The intermediate state and Lazarus

Pilgrim Standard · #1 (**permalink**) 12-20-2007, 12:43 PM

What are the varying ideas concerning the death of Lazarus and the intermediate state?

Would his spirit have gone on to be with the Father only to be brought back to this sin cursed world?
Coupled with 2 Corinthians 5:8 I would think that this would be so.

larryjf · #2 (**permalink**) 12-20-2007, 02:15 PM

I would agree that Lazarus would have gone to Heaven, and then came back to earth when Jesus raised him. But it must be remembered that Lazarus would have been very pleased to be part of something that would bring that much glory to God. He probably wasn't thinking, "i wish i didn't have to go back"....but more like "i am so glad that i get to play this part in God's plan"

ReformationArt · #3 (**permalink**) 12-20-2007, 03:13 PM

WCF Chapter 32:

1. The bodies of men, after death, return to dust, and see corruption: but their souls, which neither die nor sleep, having an immortal subsistence, immediately return to God who gave them: the souls of the righteous, being then made perfect in holiness, are received into the highest heavens, where they behold the face of God, in light and glory, waiting for the full redemption of their bodies. And the souls of the wicked are cast into hell, where they remain in torments and utter darkness, reserved to the judgment of the great day. Besides these two places, for souls separated from their bodies, the Scripture acknowledgeth none.

2. At the last day, such as are found alive shall not die, but be changed: and all the dead shall be raised up, with the selfsame bodies, and none other (although with different qualities), which shall be united again to their souls forever.

3. The bodies of the unjust shall, by the power of Christ, be raised to dishonor: the bodies of the just, by his Spirit, unto honor; and be made conformable to his own glorious body.

panta dokimazete · #4 (**permalink**) 12-20-2007, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larryjf

I would agree that Lazarus would have gone to Heaven, and then came back to earth when Jesus raised him. But it must be remembered that Lazarus would have been very pleased to be part of something that would bring that much glory to God. He probably wasn't thinking, "i wish i didn't have to go back"....but more like "i am so glad that i get to play this part in God's plan"

I think that is one reason Jesus wept...

Pilgrim Standard · #5 (**permalink**) 12-20-2007, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdlongmire

I think that is one reason Jesus wept...

Profound. I never considered that.

a mere housewife · #6 (**permalink**) 12-20-2007, 08:46 PM

(JD, that's interesting and I can't contradict it, but I was wondering if you could argue it from revelation? The context seems to be only that Christ was confronted with the grief of those who loved Him, and wept as they did?)

larryjf · #7 (**permalink**) 12-20-2007, 09:04 PM

I think that Jesus weeping is because of the serious consequences that sin has brought on God's creation. The wages of sin is death, and here Christ is at the tomb, confronted with the reason why He must go to the cross.

Notice also that the Greek word underlying "wept" in verse 35 is different from the word used in verse 33 when they are weeping for the dead. Verse 35 is "dakruo", not "klaio." So it's more directly that Jesus "shed tears" than that He "wept" in the same sense of verse 33.

A5pointer · #8 (**permalink**) 12-21-2007, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larryjf

I think that Jesus weeping is because of the serious consequences that sin has brought on God's creation. The wages of sin is death, and here Christ is at the tomb, confronted with the reason why He must go to the cross.

Notice also that the Greek word underlying "wept" in verse 35 is different from the word used in verse 33 when they are weeping for the dead. Verse 35 is "dakruo", not "klaio." So it's more directly that Jesus "shed tears" than that He "wept" in the same sense of verse 33.

I have been told that the language lends itself more to anger than sadness.

TaylorOtwell · #9 (**permalink**) 12-21-2007, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A5pointer

I have been told that the language lends itself more to anger than sadness.

"When Jesus saw her weeping, and the Jews who had come with her also weeping, he was deeply moved in his spirit and greatly troubled." (John 11:33, ESV)

The language (G1690) behind "deeply moved" or "groaned in Spirit" (KJV) is derived from a word that means snorting with anger, and means to have indignation on.

The word occurs again in v.38... "Then Jesus, deeply moved again, came to the tomb. It was a cave, and a stone lay against it." (ESV)

I do not use the Message regularly or recommend doing so, but its rendering of this verse is perhaps pretty accurate?

When Jesus saw her sobbing and the Jews with her sobbing, a deep anger welled up within him. He said, "Where did you put him?" (MSG, v.33-34)

Then Jesus, the anger again welling up within him, arrived at the tomb. It was a simple cave in the hillside with a slab of stone laid against it. Jesus said, "Remove the stone." (MSG, v.38-39)

If you're interested in hearing more about it, Tim Keller has a sermon on the passage called "The Furious Love of Jesus" in which he talks about this point, that is where I first learned about it.

Grace and Peace!

panta dokimazete · #10 (**permalink**) 12-21-2007, 10:45 AM

Thanks for the references to the Greek distinctions. I have often pondered why Jesus would cry about the death of Lazarus and I think it speaks resoundingly of the God-man that He is, as well as the simple yet profound complexity of Scripture.

That is - Christ, as Man, knows that death, for temporal Man, is traumatic for those left behind, so I see His empathy as well as His obedience to Scripture as it directs us to "weep with those that weep".

Also, Christ, as God, knows that death, for the elect, means to be released from this Fallen world and to be in the presence of the Father, so I think He was weeping for His friend that he would have to be thrust back into the mire.

Updated based on the latests posts:

One might also draw out that Christ was expressing His godly deep and righteous anger at the consequences of sin, even on the Elect.

TaylorOtwell · #11 (**permalink**) 12-21-2007, 10:55 AM

Similar to what you said, Tim Keller points out the manhood and the Divinity of Jesus coming out in this passage.

Look at what He preaches to Martha in v.21-26...

"Lord," Martha said to Jesus, "if you had been here, my brother would not have died. But I know that even now God will give you whatever you ask." Martha answered, "I know that he will be raised to life on the last day, when all the dead are raised." Jesus then said, "I am the one who raises the dead to life! Everyone who has faith in me will live, even if they die. And everyone who lives because of faith in me will never really die. Do you believe this?"

But then when Mary makes the exact same statement about if He had been there when Lazarus died, look at his response...

Mary went to where Jesus was. Then as soon as she saw him, she knelt at his feet and said, "Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died." When Jesus saw that Mary and the people with her were crying, he was terribly upset

We need a Savior who can correct us and give us the truth, yet at the same time can comfort us because He can sympathize with our infirmities.

Also, it appears Jesus is not only saddened by the effects of sin, he is angry and zealous to redeem this lost planet and "make all things new"!

larryjf · #12 (**permalink**) 12-21-2007, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TaylorOtwell

But then when Mary makes the exact same statement about if He had been there when Lazarus died, look at his response...

Mary went to where Jesus was. Then as soon as she saw him, she knelt at his feet and said, "Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died." When Jesus saw that Mary and the people with her were crying, he was terribly upset

We need a Savior who can correct us and give us the truth, yet at the same time can comfort us because He can sympathize with our infirmities.

I'm not sure if you are saying that Jesus did not tell Mary the same thing that He told Martha to make your point....but if you are, be careful about coming to conclusions from text that is not in the Scripture.

I say this because it could very well have been that Jesus told Mary the exact same thing that He told Martha...just that the Gospel writers were not inspired to repeat it in this part of the text. I'm not saying that IS the case, but it certainly could be. We must tread lightly in coming to conclusions based on what the Scriptures do not say.

Ranger · #13 (**permalink**) 12-21-2007, 09:12 PM

I think that the verbs in verse 33 and 38 are so interesting.

First, the verb in verse 33, "tarasso," meaning "agitated or deeply moved" is only used in the active aorist indicative in two other places:

Quote:

Acts 15:24 Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions

Quote:

And the people and the city authorities were disturbed when they heard these things.

Then in verse 38, the use of "embrimaomai," (present deponent participle) meaning "to have an intense strong feeling of concern" can be found only one other time in the form of a participle, but this time it is in an aorist form, yet the emotion is clearly evident:

Quote:

Mark 1:43 And Jesus sternly charged him and sent him away at once

In a non-participial form it is used in verse 33 to describe Jesus as being "deeply moved in his spirit," but we can see how great an emotion this was as it is also used in Mark 14:5 to describe how the woman who poured the ointment on Jesus was "scolded." The LXX uses the verb in Daniel 11:30 for those who "have indignation against the holy covenant." Maybe the best translation would be that Jesus was "greatly indignant in his spirit."