has life within himself, and has the power to take up his life again) that it’s now time for him to raise up his body…..too far fetched?
I think not.
Would he then have to wait for the Father to raise him up from the grave or not?
Yet we may still certainly say that God raised Jesus from the dead, just as we may say that God rolled away the stone from the mouth of the grave, even if he told an angel to do it.
THe book of John is the only gospel where Jesus really said who he is In John 10 18-19, Jesus said” Therefore doth my father love me because I lay down my life that I might take it again No m,an can take it from me but I lay it down of myself. I have the power to lay it down and I have the power to take it again. This commandment HAVE I received from the Father. If Jesus was raised by the father , wouldnt he say so. In John 6:48-50 Jesus said I am the bread of life that came down from heaven, and in 6;62 what and if ye see the son of man ascend up where he was before. If Jesus came down from heaven why couldnt he go up by his own power. In John Jesus said said The father has give to the son the power to have life in himself. which power he used to raise Lazarus from the dead as well as heal all the sick. why is it so hard to believe especially when he himself said it when the Pauline and Petrine letters conflict with Jesus’ own statements who do you believe you should trust. Men with human knowledge or him with the heavenly knowledge. I hope this helps.
John
Try to find a pre 4th century quote of this verse.
I would guarantee this was a scribal addition since the rest of NT witnesses against it. The Book of John was a very late addition ,probably was compiled using oral traditions and the need to have 4 gospels
there seems to be much confusion over the citations in the book of John.. no one really knows who wrote it. the concensus is that the apostle John wrote it, and around 70 AD. These NT scriptures were used and accepted by the early church in the 1st century, and Finally canonized in the latin Vulgate by St Jerome around 400 AD. So it seems to have been accepted as scripture much before the 4th century. In addition, some critics state Peter was not the author of 1, 11, and 111 Peter even though Peter attests to his authorship in ! PETER 1… Only Paul, in his writings, put in a salutation saying he was the author of the books he penned.
I would also like to say the veracity of the book of John has never been questioned until the last 100 years. To say that it is a scribal book questions the very truth of this gospel. In re John 6:44 Jesus said no man can come to me except the father except he father which hath sent me draw him.
Go back and read John thoroughly. Meditate on it. Good luck
“These NT scriptures were used and accepted by the early church in the 1st century,”
John
Show me the evidence John was accepted in 1st century, I can not find it mentioned till late 2nd century. Matthew and Mark were mentioned late 1st but Matthew was only in Hebrew and Mark was the scribe of Peter. Luke was first mentioned as The Gospel of the Lord and was brought to Rome in early to mid 2nd century along with several letters of Paul. John is a complete mystery not even Justin knew of it. I am not saying we should disregard John but take it with caution especially contradictory accounts not found or even hinted at in rest of NT.
For 1800+ years questioning the Romish bible could get you imprisoned, tortured or even killed.
Plus resources have come into public view that was not available 150 years ago.
The scriptures have been accepted since Jesus was sent to the world. I will be the first to say there are inconsistencies in the bible. Possibly because of the many translations and possibly because of the influence of Satan in the world. However, the totality of the scriptures is absolutely true. God is the God of the universe and is a spirit . He is also a spirit which must be worshiped in truth. His holy spirit is mentioned throughout the bible NT and OT.. In addition, He sent he son as stated in the NT. The holy spirit which comes from God is Sent to humans. THEREIN IS THE TRINITY. But God is much more that a spirit. He is the Power of the universe. Ex 33: 20. No man may see my face and live. There is enough truth in those statements for us. I am a human living on the earth But I know there are also angelic beings I dont know how God communicates with them either. But… the bible says he does. In trying to question everything to your own satisfaction or understanding is futile. We cannot have absolute understanding IE. my ways are higher than your ways. A wise man knows the wolrl he live in and the limitations put pn us.
John
We should put our trust in the Most High, everything else we should prove and reprove.
Who is denying there was scriptures when Jesus was born or we he was sent out into the world to preach.
There were dozens of fraudulent gospels made during the centuries after , many are very obvious ,some are accepted by certain denoms, many were destroyed by the romish church through persecutions.
We should use extreme research to determine for ourselves not just accept what the romish church shoved done the throats of the early christians.
2:15 Make every effort to present yourself before God as a proven worker who does not need to be ashamed, teaching the message of truth accurately.
Not proving and repoving is faith in men not God
if you cant accept recorded and accepted scripture, then it is not meant for you. I am wastnig your time and mine.
John
I am smart enough to research ,thats all
The question is “recorded and accepted by who and what motivated them to do so?”
To some it may have been fear of persecution or death.
Jas
One last thought God Jesus and the holy spirit are separate entities, but are from GOD.. GOD IS GOd and JESUS IS FROM GOD . He said ” I came down from heaven to do the work of the Father. He never said he was God, but that he was the son of God and sent from God. The holy spirit is also from God but not the totality of God But he does Gods work and teaches us spiritually.. He is also sent from God the Father . Jesus said I am one with the father, but he never said he was the father. Jesus said , in John” God the father is above all. ( (separate ) Finally the Scriptures say Jesus ascended into Heaven and is seated at the right hand of God. (separate) Jesus also said If I don,t go away the Comforter will not Come to you who came at Pentecost into the world. He is also from the father. (but separate)
those are the scriptures I am talking about. I am emphatic because these are very important points. God is and has always been rooted in truth. That is the truth as I believe it. Perhaps you may begin to see it that way. I can assure you that is the way most of the christian world believes.
John
The revealed truth is something constant and provable which the passages you use out of John are inconsistent with the rest of bible and can not be proved pre late 2nd century.Jesus himself says he sent his disciples into the World . Jesus came into existence when he was born and was fully human till he was indwelt by The Holy Spirit at his Baptism and after was sent in the world.
I do trust in the host high. But unlike you I ask/prey all things in the name of Jesus Christ. As I said before, if you dont believe in the book of John, you are either an agnostic/atheist or simething else. (hmmmm ?)
Again, you are convicted by your ignorance of the scriptures. Scripture and the whole of the christian world states and believes Jesus existed and was with God before the world began aand then later came down from heaven and was born of a woman (a Virgin Birth ). In the Revelation, the speaker is Jesus Christ ie; I am the alpha and the Omega the first and the last. Ch1 11. Again, the book of Revelation is prophetic, and much speculation concerning its meaning has abound for 2000 years. However, this is a completely different issue than our discussion about the book of John. If you don’t believe what is said in either John or the revelation then I can’t /won’t comment any more.
John
You have sadly mistaken doctrine as scripture. Scripture nowhere states Jesus existed with God. Doctrine which just poor interpretation or even poor translation is what you follow. You do not show any knowledge of history of the church prenicene. You are in total denial of the first,second and 3rd century church and where they fled to escape the persecution of the romish church.
Your Jesus was a progressive invention of late 3rd century church .
John comment ,dont comment that is your choice but if you do comment using false doctrine I will do my best to show you it is false. But whether you research it is up to you. Again it is your choice and does not effect Grace.
John
The revelation was given by God to Jesus and delivered by an Angel. The vision of Jesus was the vision of Jesus indwelt by Holy Spirit as seen in Rev 5. First and last are symbolic to the authority given Jesus not his timeframe of existance. If it was a reference someone changed it from second and last because God who gave the revelation was First and only being before creation and the last and only uncreated being.
Jesus can not be the first and last created being ,he can only be one or the other.
Many times in the OT God sent a messenger allowing for that messenger to speak as if God was there but we know they or it was just a lessor being delivering a message .
Remove the contradictory statements in the books accredited to John then the bible is clear when,why and how Jesus came into existance all which was prophesied after Solomon fell to temptation. This is the reason God allowed Satan to tempt Jesus .
Solution to the OP: Matthew 16:25 cp. Matthew 16:27.
Jaco
Very good reference but still needs the clarification of the many verses that state by whose power Jesus was resurrected by.
Jesus is Emmanuel, God with us. All of the Godhead is in Jesus, therefore it should not be difficult for anyone to understand that Jesus is God, whom ever you claim God is. He is the great I am. Before Abraham was, I Am. God is a Spirit, not more than one. Hear O Israel, God is ONE. A Spirit does not have flesh and bone. It was the Spirit of God, which is the same one in Jesus Christ that raised him, his flesh and bone from the dead. Jews were monotheistic, not trinitarian. Trinitarian is a third century false doctrine started by the catholic Church, prior to this there was for them only one God, who came as a man named Jesus. They baptized in His name. There was no Matt 28:19 or these three are one. God was manifested in the flesh.