Biblical Anthropology, Resurrection, and the New Man

Jon Paulien
Third International Bible Conference
Jerusalem, Israel
June 11-21, 2012
In so far as the ancient, non-Jewish world had a Bible, its Old Testament was Homer.
And in so far as Homer has anything to say about resurrection, he is quite blunt: it doesnt
happen.1 This statement sets the table for the fundamental challenge faced by early Christians
on this topic. Christianity was born into a world where its central claim was known to be
false.2 Outside Judaism, nobody believed in resurrection, at least not in the way that the Bible
defines it.3
This is not to say that the ancient world had no concept of life after death. If Homer
1

N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, Christian Origins and the Question of
God, volume three (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 32.
2
Recall the mocking response of many of the Greek philosophers on Mars Hill when Paul
brings up the resurrection of Jesus in Acts 17:31-32.
3
Markus Bockmuehl, Compleat History of the Resurrection: A Dialogue with N. T.
Wright, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 26:4 (2004): 491-492; Timothy Keller,
Kings Cross: The Story of the World in the Life of Jesus (New York: Dutton, 2011), 216; John J.
Tietjen, A Book Worth Discussing: The Resurrection of the Son of God, Currents in Theology
and Mission 32/2 (April 2005): 96; Wright, Resurrection, 35.

2
functioned like the Old Testament for the Hellenistic world, its New Testament was Plato.4 Plato
had no need for resurrection because he understood the human person to be divided into two
distinct parts; a mortal, material body and an immortal, immaterial soul that lives on after death.5
So for Plato, death affects only the body, not the soul.
Before going any further it would be wise to define exactly what I mean by resurrection.
Resurrection is not a general term for life after death in all its forms,6 it refers specifically to the
belief that the present state of those who have died will be replaced by a future state in which
they are alive bodily once more.7 This is not a redefinition of death, but the reversal or defeat of
death, restoring bodily life to those in which it has ceased.8 While the resurrected body may be
different in many ways, it is as material as the first body, usually arising at the very place of
death, wearing clothes, and arising with recognizable, physical characteristics of the former life. 9
Resurrection in the fullest sense requires the belief that human beings are whole persons, with
unified body, soul and spirit. That means that, in the Seventh-day Adventist view, resurrection is
4

Wright, Resurrection, 47-48. Homer is generally reckoned to have lived around the
Eighth Century BC and Plato in the late Fifth to early Fourth Century BC. See note 87 on page
48 of Wright, Resurrection.
5
John C. Brunt, Resurrection and Glorification, in the Handbook of Seventh-day
Adventist Theology, edited by Raoul Dederen, Commentary Reference Series, volume twelve
(Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2000), 365.
6
Resurrection, re-incarnation, immortality of the soul, etc.
7
This is well expressed in the second edition of the Encyclopedia Judaica: Ultimately
the dead will be revived in their bodies and live again on earth. Moshe Greenberg,
Resurrection in the Bible, in Encyclopedia Judaica, edited by Fred Skolnik and Michael
Berenbaum, volume 17 (Detroit: Thomson- Gale, 2007), 240.
8
Wright, Resurrection, 201.
9
Albrecht Oepke, evgei,rw, etc. in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,
volume two, edited by Gerhard Kittel, translated and edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand
Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1964), 337.

3
absolutely necessary in order to experience life beyond the grave.10
According to the ancients, a lot of things happened after death, but bodily resurrection
was not one of them, it was not a part of the pagans hope for the future.11 Death was like a oneway street, you can travel down that street leading to death, but once at your destination you
cant come back.12 The ancient Greeks did allow that resurrection could possibly occur as an
isolated miracle, but such are either fictional or are more like resuscitations than genuine
resurrections.13 The idea of a true resurrection, particularly a general resurrection at the end of
10

P. G. Damsteegt, primary contributor, Seventh-day Adventists Believe. . .: A Biblical

Exposition of 27 Fundamental Doctrines (Washington, DC: Ministerial Association, General
Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1988), 356.
11
Wright, Resurrection, 38, 85. Although other scholars might qualify the statement a bit,
Wright goes on to say (page 76), Nobody in the pagan world of Jesus day and thereafter
claimed that somebody had been truly dead and had then come to be truly, and bodily, alive once
more. On pages 32-84 of his monumental work Wright summarizes the evidence for his
categorical claim.
12
Ibid., 81-82.
13
Albrecht Oepke, avni,sthmi, etc., in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,
Volume One, edited by Gerhard Kittel, translated and edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand
Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1964), 369. On the difference between
resuscitation and resurrection see Edith M. Humphrey, Which Way Is Up? Revival,
Resurrection, Assumption, and Ascension in the Rhetoric of Paul and John the Seer, ARC 33
(2005): 328-330. See also Michael Welker, Wright on the Resurrection, Scottish Journal of
Theology 60 (4, 2007): 462-466.
A couple of examples of such isolated miracles in ancient Greek literature can be found
in the play Alcestis by Euripides and the novel Callirhoe, by Chariton. Alcestis is the only tale
containing a true resurrection in the entire ancient world. The heroine of the story, Alcestis, does
in fact return from the dead to bodily life, but even this is not a true parallel to New Testament
resurrection; like Lazarus she will presumably die again. Even so, intelligent pagans in Jesus
day dismissed the story as a mythic fiction (see Wright, Resurrection, 67, but see Stanley E.
Porter, Resurrection, the Greeks and the New Testament, in Resurrection, edited by Stanley E.
Porter, Michael A. Hayes and David Tombs [Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999], 52-81).
The story of Callirhoe tells of an empty tomb, with a mourner going at dawn and finding the
grave stones moved away, the rumor spreading quickly, and others coming to the tomb and

4
the world, was alien to the Greeks.14 This means that something happened to Jesus that had
happened to no one else in the ancient world.15 What is particularly striking is a sudden
proliferation of apparent deaths and reversals of deaths in the ancient pagan world beginning
with the mid to late First Century AD and for centuries afterward.16 It is quite likely that these
were influenced by the New Testament stories of the resurrection of Jesus.17

Resurrection in the Old Testament

The General Picture
To those accustomed to reading the Old Testament through the lense of the New, it may
come as a surprise that much of the Old Testament reads like Homer.18 In the words of Job
himself, life is but a breath. . . he who goes down to the grave does not return. He will never
come to his house again (Job 7:7-10, NIV).19 At least there is hope for a tree: If it is cut down,

finding it empty. This is a most interesting parallel to the New Testament, so much so that it is
more likely to have been influenced by the New Testament than the other way around. By in this
fictitious story no actual resurrection occurs and nobody in the story supposes that it actually can
(see Wright, Resurrection, 68-72).
14
Oepke, TDNT, 1: 369.
15
Wright, Resurrection, 81-82.
16
Ibid., 75.
17
See note 13.
18
Ibid., 87-93. See also Ernest C. Lucas, Daniel, Apollos Old Testament Commentary,
edited by David W. Baker and Gordon J. Wenham, volume 20 (Leicester, England: Apollos,
2002), 302; Ernest Renan, The Cry of the Soul, in The Dimensions of Job: A Study and
Selected Readings, edited by Nahum Glatzer (New York: Schocken Books, 1969), 119; Alan F.
Segal, Resurrection, Early Jewish, in The New Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, edited by
Katherine Doob Sakenfeld, volume 4 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2006), 769.
19
In this text Job knows nothing of a redemption from the grave, there is no second life
after the present. There is a finality to death. Since there is no resurrection, Job feels free to
express his opinions while he has life left, as there is no lasting consequence to doing so. The
Akkadians (contemporary with an early date for Job) called death The land of no return

5
it will sprout again. . . . so man lies down and does not rise; till the heavens are no more, men
will not awake or be roused from their sleep (Job 14:7, 12, NIV).20 Words like these sound like
a one-way street.21
It is not that the writers of the Old Testament were deeply disturbed about this.22 Old
Testament Israelites were attached to life, they did not invest much energy in dreaming of a life

(Marvin H. Pope, Job: Introduction, Translation and Notes, The Anchor Bible, William Foxwell
Albright and David Noel Freedman, general editors [Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1965], 59).
See also F. Delitzsch, Job, translated from the German by Francis Bolton in two volumes,
Commentary on the Old Testament in Ten Volumes, by C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, volume four
(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1973), 1: 121-123; Francis I. Anderson, Job: An Introduction and
Commentary, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, edited by D. J. Wiseman (London: InterVarsity Press, 1976), 136; Samuel Rolles Driver and George Buchanan Grey, A Critical and
Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Job, Together with a New Translation, The International
Critical Commentary, edited by S. R. Driver, A. Plummer and C. A. Briggs (Edinburgh: T & T
Clark, 1921), 69-70; Greenberg, Encyclopedia Judaica, 17: 240. The Seventh-day Adventist
Bible Commentary, on the other hand, suggests this statement is no denial of the resurrection, it
is simply not relevant to the particular context to mention it. F. D. Nichol, The Seventh-day
Adventist Bible Commentary, ten volumes (Washington, DC: Review and Herald Publishing
Association, 1954), 3: 518.
20
According to Delitzsch (Job, 227-230), Job was a true child of his age on this issue. See
also John J. Collins, Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, in Hermeneia A Critical and
Historical Commentary on the Bible, edited by Frank Moore Cross (Minneapolis: Fortress Press,
1993), 392; Delitzsch, Job, 227-230; Driver and Grey, Job, 127-129; George Buchanan Gray, A
Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Isaiah I - XXXIX, in two volumes, The
International Critical Commentary, edited by S. R. Driver, A. Plummer and C. A. Briggs
(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1912), 1: 447; Nahum Glatzer, The Dimensions of Job: A Study and
Selected Readings (New York: Schocken Books, 1969), 44; Lucas, 302; Segal, NIDB, 4: 770.
Pope (102) calls this the standard Old Testament view.. While not addressing Job 14:12 at all,
the SDA Bible Commentary admits that the details of a corporeal resurrection were not clearly
unveiled until the time of Christ. SDABC, 3:537.
21
Wright, Resurrection, 96. See also Arthur S. Peake, Jobs Victory, in The Dimensions
of Job: A Study and Selected Readings, edited by Nahum Glatzer (New York: Schocken Books,
1969), 201. See also 2 Sam 14:14.
22
Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology, translated from the German by D. M. G.

6
hereafter.23 As with Job, they were interested in the outcome of Gods judgment in the here and
now.24 They did not believe that human beings have innate immortality.25 Rather, they believed
that life comes from God (Gen 2:7), returns to Him (Eccl 12:7), and the dead lose consciousness
and never again have a part in what happens under the sun (Eccl 9:5-6).26 Sheol or the grave was
a place where the whole person goes at death. It is not a place of consciousness or purpose.27
So for most of the Old Testament the idea of resurrection was, at best, dormant.28 The
two or three relatively clear texts (Dan 12:2-3; Isa 26:19; Job 19:25-27) are accompanied by
numerous hints that would eventually blossom into the full-blown confidence in the resurrection
expressed by most of First Century Judaism.29 What is the evidence for resurrection in the Old

Stalker, volume one (New York: Harper and Row, 1972), 389; Renan, 119.
23
Robert Martin-Achard, translated by Terrence Prendergast, Resurrection (Old
Testament), in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, volume 5, edited by David Noel Freedman (New
York: Doubleday, 1992), 680.
24
Wright, Resurrection, 96-97.
25
Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 680.
26
Generally death was not feared. The Old Testament saints were content to go down to
the grave as long as three conditions were met: 1) they had had a long and blessed life (Gen
15:15; Exod 20:12; Job 42:10-17), 2) they had left behind many descendants (Gen 15:17-18;
46:3), or at least a son (Deut 25:5-10), and 3) the proper burial rites were carefully observed
(Gen 49:29-32; 2 Sam 3:30-39; Jer 16:1-7). Likewise, divine punishment was expressed through
a shortened life, a lack of descendants and a corpse abandoned to the wild beasts. See MartinAchard, ABD, 5: 680; von Rad, 1: 389-390.
27
Damsteegt, 353; Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 680-681; von Rad, 1: 389.
28
Renan, 119. Some scholars even argue for the complete absence of Old Testament texts
about resurrection. Byron Wheaton, As It Is Written: Old Testament Foundations for Jesus
Expectation of Resurrection, Westminster Theological Journal 70 (2008): 246 and note 4. See
also Wendell W. Frerichs, Death and Resurrection in the Old Testament, Word and World 11
(1991): 14, note 2; and John L. McKenzie, A Theology of the Old Testament (Garden City, NY:
Doubleday, 1974): 307-308.
29
Wright, Resurrection, 85. While post-Old Testament Judaism exhibited dozens of ways
to express life after death, bodily resurrection was clearly the standard teaching by the time of

7
Testament and how did people come to believe in it?

Explicit OT Texts
The clearest expression30 of bodily resurrection in the Old Testament is found in an
apocalyptic context in Daniel 12:2-3:31 Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall
Jesus. In fact, the Mishnah (Sanh. 10:1) explicitly states (in reaction against the Sadducees) And
these are they that have no share in the world to come: he that says that there is no resurrection of
the dead prescribed in the Law. . . Herbert Danby, editor, The Mishnah: Translated from the
Hebrew with Introduction and Brief Explanatory Notes (London: Oxford University Press,
1933), 397. See also Martin-Achard, ABD 5: 680; Oepke, TDNT, 1: 370; Wright, Resurrection,
129. For extensive surveys of the intertestamental literature on this subject see George W. E.
Nickelsburg, Resurrection (Early Judaism and Christianity), in The Anchor Bible Dictionary,
volume 5, edited by David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 685-688 and Wright,
Resurrection, 129-200.
30
And generally also considered the latest (see Wright, Resurrection, 109).
31
Brunt, 359-360; Collins, Hermeneia, 392, 394; idem, Daniel: With an Introduction to
Apocalyptic Literature, The Forms of the Old Testament Literature, Rolf Knierim and Gene M.
Tucker, editors, volume 20 (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1984), 100; Jacques
Doukhan, Daniel: The Vision of the End (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1987),
112-113; Greenberg, Encyclopedia Judaica, 17: 241; Gerhard F. Hasel, Resurrection in the
Theology of Old Testament Apocalyptic, Zeitschrift fuer die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 92
(1980): 267-284; C. F. Keil, Ezekiel, Daniel, in Commentary on the Old Testament in Ten
Volumes by C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, volume nine, translated from the German by M. G.
Easton and separated into three volumes (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1973), 3:
480-481; Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 682-683; Nickelsburg, ABD, 5: 686; Oepke TDNT, 1: 369370; Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology, translated from the German by D. M. G.
Stalker, volume two (New York: Harper and Row, 1965), 350; Segal, NIDB, 4:770; Zdravko
Stefanovic, Daniel: Wisdom to the Wise: Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Boise, ID: Pacific
Press Publishing Association, 2007), 436; Wright, Resurrection, 109-115. Some would argue
that Daniel 12 is the only clear affirmation of a belief in resurrection in the Old Testament. See
Louis F. Hartman and Alexander A. DiLella, The Book of Daniel, The Anchor Bible, edited by
William Foxwell Albright and David Noel Freedman, volume 23 (New York: Doubleday, 1978),
308-309; Lucas, 302; James A. Montgomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Book of Daniel, The International Critical Commentary, edited by S. R. Driver, A. Plummer and
C. A. Briggs (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1927), 471.

8
awake (ESV).32 The text goes on to make reference to two resurrections, one to everlasting
life and the other to shame and everlasting contempt. Then in verse 3, referring to the first of
the two resurrections, the wise shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who bring
many to righteousness like the stars forever and ever.33 This prediction of the resurrection is the
last in a long line of promises to the people of God in Daniel,34 promises of a divine kingdom
(Dan 2:35, 44-45), stories of vindication in the face of death (Daniel 3 and 6), the vindication of
the son of man (Dan 7:13-14), and a Messiah to come (Dan 9:24-27). So deliverance of bodies
from death is connected to the vindication of the whole people of God.35
It is not immediately clear if the word many foresees only a partial resurrection or
whether the word is used as an idiom for all.36 But what will prove particularly significant for
32

Sleeping in the dust of the earth undoubtedly refers to the death of the whole person
in Hebrew thinking (on sleep as a metaphor of death see 2 Kings 4:31; Job 3:11-13; 14:10-13;
Psa 13:3; Jer 51:35-40, 57; on dust as a destination of the dead see Gen 3:19; Job 10:9; 34:15;
Psa 104:29; Eccl 3:13). Thus the metaphor of sleeping and waking refers to the concrete, bodily
event of resurrection. See Montgomery, 471; Stefanovic, 436 and the discussion in note 107 of
Wright, Resurrection, 109.
33
The imagery of stars seems to have a royal connotation (kings are spoken of as stars or
celestial beings Num 24:17; 1 Sam 29:9; 2 Sam 14:17, 20; Isa 9:6). See also Wright,
Resurrection, 112 and notes. This is perhaps related to the corporate kingship imagery of Exodus
19 and Revelation 1 and 5. Stars are also frequently identified with the angelic host in the Old
Testament. John J. Collins, Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death, Catholic
Biblical Quarterly 36 (1974): 31-34.
34
Hasel, 282; Lucas, 303; Wright, Resurrection, 114.
35
The resurrection verses (Dan 12:2-3) are connected in the Hebrew to verse 1, where the
deliverance of Gods people is at the center of focus. Verse 2 makes clear that in this text
deliverance is not limited to deliverance within this life, but includes also deliverance out of
death into the afterlife. C. F. Keil, Daniel, 477.
36
Brunt, 360. The natural meaning of the language is that this text is not referring to a
universal resurrection, only some of the dead will arise (see Nickelsburg, ABD, 5:686; MartinAchard, ABD, 5:683). On the other hand, the word many is used in both Old and New
Testament texts as a reference to the whole (Isa 53:12; Mark 14:24; Rom 5:15). See Stefanovic,

9
this paper is the fact that Daniel 12:2-3 alludes to earlier passages in the Old Testament (such as
Isa 26:19;37 53:10-12;38 65:20-22; and 66:2439), putting an inner-biblical, bodily resurrection spin
on passages that could be read in other ways.
The second clearest expression of bodily resurrection in the Old Testament can be found
in Isaiah 26:19.40 Isaiah 24-27 exhibits a more apocalyptic style than is generally found in the

436. Some Adventists, however, have seen in Daniel 12 a reference to a special resurrection of
some to be living witnesses to the Second Coming of Jesus. See Hasel, 277-279; F. D. Nichol,
editor, The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, ten volumes (Washington, DC: Review
and Herald Publishing Association, 1955), 4:878; William H. Shea, Daniel 7-12, The Abundant
Life Bible Amplifier, edited by George R. Knight (Boise, ID: Pacific Press Publishing
Association, 1996), 215-216; and Ellen G. White, (The Great Controversy Between Christ and
Satan: The Conflict of the Ages in the Christian Dispensation [Mountain View, CA: Pacific
Press Publishing Association, 1911]), 637: Graves are opened, and many of them that sleep in
the dust of the earth. . . awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting
contempt. Daniel 12:2. All who have died in the faith of the third angels message come forth
from the tomb glorified, to hear Gods covenant of peace with those who have kept His law.
They also which pierced Him (Revelation 1:7), those that mocked and derided Christs dying
agonies, and the most violent opposers of His truth and His people, are raised to behold Him in
His glory and to see the honor placed upon the loyal and obedient. This view of Daniel 12 is
supported in some detail by Hartman and DiLella, 307-308. Keil, (Daniel, 481-483) offers an
interesting middle position.
37
Allusion confirmed by Collins, Hermeneia, 392; Hartman and DiLella, 307; Hasel, 276;
Stefanovic, 436; and Wright (Resurrection, 116), who notes: Few doubt that this passage was
strongly present to the writer of Daniel 12:2-3.
38
Allusion confirmed by Collins, Hermeneia, 393; idem, Daniel: With an Introduction to
Apocalyptic Literature, 100; Lucas, 303; Martin-Achard, ABD, 5:683; Ben C. Ollenburger, If
Mortals Die, Will They Live Again? Ex Auditu 9 (1993): 33; Wright, Resurrection, 110.
39
Allusions suggested by Nickelsburg, ABD, 5:686, who believes everlasting life in
Dan 12:2 is a reference to the long life referred to in Isaiah 65:20-22 and shame and everlasting
contempt is a reference to the fate of the rebels outside Jerusalem in Isaiah 66:14, 24. See also
Collins, Hermeneia, 393. But the verbal links between the two texts are quite weak, so I doubt an
intentional link here. Hartman and DiLella (308) and SDABC (4: 878) support an allusion to Isa
66:24.
40
Brunt, 359-360; F. Delitzsch, Isaiah, in Commentary on the Old Testament in Ten

10
pre-exilic prophets, envisioning the renewal of the whole cosmos.41 The section is a mixture of
doom and lament, on the one hand, and expressions of trust and praise on the other. The hope
expressed in 26:19 is anticipated first in Isaiah 25:7-8 (NIV) where the Lord Almighty will
destroy the shroud that enfolds all peoples, the sheet that covers all nations;42 he will swallow up
death forever.43 The context of 26:19 is set in verses 13-15,44 where the enemies of Gods
people are now dead in the complete and endless sense. But in contrast to these (Isa 26:19, NIV),
Your dead will live; their bodies will rise. You who dwell in the dust, wake up and shout for
joy.45 A resurrection of the body is clearly in view here, but there is no reference to a
resurrection of the wicked.46 Also significant for our purpose is that Isa 26:19 evokes the

Volumes by C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, volume seven, translated from the German by James
Martin in two volumes (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1973), 1: 450-452; Gray,
Isaiah I - XXXIX, 1: 446-447; Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 682; Oepke TDNT, 1: 370; Philip
Schmitz, The Grammar of Resurrection in Isaiah 26:19a-c, Journal of Biblical Literature
122/1 (2003): 145-149; SDABC, 4: 204; Wright, Resurrection, 116-118. Lucas (302) favors a
metaphorical interpretation for this passage, yet believes that bodily resurrection is presumed
(304). See also Thomas L. Leclerc, Resurrection: Biblical Considerations, Liturgical Ministry
18 (summer 2009): 98; Segal, NIDB, 4:770. Greenberg notes that while Daniel 12 could be read
as a very limited resurrection, Isaiah 26 is clearly in the context of world judgment. Greenberg,
Encyclopedia Judaica, 17: 241.
41
Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 682; Wright, Resurrection, 117.
42
The Hebrew word translated shroud and sheet in this text has connotations of burial
clothes (Job 40:13), so the language of the whole passage suggests a reversal of death, the great
enemy of all humanity.
43
See Delitzsch, Isaiah, 439-440; Gray, Isaiah I - XXXIX, 1: 429-430; Ollenburger, 3840; SDABC, 4: 201.
44
Brunt, 359; Collins, Hermeneia, 395; Wright, Resurrection, 117.
45
Brunt, 359; Hasel, 273.
46
Brunt, 360; Martin-Achard, ABD, 5:682. There is a detailed discussion in Hasel (272276) regarding who the speaker in Isaiah 26:19 is, and also who is being addressed, but that goes
beyond the scope of this paper.

11
language of earlier, more ambiguous Old Testament texts like Hosea 6:1-3.47
The third Old Testament text widely considered an explicit description of bodily
resurrection is also the most controversial of the three; Job 19:25-27.48 While there are
difficulties in this passage, Brunt believes that the conviction of life after death is clear.49 Job
47

Allusion confirmed by C. F. Keil, Minor Prophets, in Commentary on the Old

Testament in Ten Volumes by C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, volume ten, translated from the
German by James Martin in two volumes (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1973), 1:
95; Martin-Achard, ABD, 5:682.
48
Driver and Grey (Job, 171) call the manuscript evidence for Job 19:25-27 corrupt and
obscure and more ambiguous than could have been desired. Pope (135) says that the ancient
versions all differ and no reliance can be placed on any of them. He does not see in them a
witness to bodily resurrection. Anderson. Job (193), says that several lines are so unintelligible
that the range of translations offered is quite bewildering. For a sample of a dozen or so
translations in German, English and French see H. H. Rowley, The Book of Job and its
Meaning, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 41 (1958), note 5, running from 203-205. On the
other hand, early Christian students of the Hebrew text like Jerome were confident that the text
expressed the hope and reality of bodily resurrection. See Glatzer, Introduction, 27. And
Anderson, Job (193), goes on to point out that we must not let the ambiguities in the text hide the
fact that some things in the text are clear. See also Lucas, 302-303.
49
Brunt, 359. Though conservative in his leanings, Wright (Resurrection, 97-98; see also
Delitzsch, Job, 356-372) emphatically differs with regard to Job 19. He argues that the passage is
a clearer reference to resurrection in some English translations than in the Hebrew. Job has
earlier expressed the conviction that life is a breath, that the dead will not come up out of Sheol
(Job 7:7-10), that they do not rise again as long as the cosmos exists (Job 14:1-14). Why should
Job suddenly be singing a different tune? I would point out, however, that there is a progression
in Job from hopeless doubt to trust in God, and the very expressions of hopelessness in chapters
7 and 14 set the table for the hope that is expressed in chapter 19. In Job 19:25 (masked by most
English translations) the word for earth (rp'[') is actually dust of the earth, the very word used
in key texts like Gen 2:7; 3:19; Isa 26:19 and Dan 12:2. So the context of verse 26 is God
standing on the dust of the earth to vindicate His servant. Not only so, but in chapter 20 (as
admitted by Wright, Resurrection, 98) Zophar reaffirms the traditional view of death and
resurrection by way of rebuke to Job (see 20:2-9): My troubled thoughts prompt me to answer
because I am greatly disturbed. . . . Surely you know how it has been from of old, ever since man
was placed on the earth, . . . he will perish forever, like his own dung; those who have seen him
will say, 'Where is he?' Like a dream he flies away, no more to be found, banished like a vision

12
expresses confidence that God will be his goel in the last days (19:25). What this means is
expressed in verse 26, the challenging Hebrew of which is translated by the ESV: And after my
skin has been thus destroyed, yet in my flesh I shall see God.50 In the context, Job can find no
justice and all his friends and family have deserted him. But in verse 25 the mood changes and
Job expresses confidence that his goel will one day vindicate him.51 Such a vindication requires
a judgment and a bodily resurrection, so in spite of translational challenges, it seems likely that
of the night. The eye that saw him will not see him again; his place will look on him no more.
So I would place the weight of evidence in favor of a reference to bodily resurrection in Job
19:25-27. The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary confidently asserts that verse 25 is an
unmistakable glimpse of the resurrection. See Jacques Doukhan, Radioscopy of a
Resurrection: The Meaning of niqqepu zot in Job 19:26, Andrews University Seminary Studies
34:2 (Autumn 1996): 187-193; SDABC, 3: 549.
50
According to Anderson, Job (193), the reference here to skin, flesh and eyes makes it
clear that Job expects to have this experience in the body, not as some disembodied shade. The
problem in verse 26 is the Hebrew preposition min (!mi), which is united to the Hebrew word for
flesh (basar rf'B'). Min is this context can express removal, separation or location. So possible
translations include in my flesh, apart from my flesh, away from my flesh, or from my
flesh, the choice makes a huge impact on the meaning of the verse as a whole. If one translates
in my flesh or from my flesh the text supports bodily resurrection. If one translates apart
from my flesh or away from my flesh, it could imply apart from the corruptible, mortal flesh
in a new body like the one in 1 Corinthians 15. Either way, bodily resurrection is not denied in
Job 19. See SDABC, 3: 549-550.
51
Driver and Grey (172-174) are convinced that the text of verses 23 and 26 requires that
Job will have some conscious sense of Gods vindication after his death, although the fullness of
bodily resurrection is not directly expressed, it is certainly implied. Charles Bruston (Pour
lexegese de Job, Zeitschrift fuer die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 26 (1906): 143-146) takes
the opposite position based on the same evidence, so not all will be convinced that Job 19 is a
clear statement of bodily resurrection. Renan (119) takes a middle position: Job normally holds
the standard Old Testament view of death, but in Job 19 catches a flash or intuition of something
more beyond. Rowley seems to take a similar position. See H. H. Rowley, The Intellectual
versus the Spiritual Solution, in Nahum Glatzer, The Dimensions of Job: A Study and Selected
Readings (New York: Schocken Books, 1969), 126-127.

13
bodily resurrection is in view in Job 19,52 although the word explicit is probably a stretch when
applied to this passage.

Harbingers of the Resurrection in the Old Testament

In addition to the more explicit texts on bodily resurrection in the Old Testament, there
are a number of texts that offer intriguing hints of what would become the standard
understanding within early Judaism and Christianity. 53 The two most intriguing of these are
found in Isaiah 53 and Ezekiel 37. I will begin with Ezekiel 37.
In Ezekiel 37 Gods ability to restore life is applied to the nation as a whole, in keeping
with the community-oriented worldview of the Old Testament.54 The prophet sees a valley full of
dry bones.55 He prophesies to the bones and they come together, life is breathed into them and
they live again (Eze 37:1-10).56 In verse 11 the vision is interpreted as a metaphor of Israels
52

See the strong confirmation of this viewpoint in Anderson, Job, 194. But see also the
extensive rejection of such a viewpoint in John MClintock and James Strong, Cyclopedia of
Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature, volume eight (n. p.: Harper and Brothers,
1879), 1053.
53
Wright, Resurrection, 85-128 offers a thorough summary of most of these.
54
Brunt, 358. Wright (Resurrection, 119) considers Ezekiel 37 the most famous of all Old
Testament resurrection passages and also the most obviously metaphorical. See also Lucas, 302.
55
Corpses and bones are highly unclean objects to the observant Jew. This is the state to
which Israel has been reduced in the eyes of God. See Wright, Resurrection, 119.
56
Martin-Achard, ABD, 5:682-3 sees the language here as grounded in the creation
language of Genesis 2:7; Isaiah 42:5; and Psalm 104:29-30, echoed also in Job 33:4. Just as in
creation, Adam was made in two stages, so here the resurrection would take place in two stages,
the gathering of bones and construction of flesh first, then the breath of life comes into the
reconstituted bodies. So Ezekiel 37 functions as a renewal of creation. See Keil, Ezekiel, Daniel,
2:118-119; Wright, Resurrection, 121. Moshe Greenberg affirms the connection between Ezekiel
37 and Genesis 2:7 (Ezekiel 21-37: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, The
Anchor Bible, edited by William Foxwell Albright and David Noel Freedman, volume 22A
[New York: Doubleday, 1997], 741).

14
restoration after the Exile. But the repeated use of the word grave (rb,q,) in verses 12 and 13
suggests to some that the text goes beyond return from Exile to the resurrection of individuals
within the nation who have died.57 At the least, this text shows that the idea of resurrection was
not unfamiliar to Israel, even if it was rarely expressed in explicit terms.58
Isaiah 53 is one of several Servant Songs in the latter part of Isaiah.59 It is not always
clear whether these songs are a metaphor of the suffering of Israel as a community in the future
or a reference to one who suffers in their behalf.60 As we have seen with Ezekiel 37, the language
of death and bodily resurrection can be used as a metaphor for the exile and return of the whole
nation.61 But Isaiah 53:7-12 seems to imply more than that.62 While there is no explicit mention
of resurrection itself, verses 7-9 indicate that the servant dies and is buried and verses 10-12
57

Brunt, 358; Keil, Ezekiel, Daniel, 2:120-128. But see the counterpoint of Martin-Achard
in ABD, 5: 681-682 and also G. A. Cooke, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book
of Ezekiel, The International Critical Commentary, edited by S. R. Driver, A. Plummer and C. A.
Briggs (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1936), 400; Segal, NIDB, 4: 770; Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2:
A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel Chapters 25-48, translated by James D.
Martin, in Hermeneia A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible, edited by Frank
Moore Cross (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 262-265. On the other hand, in the early
rabbinic period Ezekiel 37 was seen as a prediction of physical resurrection. See Wright,
Resurrection, 120-121. Greenberg (749-751) reviews Jewish and Christian interpretation of this
passage in relation to bodily resurrection. Greenberg himself seems to lean toward the
metaphorical interpretation (750).
58
Brunt, 358; Leclerc, 100; Lucas, 304; Ollenburger, 37. This passage clearly asserts that
Yahweh has sufficient power to accomplish anything that He promises to His people. See Keil,
Ezekiel, Daniel, 2: 116.
59
Isaiah 53, in fact, begins with 52:13. There is a break between verses 12 and 13 and the
material flows naturally from 52:15 on into 53:1. See John McKenzie, Second Isaiah:
Introduction, Translation and Notes, The Anchor Bible, edited by William Foxwell Albright and
David Noel Freedman (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1968), 129-131; SDABC, 4: 288.
60
Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 682; McKenzie, Second Isaiah, 132.
61
Delitzsch, Isaiah, 2: 303-304.

15
indicate that he afterward emerges in triumph.63 So the early Christian application of Isaiah 53 to
the death and resurrection of Jesus was exegetically defensible. But more than this, numerous
allusions to Isaiah 53 in Daniel 12:2-3 provide evidence that long before the time of Jesus, some
Jews at least saw in Isaiah 53 a forecast of resurrection.64 In Isaiah 53 belief that Israels God
will restore the nation after the exile becomes belief that He will restore the nations
representative after death.65 So Isaiah 53 seems to provide a transition between national and
bodily restoration.66
Hosea, one of the two earliest writing prophets,67 has a couple of intriguing hints of
62
63

Ibid., 2: 322-342; Lucas, 303 SDABC, 4: 291-292.

Wright, Resurrection, 116. Verses 7-12 contain numerous words that refer to death.

Verse 7 speaks of slaughter (xb;J,), a word used for the death of people in Isa 34:2. In verse
8 the servant is cut off (rz:g>nI) from the land of the living. Then in verse 9 the text contains
the language of grave (rb,q,) and death (tw<m'). Even in verse 10 it refers to the life of the
servant as a guilt offering (~v'a'), and verse 12 repeats the reference to death (tw<m'). So if
the servant of Isaiah 53 is an individual, there is no question that he dies, is buried and is then
exalted in triumph. See also Martin Luther, Lectures on Isaiah: Chapters 40-66, in Luthers
Works, edited by Hilton C. Oswald, volume 17 (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1972),
227-232; McKenzie, Second Isaiah, 135-136.
64
Wright, Resurrection, 115-116. The wise of Daniel 12:3 seem to be a plural version
of the servant who deals wisely in Isaiah 52:13. They turn many to righteousness, the
servant of Isaiah 53:11 will justify many. The shining of the wise in Daniel 12:3 may also
reflect the light featured in Isaiah 53:11 in the Hebrew manuscripts at Qumran and also the LXX
(fw/j). Wright also notes a strong thematic parallel between the suffering and redemption of the
wise in Daniel (Dan 12:2-3, cf. 11:33-35; 12:1) and that of the servant in Isaiah 53.
65
Ibid., 123. See also 128: The national element in this hope is never abandoned. The
promise remains. But out of that promise there has grown something new.
66
Delitzsch (Isaiah, 2: 302), however, does suggest that the individual reading of Isaiah
53 is grounded in multiple earlier references in Isaiah.
67
C. L. Seow, Book of Hosea, in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, six volumes, edited by
David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 3: 291; J. D. Smart, Hosea (Man and
Book), in The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, five volumes, edited by George Arthur

16
resurrection. Hosea 13:14 (ESV), speaking of Ephraim (northern Israel) asks, Shall I ransom
them from the power of Sheol? Shall I redeem them from Death? O Death, where are your
plagues? O Sheol, where is your sting? The thrust of the Hebrew is actually a denial that God
will raise the northern kingdom of Israel from death, but the LXX and the New Testament (1 Cor
15:54-55) take the passage in a positive sense.68 John Day has persuasively demonstrated that
Isaiah 26:19, a fairly plain resurrection text, clearly alludes to Hosea 13:14.69
The second hint is in Hosea 6:1-3.70 The idea of bringing to life (hy"x') on the third day is
echoed in later passages, such as 1 Corinthians 15:4.71 It may also have been in the mind of
Daniel when he wrote his resurrection passage in Daniel 12.72 That the bringing to life is
preceded by a striking down (hk'n') is resurrection language.73 While in its original context

Buttrick (New York: Abingdon Press, 1962), 2: 648. Hoseas ministry took place on either side
of about 740 B.C. See Francis I. Anderson and David Noel Freedman, Hosea: A New
Translation with Introduction and Commentary, The Anchor Bible, edited by William Foxwell
Albright and David Noel Freedman, volume 24 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1980), 33-35 and
William Rainey Harper, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Amos and Hosea, The
International Critical Commentary, edited by S. R. Driver, A. Plummer and C. A. Briggs
(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1905), cxli.
68
Harper, 404; SDABC, 4: 931; Wright, Resurrection, 118.
69
John Day, The Development of Belief in Life After Death in Ancient Israel, in After
the Exile: Essays in Honour of Rex Mason, edited by J. Barton and D. J. Reimer (Macon, GA:
Mercer University Press, 1996), 244-245. Some eight different features of the texts and contexts
of Isaiah 26:19 and Hosea 13:14 can be paralleled.
70
Come, let us return to the LORD. He has torn us to pieces but he will heal us; he has
injured (hkn) us but he will bind up our wounds. After two days he will revive us; on the third
day he will restore us, that we may live in his presence. Let us acknowledge the LORD; let us
press on to acknowledge him. As surely as the sun rises, he will appear; he will come to us like
the winter rains, like the spring rains that water the earth. (NIV)
71
He rose again the third day according to the scriptures.
72
Wright, Resurrection, 119.
73
Clearly affirmed by Anderson and Freedman, 419-422; Wright, Resurrection, 118. This

17
Hosea 6:1-3 is probably mocking an inadequate prayer based on Canaanite religious
expectations,74 both Hosea 6 and 13 demonstrate that the idea of resurrection was clearly present
in Israel as early as the eighth century.75
There are other intimations of resurrection in the Old Testament.76 There are several
accounts of bodily resurrection in the stories related to Elijah and Elisha.77 Perhaps these
incidents inspired the language found in Hosea, written to the same area less than a hundred

is also supported by the connection between the language of this passage and Deut 32:39. See
Anderson and Freedman, 419; Keil, Minor Prophets, 94.
74
The prayer of 6:1-3 is from the people of Ephraim to God and sounds impressive when
read in isolation. But note the harsh condemnations directed by God to Ephraim immediately
before and after the prayer in Hosea 5:14-15 and 6:4-11. Whatever its source, the prayer is
clearly an inadequate response to the prophets message and is probably more metaphorical in
intent than physical. See Harper, 281-284; Lucas, 302. But see also Keil (Minor Prophets, 94)
who argues that these words are a call addressed by the prophet to the people in the name of the
Lord. But while Keil takes the passage in a positive way, he does not see it in terms of bodily
resurrection but rather in terms of the spiritual and moral restoration of Israel as a people (96).
75
Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 681.
76
While generally skeptical about the clarity of resurrection in the Old Testament, Lucas
(302) does suggest that in several texts the Psalmists relationship with God is so deep that it will
somehow not be ended by death (Psalm 16:9-11; 73:23-26; 49:15). These texts seem worthy of
further exploration even though most OT scholars do not mention them in this context.
77
1 Kings 17:17-24; 2 Kings 4:31-37 and 13:20-21. See C. F. Keil, The Books of Kings, in
Commentary on the Old Testament in Ten Volumes, edited by C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch,
volume three, translated from the German by James Martin in three volumes (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1973), 1: 239-240; 313-314; 378-379; Martin-Achard, 5: 681; James A. Montgomery,
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Books of Kings, edited by Henry Snyder Gehman,
in The International Critical Commentary, edited by S. R. Driver, A. Plummer and C. A. Briggs
(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1951), 295-296; 369; 435-436; F. D. Nichol, editor, The Seventh-day
Adventist Bible Commentary, ten volumes (Washington, DC: Review and Herald Publishing
Association, 1954), 2: 814-815; 870-871; 929; Oepke, TDNT, 1: 369; Wright, Resurrection, 74,
note 234. One could argue that these are not significant to the topic, since they are not used
within Israel as examples of what can happen to all at the end of time. They are also more like
resuscitations of people who will die again, they are not raised to immortal, bodily life. See
Wright, Resurrection, 96.

18
years later. There are also the unusual stories of Enoch and Elijah, who took a different route to
immortality than by death.78 There are frequent expressions of hope that there might be a
deliverance from Sheol.79 And the Torah itself was later understood to offer a number of
78

Genesis 5:24; 2 Kings 2:1-15. The Enoch reference is in the midst of a geneology in
which it is said of others, and he died, but of Enoch God took him. See Keil, The Books of
Kings, 1: 294-297; Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 681; Montgomery, The Books of Kings, 353;
SDABC, 2: 852; Alan F. Segal, Resurrection, OT, in The New Interpreters Dictionary of the
Bible, edited by Katherine Doob Sakenfeld, volume 4 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2006), 769;
Wright, Resurrection, 94-96. Von Rad (1: 406) clearly understands the Enoch and Elijah texts as
expressing translation into Yahwehs other realms beyond this life. While Cogan and Tadmore
do not consider the story historical, they do concede that the intention is to describe an ascension
into heaven. See Mordechai Cogan and Hayim Tadmor, II Kings: A New Translation with
Introduction and Commentary, The Anchor Bible, edited by William Foxwell Albright and
David Noel Freedman, volume 11 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1988), 32-33. Skinner notes
that while the Enoch narrative clearly expresses a bypassing of the normal process of death, it
was not presumed to relate to the destiny of ordinary mortals, it was an extraordinary
circumstance. See John Skinner, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis, The
International Critical Commentary, edited by S. R. Driver, A. Plummer and C. A. Briggs
(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1910), 131-132.
There is less clarity within the Old Testament regarding the fate of Moses (Deut 34:5-6),
who is later thought to have been translated after death (Jude 7) and also appeared with Elijah
and Jesus on the mountain of transfiguration (Matt 17:1-13; Mark 9:1-13; Luke 9:27-36).
79
1 Sam 2:6; 2 Kgs 5:7; Job 33:15-30; Psalm 16:8-11; 22:15-31; 104:29-30. The
challenge with many of these texts is determining whether they refer to a deliverance that lies
beyond Sheol; in other words, a bodily resurrection after death, or if they refer to a deliverance
from death within this life; prolonging life to a good old age rather than dying in ones prime.
See Mitchell Dahood, Psalms I: 1-50: Introduction, Translation and Notes, The Anchor Bible,
edited by William Foxwell Albright and David Noel Freedman, volume 16 (Garden City, NY:
Doubleday, 1966), 91; F. Delitzsch, Psalms, in Commentary on the Old Testament in Ten
Volumes by C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, volume five, translated from the German by Francis
Bolton in three volumes (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1973), 1: 228; Driver and
Gray, Job, 290; Greenberg, Encyclopedia Judaica, 17: 240; Segal, NIDB, 4: 780-781; Gregory
V. Trull, An Exegesis of Psalm 16:10, Bibliotheca Sacra 161 (July - September 2004): 304321; Wright, Resurrection, 103-105. Briggs and Briggs offer a third option, the text moves
beyond death, but promises Gods presence and favor with the Psalmist in Sheol itself, or the
replacement of the dead with newly created individuals. See Charles Agustus Briggs and Emilie

19
harbingers of the resurrection.80 So from our perspective, at least, the Old Testament picture was
not as bleak as it may seem at first glance.

The Path to Resurrection

This survey of the Old Testament data raises the historical question of where resurrection
came from within Israel. We have seen that explicit references to resurrection are rare and most
of the implicit ones can be understood as metaphors of the communitys return from exile and
disgrace. When and why did God begin to turn Israels eyes from the hope of national
resurrection to an individual hope in the resurrection of the body?
The consensus among scholars who take a naturalistic,81 developmental approach to the
Old Testament is to see this shift as fairly late. They understand Job 19 to be written not by
Moses, but during or after the Exile.82 They consider Job, in any case, to be ambiguous at best
regarding bodily resurrection. They also date Daniel and the Isaiah Apocalypse (Isaiah 24-27) as
second and third century BC insertions into the canon of the Old Testament.83 So in the critical

Grace Briggs, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Book of Psalms, two volumes, The
International Critical Commentary, edited by S. R. Driver, A. Plummer and C. A. Briggs
(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1906), 1: 121-122; 2: 336-337.
80
The best known of these, of course, is the statement of Jesus that the God of Abraham,
Isaac and Jacob is the God of the living, not the dead (Matt 22:31-32). But there are many other
texts in the Pentateuch that were seen as intimating resurrection in the Mishnah and the Talmud
(Num 15:31; 18:28; Deut 11:9; 31:16; 32:39; 33:6). Most of these references are found in
Sanhedrin, 90-92 and are exegeted briefly in Wright, Resurrection, 197-198.
81
By naturalistic I mean an approach to Scripture which ignores or denies supernatural
intervention in history or in the development of the biblical canon. In such an approach, shifts in
biblical thinking over time are not due to divine revelation, but to natural cause and effect
triggered by cultural and philosophical developments in the Israelite environment.
82
James L. Crenshaw, Book of Job, in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, six volumes,
edited by David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 3: 863.
83
John J. Collins, Book of Daniel, in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, six volumes, edited

20
consensus, belief in bodily resurrection was a late development in Israel, clearly witnessed only
centuries after the Exile.
Given these critical assumptions, it is often assumed that the belief in bodily resurrection
arose among Israelites around or after their exposure to Zoroastrianism in the Persian court.84
But the popularity of this view has waned considerably among scholars.85 First of all, as we have
seen, the language of resurrection is echoed not only in Ezekiel 37, but all the way back to
Hosea, in the eighth century BC. And Ezekiels story of the dead rising from their graves cannot
be related to Zoroastrianism, since the Persians exposed their dead rather than burying them.86
And the emerging Israelite belief in resurrection is anything but dualistic, a core characteristic of
Zoroastrianism.
More recently it has become fashionable to see the emerging Israelite belief in
resurrection as grounded in the dying and rising Baal of Canaanite mythology.87 While this

by David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 2: 29-30; Gray, Isaiah (399-400)
asserts that Isaiah 24-27 is much closer to Daniel (Second Century B.C. in his mind) than to
Ezekiel (Sixth Century B.C.). But many critical scholars place Isaiah 24-27 as early as the Exile.
See William R. Millar, Isaiah 24-27 (Little Apocalypse), in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, six
volumes, edited by David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 3: 489.
84
Oepke, TDNT, 1: 369. While Zoroaster himself may have lived much earlier,
Zoroastrianism was introduced to general consciousness during the Persian period when it
became the official religion of the Persian Empire. From there it is assumed that it crept into the
relatively late Jewish documents such as Daniel and Isaiah. See Mary Boyce, Zoroaster,
Zoroastrianism, in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, six volumes, edited by David Noel Freedman
(New York: Doubleday, 1992), 5: 1168-1174.
85
See Collins, Hermeneia, 396; Hartman and DiLella, 308; Wright, Resurrection, 124125.
86
Collins (Hermeneia, 396) sees no Persian motifs in Daniel 12 either.
87
See in particular John Day, The Development of Belief in Life After Death in Ancient
Israel, 245-248; idem, Resurrection Imagery from Baal to the Book of Daniel, in Congress
Volume: Cambridge 1995, edited by J. A. Emerton, Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 66

21
approach is more plausible in terms of its historical progression, it is also unlikely to be the
primary explanation of Israels emerging belief in the resurrection.88 For one thing, there is no
reason to believe the Canaanites ever applied the resurrection of their god to themselves. And it
is also questionable in light of the larger picture of the Exile. If Israels exile was a consequence
of its compromise with pagan gods and their nature religions, why would the prophets who
promised a return borrow their central imagery from those same religions?
If one accepts the biblical chronology of Daniel and Isaiah at face value, a different
trajectory begins to emerge. With Hosea the seeds of resurrection, buried long before in the
Pentateuch, begin to emerge as metaphors of Israels rebirth as a people.89 With the Isaiah
Apocalypse (Isaiah 24-27), bodily resurrection, hinted at also in Isaiah 53, takes explicit form.
During the Exile itself, Daniel and Ezekiel apply resurrection language not only the return of the
nation but also to the return from the grave of at least some of those who have died in the past. In
such a trajectory, it is more likely that Zoroaster picked up the idea of resurrection from Daniel
than the other way around.
If bodily resurrection is a plausible development within the evidence of the Old

(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1997), 125-133.

88
See Wright, Resurrection, 126-127.
89
Note the remarkable statement by Anderson and Freedman (420): Hosea reflects the
adaptation of individual physical death and resurrection to the experience of the nation, and thus
is figurative. The underlying picture, while deriving from the realm of sickness and severe
injury, and associated with it, must also embrace the notion of real death and real revivification.
Most scholars find a doctrine of death and resurrection of people at this stage in Israels thought
too advanced. Recent research on the belief of early Israelites in personal survival after physical
death has weakened this approach.
As mentioned earlier, these texts may have taken their cue from the three resuscitations
recorded in the Elijah and Elisha stories of the historical books. 1 Kings 17:17-24; 2 Kings 4:3137 and 13:20-21. See Martin-Achard, 5: 681; Oepke, TDNT, 1: 369; Wright, Resurrection, 74,

22
Testament itself,90 what were the factors that led to that development? I believe there are several,
which I will summarize here. First, is the belief in creation.91 If God is the ultimate source of
physical life, it is perhaps inevitable that people would come to believe that the same God is
powerful enough to both end life and restore it (Deut 32:39; 1 Samuel 2:6).92 He created and thus
He can re-create.93 And indeed, some of the resurrection texts we have explored contain strong
echoes of the Genesis creation narratives.94 In those narratives, Yahweh created the first human
from the dust, breathing into Adam His own breath (Gen 2:7). This language is then echoed in
relation to death in Genesis 3:19; when God takes His breath away, humanity returns to the dust
once more.95 Furthermore, in Adam and Eves expulsion from the garden, we see a first
intimation of Israels future exile. So the fate of the nation and the body are linked together in the
original narrative of creation.96
A second root of resurrection belief lay in the promises of Gods love (bh;a') and
faithfulness (ds,x,) to Israel.97 If Gods love and faithfulness are only for this life, they are truly
steadfast in only a limited sense. Victory over death provided Israels God the ultimate way to

note 234.
90
Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 684.
91
Wright, Resurrection, 127.
92
Brunt, 358; Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 684; Nickelsburg, ABD, 5: 685; Wright,
Resurrection, 139.
93
Belief in the resurrection concerns the capacity of God. Immortality, on the other hand,
is our weak claim to autonomous significance. Walter Brueggemann, Ultimate Victory: Jesus
and Resurrection, Christian Century 124, no. 3 (February 6, 2007), 33. In other words,
resurrection puts the focus on God while immortality puts the focus on us. See also MartinAchard, ABD, 5: 684 and 2 Macc 7:22-23, 28-29.
94
Wright, Resurrection, 122-123.
95
See also Psa 7:5; 22:15, 29; 30:9; 104:29; 119:25; 146:4; Eccl 12:7.
96
Ibid., 123.

23
demonstrate his faithfulness and love toward His own people.98 A personal experience with the
steadfast love of Israels God led to the conviction that His faithfulness would be known, not
only in the present, but also beyond the grave.99 There Israels relationship with God would
continue.100
Resurrection belief within Israel is also rooted in the justice of God combined with His
sovereign power.101 As the almighty Judge, God rewards the faithful and punishes those who
rebel against His covenant commandments.102 A God of justice would not forever leave Israel to
suffer oppression from the pagans.103 But that kind of justice was less and less seen as Israels
history went on. It became clear that if there is no resurrection and no judgment, there is no
justice in this world, therefore, a future bodily resurrection is required for justice to occur. It is
precisely the resurrection that allows God to fully demonstrate his faithfulness toward His
people.104 Gods justice is seen first in the national resurrection of the people, and ultimately in
the bodily resurrection of the individuals that made up that people.105
The fourth root of resurrection belief lay in Israels belief in the wholeness of human
beings, the idea that body and soul are a single, indivisible unit.106 This wholistic perspective is
97

Ibid. , 127.
Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 684. It is in the resurrection that Israel received the ultimate
answer to the questions of the Psalmists about the future quality of Gods love and faithfulness
(Psalms 6, 16, 22, etc.).
99
Collins (Hermeneia, 394) particularly note Psa 73:23-26 and 16:9-10 in this regard.
100
Wright, Resurrection, 103.
101
Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 684; Wright, Resurrection, 139. See 2 Macc 7:9.
102
Nickelsburg, ABD, 5: 685.
103
Wright, Resurrection, 202.
104
Martin-Achard, ABD, 5: 684.
105
Brunt, 358.
106
Daniel Boyarin and Seymour Siegel, Resurrection in the Rabbinic Period, in
98

24
revealed in Genesis 2:7, where the living soul represents the whole being, including the body.
According to Brunt, the Old Testament view of death grows out of this wholistic
understanding.107 If it is the whole person that dies, then any hope for an afterlife must include a
restoration of the physical body.108
The final root of resurrection belief lay, of course, in the promise of national restoration
at the other side of the exile.109 In passages such as Isaiah 53 and Ezekiel 37, as we have seen,
the two restorations are so completely mingled that it is hard to tell them apart. As hope for
Israels national restoration began to fade with the Persian and Greek occupations after the Exile,
bodily resurrection became more and more the focus of the remnant of ancient Israel. 110

Encyclopedia Judaica, edited by Fred Skolnik and Michael Berenbaum, volume 17 (Detroit:
Thomson-Gale, 2007), 241; Leclerc, 98.
107
Brunt, 358.
108
Recently Francois Bovon protested against the current tendency of biblical scholars
toward what he called inflation of the body and a fixed commitment to the unity of the human
person as the core of biblical anthropology. He feels that this doctrine of wholeness encourages
the absence of the divine in an outrageously secular society. His protest, however, ignores the
monumental work of N. T. Wright (The Resurrection of the Son of God) as well as the vast body
of evidence from the Old Testament and the ancient Near East. See Francois Bovon, The Souls
Comeback: Immortality and Resurrection in Early Christianity, Harvard Theological Review
103:4 (October 2010): 401.
109
Collins, Hermeneia, 395; Wright, Resurrection, 93.
110
An interesting feature of this trajectory is that the more Greek the ancient Bible is, the
more personal resurrection one finds in it. See Wright, Resurrection, 147-150. In the LXX the
Old Testament passages that speak unambiguously of resurrection come through loud and clear,
there is no attempt to soften them in any way. When it comes to Job 19, Hosea 6 and Hosea 13,
the LXX translator had no doubt at all about bodily resurrection and made sure that the Greek
translation of these texts affirmed it without question. For example, in Hosea 13:14, the
translator takes the rhetorical question shall I redeem them from death? with the expected
answer being no, and turns it into a straightforward statement, I will redeem them from
death. In Job 14:14, the translator turns if a man die shall he live again? into if a man dies,
he shall live. It is interesting that the LXX is a Greek translation of a Hebrew text in ancient

25
Given the theological perspective just outlined, why is the Old Testament so implicit
about the resurrection? Brunt argues that the Old Testament writers could not point back to the
resurrection of Jesus Christ as the foundation of their hope for the future.111 Their thought world
was oriented to the community rather than the individual. So it is to the social unit and its
survival that the emphasis of Gods revelation to them is placed.112 But individual and national
restoration are not an either/or in the Old Testament.113 Many seeds of both the Messiah and the
future understanding of resurrection are planted in the Old Testament, to bear fruit once the
messianic promises of God were fulfilled.

Resurrection in the New Testament

Edgar Krentz makes a very strong statement that is nevertheless not an overstatement. If
there is no proclamation of the resurrection, then there is no gospel, no church, and no Christian

Egypt, a philosophical home of bodiless afterlife. One might expect that every Old Testament
reference to resurrection would be altered into something more Platonic and immaterial. But that
is not what happened. Instead Hellenistic Jews saw bodily resurrection in places less than clear in
the Hebrew Old Testament itself.
111
Brunt, 357. Brunt also makes the point (360) that while resurrection is less explicit in
the Old Testament than in the New, it is theologically consistent with what the New Testament
teaches.
112
Wright, Resurrection, 99-103, 127. Wright notes that in Genesis 3 the future hope is
couched in terms of child-bearing and that the future of the land is a central theme throughout the
OT. This community focus is crucial also to the remnant theme in the Old Testament, which is
grounded on the survival of the people in the face of destructive threats that could destroy the
whole nations future. See Tarsee Li, The Remnant in the Old Testament, 23-25 and Angel
Manuel Rodriguez, Concluding Essay: Gods End-Time Remnant and the Christian Church,
201-202, in Toward a Theology of the Remnant: An Adventist Ecclesiological Perspective, edited
by Angel Manuel Rodriguez, Biblical Research Institute Studies in Adventist Ecclesiology,
volume one (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, 2009).
113
Wright, Resurrection, 116. Resurrection becomes a primary metaphor for the return in
Psalm 16, 49, 73; Isaiah 24-27, 52-53, 66; and Ezekiel 37. See Nickelsburg, ABD, 5: 685.

26
theology. The early church is the child of the resurrection.114 The resurrection in general and the
resurrection of Jesus in particular are absolutely central to the message of the New Testament. 115
It is on account of the resurrection that Jesus the preacher became Jesus the preached.116 We can
understand this theme best when we read the New Testament in the light of the Old Testament
and the way it was understood in the Jewish context of the First Christian century.

The Jewish Context

Christian faith arose in the context of Early Judaism in the Greco-Roman World.117 Jesus
Himself was born and raised as a Jew in the Roman province of Syria/Palestine. The earliest
Christian church was not distinct from the synagogue. Christians and Jews worshiped the same
God, used the same Scriptures, frequented the same temple in Jerusalem and were essentially one
people.118 So it should not surprise us to find out they held a similar view of the resurrection.
It is true that there were a variety of views on life after death within Early Judaism.119 But
114

Edgar Krentz, Images of the Resurrection in the New Testament, Currents in

Theology and Mission 18:2 (April 1991): 98.
115
According to Krentz, twenty one of the twenty seven New Testament books speak
about the resurrection of Jesus. James, Second Thessalonians, Second Peter, Third John, Jude
and Titus do not refer to Jesus resurrection explicitly, although it could be argued that at least
some of them presuppose it. Krentz, 99-100.
116
Krentz, 99, 102.
117
James D. G. Dunn, The Partings of the Ways Between Christianity and Judaism and
their Significance for the Character of Christianity (London: SCM Press, 1991). On the meaning
of the phrase Early Judaism see James Hamilton Charlesworth, The Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha and the New Testament: Prolegomena for the Study of Christian Origins
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 59-62.
118
Dunn, 18-36.
119
Brunt, 365-366; Wright, Resurrection, 129. There were dozens of options, with
different ways of describing similar positions and similar ways of describing different ones. The
more ancient texts we find, the more variety there seems to have been. Immortality of the soul,

27
the standard view among Jews in New Testament times was bodily resurrection of the dead at
the end of the age.120 The view is widespread throughout the centuries preceding and following
the First Century, and was also widespread geographically.121 And the diversity of views within
Judaism did not carry over into Christian belief.122 New Testament Christians, instead,
presupposed standard Jewish beliefs about the resurrection with one main shift of understanding.
In the words of George Nickelsburg: God has begun the eschatological process by raising the
crucified Jesus from the dead.123

for example, was clearly taught by Philo of Alexandria. He believed that the deserving dead
lived on in some kind of non-bodily life. There is archaeological evidence that many other Jews
of his day would have agreed with him, showing that the influence of Plato and other Greek
philosophers was widespread in both Palestine and the diaspora (Ibid., 140-146). The Sadducees,
on the other hand, did not believe in an afterlife at all. See Brueggemann, 33; Benedict T.
Viviano and Justin Taylor, Sadducees, Angels, and Resurrection, Journal of Biblical
Literature 111, no. 3 (Fall 1992): 496-498; and Wright, Resurrection, 131-140. It is possible that
they saw bodily resurrection as a revolutionary doctrine (Ibid., 138), that it had to do with the
coming new age when the present system of things would be overturned, along with their own
privileged position.
120
George Foot Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: The Age of
the Tannaim, three volumes (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1927), 2: 323; Wright,
Resurrection, 146-200. Boyarin and Siegel, (Encyclopedia Judaica, 17: 241) note: The doctrine
of the resurrection of the dead enables righteous souls throughout history to have a share in the
world to come.
121
Wright, Resurrection, 147. Bodily resurrection of the dead is strongly attested in the
martyrdom passages of 2 Maccabees 7 and 14, Ethiopic Enoch and other early apocalypses (see
Ibid., 153-162), the Wisdom of Solomon (Ibid., 162-175), Josephus (Ibid., 175-181), and
Pseudo-Philo 19:12-13, as well as the Mishnah and the Targums (Ibid., 191-200).
The Early Jewish hope of the future resurrection was materialistic, meaning resurrection
with a physical body. Such resurrections occur at the place where a person died, the resurrected
individuals are wearing clothes when they rise, there is a sound of a trumpet and people rise with
their distinctive characteristics, with the exception that anything that was broken in this life is
healed. See summary in Oepke, TDNT, 2: 337.
122
Bockmuehl, 493.
123
Nickelsburg, ABD, 5: 688. As attractive as the idea has been for some scholars, the

28

The Language of Resurrection

There are three main words used to describe bodily resurrection in the New Testament,
egeiro (evgei,rw), anastasis (avna,stasij) and zao (za,w). Anastasis (avna,stasij) is the preferred
noun for resurrection in the New Testament and egeiro is the preferred verb.124 The root meaning
of egeiro (evgei,rw) is to awaken from sleep, to arouse, and, of course, to awaken the
dead.125 All of these meanings are found in the Bible.126 The word is used for resurrections
performed by Jesus during His earthly ministry (Mark 5:41; Luke 7:14; John 12:1, 9, 17) and the
one that occurred in the context of the cross (Matt 27:52). It is also reflected in the Easter stories
(Matt 28:7; Mark 16:6; Luke 24:34; and John 21:14). This word is particularly used by Paul with
reference to the resurrection of believers, but the fact that it is found in parts of Paul that echo
earliest Christian traditions (Phil 2:6-11; Rom 1:3-4; 1 Thess 4:13-14)127 shows that it was part
of the general teaching of the earliest Christian churches.128
The word anastasis is used in a variety of ways in the ancient Greek world. It is applied
to the erection of statues and public structures, expulsion from ones house, arising from sleep in
the morning, and in isolated instances for an uprising or insurrection. Most of these meanings are

dying and rising gods of the ancient world were not the root of Christian belief in the
resurrection, they are not even a true parallel to early Christian belief, instead that belief was
firmly rooted in the Jewish context. See Leclerc, 101; Oepke, TDNT, 2:335-336; Alan F. Segal,
Resurrection, NT, in The New Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, edited by Katherine Doob
Sakenfeld, volume 4 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2006), 772; Tietjen, 96.
124
Oepke, TDNT, 2: 335.
125
Oepke, TDNT, 2: 333-334.
126
Oepke, TDNT, 2: 334.
127
See Nickelsburg, ABD, 5: 688. These texts contain traces of early Christian creedal
formulas, hymns and other traditions.
128
Oepke, TDNT, 2: 336; Nickelsburg, ABD, 5: 688.

29
not found in the New Testament.129 Instead, anastasis became the standard noun with which to
express the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead130 as well as that of those who believe in
Jesus when He returns at the end of the age.131 There is no evidence whatsoever that either egeiro
or anastasis were capable of expressing some sort of non-bodily survival after death.132
Zao (za,w), often shortened to simply zo (zw/), generally means to be alive in a physical
sense.133 By extension in the New Testament it can refer to the glory of the life to come, as in
eternal life, and also with reference to the sanctified life in the present.134 But in the context of
death, the term can be used in an inceptive way as a return to life, another way of describing
resurrection.135
129

Oepke, TDNT, 1: 372.

Acts 1:22; 2:31; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:12; Phil 3:10; 1 Pet 1:3; 3:21. It is not, however,
used in the four gospels to describe Jesus resurrection, instead the verb form (egeiro) is used,
He is risen.
131
John 5:29; 11:24; 1 Cor 15:21; Phil 3:11; Heb 6:2; Rev 20:5-6.
132
Wright, Resurrection, 330.
133
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature,
third edition, revised and edited by Frederick Danker, based on Walter Bauers Griechischdeutsches Woerterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der fruehchristlichen
Literature, sixth edition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 424.
134
Ibid., 425.
135
Ibid., 425. In Revelation 20:4 beheaded martyrs came to life (aorist indicative). In
Matthew 9:18 a ruler expresses faith that if Jesus would put His hand on the mans daughter she
would come to life (future indicative). The word is also used with reference to the resurrection
of Jesus in Mark 16:11; Luke 24:5, 23; and Acts 1:3, among others. According to Danker, zao is
used for resurrection in the New Testament 14 times. So it is not as significant as anastasis and
egeiro, but is frequent enough to be of note. There is also a rare form of the word, anazao
(avnaza,w), which is found in variants of Rev 20:5 with reference to the resurrection at the
eschaton and variants of Rom 14:9 with reference to the resurrection of Christ. See Rudolf
Bultmann, avnaza,w, in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ten volumes, edited by
Gerhard Kittel, translated and edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
1964), 2: 872-873.
130

30

Different Kinds of Resurrection

It may be helpful to begin our discussion of the New Testament evidence with a list of all
the resurrections that are described in it in the order in which they occur.136 First, in point of
time, are the resurrections that occur in the course of Jesus earthly ministry.137 Second are the
resurrections of bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep in the context of Jesus crucifixion
(Matt 27:52, ESV).138 Third is the resurrection of Jesus Himself.139 Fourth are the resurrections
performed by the apostles and reported in the Book of Acts (Acts 9:36-42; 20:7-10). Fifth is the
special resurrection of individuals before the second coming of Christ, so that they might be
witnesses of that event (Rev 1:7). Sixth is the resurrection of the righteous at the beginning of the
millennium (Rev 20:5-6, cf. Luke 14:14; John 5:29; Acts 24:15). And finally there is the
temporary resurrection of the wicked at the end of the millennium (Rev 20:6-10, cf. John 5:28;
Acts 24:15).140
136

Brunt offers a helpful but incomplete list on page 349.

Mark 5:38-43 and parallels; Luke 7:11-17; John 11:38-45, cf. Matt 10:8 and 11:5.
138
In the context of Jesus death and resurrection, the passage makes sense as a
fulfillment of the Old Testament concept of the Day of the Lord. J. Bergman Kline, The Day of
the Lord in the Death and Resurrection of Christ, Journal of the Evangelical Theological
Society 48:4 (December 2005): 757-770. This was, perhaps, also a foretaste of the resurrection of
all the saints. Mary Rose DAngelo, Re-Reading the Resurrection, Toronto Journal of
Theology 16:1 (Summer 2000): 111.
139
David J. Norman, Doubt and the Resurrection of Jesus, Theological Studies 69
(2008): 786-811. Norman offers a thorough discussion of the history of Jesus death and
resurrection. I do not attempt here to review the evidence or arguments regarding the historicity
of the resurrection of Jesus, these are well covered by others. See Peter Stuhlmacher, The
Resurrection of Jesus and the Resurrection of the Dead, translated by Jonathan M. Whitlock, Ex
Auditu 9 (1993): 45-56.
140
Oepke (TDNT, 1: 371) says that the predominant view in the New Testament is that of
a double resurrection, one for the righteous and one for the wicked. Brunt (348-349) notes that
137

31
The core event among the seven is the resurrection of Jesus. All other New Testament
teaching on resurrection is firmly grounded in the resurrection of Jesus.141 This event is
unquestionably attested in three of the four gospels142 and widely referred to in the rest of the
New Testament, particularly in Paul. In the Synoptic Gospels and Acts Jesus is not only the one
who rises from the dead Himself, but He is also the one who raises others from the dead.143 His
resurrection is the first-fruits of the general resurrection (1 Cor 15:20, 23), it is an eschatological
event, the beginning of the end.144 The miracles Jesus did are signs of the messianic age as well
as the resurrection of the dead at the end of the age.145 All Christian hope is based on the
resurrection as there is no natural immortality that human beings can count on.146 Jesus
resurrection inaugurated the final events.
the wicked attack on the city in Rev 20:7-10 indicates their unwillingness to accept Christs rule
despite all evidence. They are then destroyed with Satan. Revelation is the only New Testament
book to be specific about the difference in time between the two resurrections (see Brunt, 355;
Damsteegt, 358).
141
Nickelsburg, ABD, 5: 688-689.
142
Matthew, Luke and John. Although the resurrection of Jesus is announced in Mark
16:6, the earliest manuscripts of Mark end at 16:8 without a clear description of Jesus
resurrection or post-resurrection appearances. Later manuscripts include such in verses 9-20, the
originality of which is uncertain on the basis of the textual evidence. See also Edward Robinson,
The Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord, Bibliotheca Sacra 150 no. 597 (January - March,
1993): 9-34.
143
Brunt, 347, 352-353. Christs resurrection assures believers that all the promises of
God are reliable, even after death.
144
Brunt, 347-348; Oepke, TDNT, 1: 371.
145
Oepke, TDNT, 2: 335.
146
Brunt, 347-350.

32
The Resurrection Body
What kind of body will resurrected believers have?147 Will it be identical to the present
body except in its perfection or will there be differences? To answer these questions it is helpful
to begin with what the New Testament says about the resurrected body of Jesus.148 Jesus
appeared to His disciples a number of times over a period of 40 days after the resurrection (Acts
1:3; 1 Cor 15:5-8), but these appearances tended to be brief and often began and ended
abruptly.149 What can we learn about Jesus resurrected body from these appearances?
In some ways Jesus body seems to have been different than it was before His death and
resurrection.150 Jesus either passed through walls to enter a room in John 20:19 or He entered the
room invisibly when the door was open. In Luke 24:31 He vanishes suddenly out of sight while
sitting at the dinner table.151 He is recognizable but not easily recognized (Luke 24; John 20:15;
21:4).152 He lifts off the ground and ascends up into the clouds (Luke 24:51; Acts 1:9-11).153 So
His resurrected body seems to have had powers that were either not available before or that He
did not choose to exercise before.
147

This direct question is asked in 1 Corinthians 15:35. Pauls lengthy answer to the
question is found in verses 36-57. See Benjamin L. Gladd, The Last Adam as the Life-Giving
Spirit Revisited: A Possible Old Testament Background of One of Pauls Most Perplexing
Phrases, Westminster Theological Journal 71 (2009): 304-305 and pages following above.
148
In fact, the resurrected body of the believer will be like the resurrected body of Jesus.
See Wright, Resurrection, 341, 348.
149
Brunt, 361.
150
Gerald OCollins, Resurrection and New Creation, Dialogue 38:1 (Winter 1999): 16;
Segal, NIDB, 4: 772. Paul seems to address this in 1 Cor 15:40-42.
151
Segal, NIDB, 4: 773-774.
152
Raymond E. Brown, The Resurrection in John 20 A Series of Diverse Reactions,
Worship 64:3 (May 1990): 199-200; Leclerc, 104; Eugene Peterson, Resurrection Breakfast:
John 20:1-14, Journal for Preachers 25 (3, 2002): 15.
153
Leclerc, 104.

33
But the emphasis in the gospels is on continuity rather than discontinuity.154 Both Luke
and John seem eager to demonstrate that the resurrected body of Jesus was not a phantom or
disembodied spirit, but was as real as the body He had lived in before the crucifixion.155 Jesus
voice was recognizable and it was possible to hold onto Him (John 20:16-17). The scars in His
hands could be seen and it was possible to touch them (John 20:20, 27).156 He did physical tasks
like cooking breakfast (John 21:9-12).157 While the disciples on the road to Emmaus did not
recognize Him at first, Luke explains that it was because they were kept from recognizing Him
(Luke 24:16). Jesus even ate in their presence (Luke 24:43). But the strongest support for
continuity is in verses 36-39 where the idea that Jesus was some sort of disembodied spirit is
explicitly rejected.158 After the resurrection, it is the same Jesus, but His body has been
transformed.159
For the believer, likewise, there is continuity and discontinuity between the present body
and the glorified, resurrection body.160 The discontinuity can be summed up in one basic fact: the
earthly body is mortal, it is subject to the law of sin and death, the great enemy. The resurrected
body of the believer, on the other hand, participates in Christs victory over death and is
immortal.161
The passage that most directly addresses this continuity and discontinuity is 1 Corinthians
154

Segal, NIDB, 4: 773-774. Welker (464-474) argues more for discontinuity.

Brunt, 361; Charles H. Talbert, The Place of the Resurrection in the Theology of
Luke, Interpretation 46:1 (January 1992): 24-25.
156
Segal, NIDB, 4: 773.
157
Leclerc, 104.
158
Brunt, 361; Segal, NIDB, 4: 774; Talbert, 24-25.
159
Leclerc, 104.
160
Bovon, 401; Brunt, 361.
161
Brunt, 361.
155

34
15:35-50.162 Paul there uses an analogy to describe the similarities and differences between the
present earthly body and the glorious resurrected body. The earthly body is like a seed, which
when buried in the ground comes forth a plant (1 Cor 15:37, 42-44). There is continuity between
a seed and a plant, but there is also discontinuity. Note how Paul works out the analogy in verses
42-44 and 47-49.163
The earthly body is sown perishable, but raised imperishable. It is sown in dishonor, but
raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, but raised in power. It is sown a natural body, or as the
Greek brings out, soul-like; it is raised a spiritual body, or spirit-like.164 The first body is
related to the first Adam, the man of the dust, the resurrected body is related to the second
162

Note the second question in verse 35. Conzelmann focuses mainly on the
discontinuities in this passage. Han Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians: A Commentary on the First
Epistle to the Corinthians, translated by James W. Leitch, in Hermeneia A Critical and
Historical Commentary on the Bible, edited by Frank Moore Cross (Minneapolis: Fortress Press,
1975), 280-288.
163
Brunt (362) is particularly helpful here. But see also Conzelmann, 282-283; Stephen
Hultgren, The Origin of Pauls Doctrine of the Two Adams in 1 Corinthians 15.45-49, Journal
for the Study of the New Testament 25 (3, 2003): 366-370.
164
Paul clarifies the terms soul-like and spirit-like in verse 45. He chose the term
soul-like from Genesis 2:7, where the original Adam was made from the dust of the ground
and became a living soul when the breath of God entered him. So soul in verse 44 represents
the whole person, not just the mind or consciousness. The spirit-like resurrected body reflects
the second Adam, who is a life-giving spirit. So the two bodies are compared and contrasted
along the lines of the two Adams. Paul follows up the reference to two Adams by speaking of the
man of the dust (or earth) in verses 47-49, a further reference to Genesis 2. The concept of a
spiritual body would be a complete contradiction in a Platonic view of the immortality of the
soul. Segal, NIDB, 4: 772.
The concept of spiritual body is clearly not intended to express the material in which it
is made. In Greek adjectives ending in -ikos have ethical or functional meanings rather than
referring to the material of which something is made. See Wright, Resurrection, 351-352.
For a detailed analysis of the allusions to Genesis 2:7 and 5:3 in 1 Corinthians 15:45 see
Gladd, 305-308.

35
Adam, the man from heaven. What is different about the resurrected body is precisely its
shedding of human mortality.165 It is no more subject to death (Rom 6:9). It is no more
vulnerable to dishonor and weakness.166
Does Pauls contrast between the natural body and the spiritual body imply that the
resurrected bodies of believers are no longer material or physical as they were before? The
analogy of the seed and the plant argues strongly against this. The resurrected body is spiritual,
not in the sense of being disembodied or non-physical, but in the sense that it is no longer subject
to death.167 The new body is freed from all the imperfections that result from sin, but it remains
physical and material as it was before.168 This is confirmed by the nature of Jesus resurrected
body, which had powers and qualities that transcended His previous body yet was undeniably
physical in that He could be seen, touched, heard and was able to handle food and eat it.169

The Meaning of the Resurrection of Jesus

The disciples were initially puzzled by both the death and the resurrection of Jesus. But
165

Wright, Resurrection, 360-361.

Tietjen, 96-97. Why then does Paul say in 1 Corinthians 15:50 that flesh and blood
cannot inherit the kingdom of God? Wright (Resurrection, 359) suggests that flesh and blood
have here their ordinary meaning of corruptible, decaying human existence in contrast to the
transformed, incorruptible body after the resurrection. It is not an expression of the material in
contrast with immaterial.
167
Brunt, 348. According to Krentz (108), since Christ was clearly raised bodily in the
material sense, the resurrection of believers will also be bodily. The soul-like body is
characterized by the sensual appetite of the original Adam after sin. The resurrection body will
be spiritual, not in an immaterial sense, but in the sense that it is characterized by the Spirit.
168
Conzelmann, 283; MClintock and Strong, 1054-1055; Alan G. Padgett, The Body in
Resurrection: Science and Scripture on the Spiritual Body (1 Cor 15:35-58), Word and World
22:2 (Spring 2002): 162.
169
Bockmuehl (496) and Wright (Resurrection, 477) use the word transphysical to
describe the resurrection body.
166

36
over time they came to realize that these two events together were the decisive key to
understanding who Jesus is and what He accomplished by His earthly ministry. Careful,
exegetical attention to texts that interpret the resurrection reveal a trajectory in their
understanding that can also help todays readers to take meaning from that event.
1) The Resurrection as Revelation. In Luke-Acts the death of Jesus was portrayed as a
travesty of justice.170 It would have been easy for the disciples to draw from this that Jesus life
and death were ordinary and meaningless. But the resurrection revealed Gods reversal of these
human verdicts, and made the guilt of those who condemned him publically evident.171 It was
now clear that Jesus innocence was not only affirmed by earthly authorities but also by God
Himself,172 and that He had authority and dignity of the highest order.173 It is at the resurrection
that Jesus is revealed without question to be more than a mere man.
2) Resurrection as Enthronement. The earliest stages of Christian theological thinking are
170

See Krentz, 100-101. At the end of Jesus trial there is no pronouncement of guilt
(Luke 22:71 in contrast to Matt 26:65-66 and Mark 14:64). Instead, Pilate pronounces Jesus
innocent three times (Luke 23:4, 14, 22) and claims that Herod agrees with that verdict (23:15),
One of the criminals crucified with Jesus also testifies to His innocence (23:41), as does the
Roman centurion stationed at the cross (23:47). Nevertheless, Pilate gives in to the clamor of the
crowd and surrenders Jesus to them (23:23-25). The sermons in Acts underline the point. Jesus
was disowned and betrayed by the Jewish leaders even though many of them knew that God
was with Him, and they made league with Gentile leadership to kill him unjustly (Acts 2:22-24;
3:13-15; 5:30-31; 7:52-53).
171
See the texts in Acts referenced in the previous note. See also Krentz, 100.
172
The trial of Jesus was a miscarriage of justice which was corrected by Gods act of
resurrection. This interpretation of the crucifixion and resurrection would have made a lot of
sense in the Roman world, to which Luke was writing. See Krentz, 101; Wolfhart Pannenberg,
A Theology of the Cross, Word and World 8:2 (Spring 1988): 170.
173
Krentz, 100-101, 105-106. Through the resurrection, Jesus is revealed as the Jewish
Messiah (Acts 2:36, see also Tietjen, 98), who is exalted to the right hand of God, (Acts 2:25,
33-36; 5:31; 7:55-56), and who was raised by the creative power of God. In a sense the

37
directly witnessed in the hymns cited by Paul.174 These early hymns emphasize how the
resurrection leads to the enthronement of Christ.175 In Philippians 2:6-11, Jesus went so low in
His death that His exaltation to the highest place seems all the greater.176 In Colossians 1:18
the firstborn of the dead is now pre-eminent over all things.177 The impact of Jesus
enthronement was at least twofold in the ancient world.178 He brought victory over the spiritual

resurrection of Jesus is the ultimate act of creation.

174
Colossians 3:16 describes the early hymns as the account of the Messiah (~O lo,goj
tou/ cristou/). Hymns in the New Testament can be detected by a number of features
benchmarked by ancient standards of song-writing. They open with a relative pronoun that has
no antecedent. The lines of the hymn may have cadence, parallels in thought and grammatical
structure (as in the antithetical datives at the end of each line in 1 Timothy 3:16), and sometimes
end rhymes. See Krentz, 101. Among the better known early Christian hymns embedded in the
New Testament are Philippians 2:6-11, Colossians 1:15-20 and 1 Timothy 3:16.
175
Krentz (101) notes that 1 Timothy 3:16 is formed along the lines of ancient
enthronement rituals. There are six lines, each beginning with a verb that rhymes with all the
others. To quote Krentz regarding 1 Timothy 3:16: The first two lines [of the hymnic portion of
the verse] assert that the subject is elevated to the status of ruler in heaven and on earth. Lines
three and four describe his public presentation by his appearance in heaven to the angels and his
proclamation (in missionary preaching) to the nations of the world. Lines five and six present the
response of those ruled: he is accepted in the universe by faith, he is installed as Kosmokrator
(Lord of the cosmos) in heaven.
176
While the death of Jesus Christ is mentioned in the text, the crosss salvific meaning is
not mentioned. The emphasis, rather, is on the voluntary and humble nature of Jesus human
experience (Phil 2:6-8) as the background to His exaltation in verses 9-11. In some sense God
exalts Jesus to an even higher place than He had before He humbled Himself. Philippians 2:9-11
is, along with Revelation 5, the clearest description of what the phrase Jesus is Lord meant to
the early church. The allusion to Isaiah 45:23 includes Jesus Christ in everything the Old
Testament attributes to Yahweh.
177
The all things (pa/sin) in this text means the entire universe. As the first born over
all creation (Col 1:15, NIV), the Son is the agent of God who created all things and the one who
reconciles all things and makes peace in the universe (Col 1:15-20).
178
Beside the hymns in the New Testament and the seated at the right hand of God
motif (see notes 174 and 175), there are other significant enthronement texts. In Mark 14:61-62
the High Priest asks if Jesus is the Messiah. Jesus reply combines Daniel 7:13-14 (the son of

38
powers179 that the ancients feared and which controlled their lives. And He demonstrated the
emptiness of the Roman Emperors claims to be lord and savior over this world.180 The
resurrection of Jesus is the key to early Christian belief and experience.
3) Resurrection as First Fruits. Since the resurrection of Jesus was Gods creative act in
the power of the Holy Spirit, and that Spirit now dwells in the believer, Romans 8 asserts that the
God who raised Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit
(Rom 8:11). The resurrection of Jesus enables us to live in the Spirit. And the life we now have
in the Spirit is an advance payment on the resurrection we will have in the future.181 Both the
resurrection of Jesus and the advance payment of the Spirit are called first fruits in the New
Testament.182

Resurrection Power in the Present

The concept of first fruits indicates that the resurrection of Jesus has greater implications

man coming with the clouds) with Psalm 110:1ff., which speaks of the enthronement of a king
(sit at my right hand). Matthew includes the same incident and statement (Matt 26:64) but
expands on its significance by describing the death of Jesus as an eschatological event (27:50-53)
which brings Jesus into total authority over all creation (28:18-20). See Krentz, 103-104.
179
Things visible and things invisible (Col 1:16). See Krentz, 102.
180
Krentz, 104-105; Tietjen, 98. The Christian phrase Jesus is Lord (Acts 10:36; Phil
2:11) stood in stark contrast to Caesar is Lord. In First Thessalonians 1:9-10 it is the one who
was raised from the dead that rescues His people from the wrath that is to come. And in
Philippians 3, it is on account of the resurrection of Jesus (3:8-11) that believers can look to Him
as the Savior (another title of the Roman Emperor) who is the Lord enthroned in the heavens
(3:20).
181
Krentz, 106.
182
First Corinthians 15:20-23 speaks of the death and resurrection of Jesus as a
firstfruits of all those who have fallen asleep. See the section on First Corinthians 15 on
pages 44-46 below. Romans 8:23, on the other hand, speaks of the believers experience as a
firstfruits of the Holy Spirit.

39
than merely a promise of future, bodily life. The power of the resurrection also impacts the
believers present existence.183 The resurrection of Jesus is not just another story, it is the
underlying reality to which all stories point.184 In pointing to the ultimate resurrection, the
resurrection of Jesus changes everything about the world we live in today.185 According to
Romans 6:3-14, those who die with Christ in baptism are united with Him also in His
resurrection. This brings resurrection power into the present life of the believer. This theme is
also found in Ephesians 2:3-7 where believers are, as it were, raised up into heavenly places in
Christ. There is power to live a new life, power to change and a new meaning and purpose to
existence (2 Cor 5:15).186
183

Wright, Resurrection, 373.

Keller, 228.
185
Keller, 222 and Robert H. Smith, (W)right Thinking on the Resurrection? Dialogue
43:3 (Fall 2004): 251. Resurrection tells us that ordinary life is good, it is worth preserving. But
Keller points out that the problem with ordinary life is that it is always going away or falling
apart. Death, disease and violence are hard to take because we think this broken world is the only
world we will ever have. But when we realize that this is not the only world, the only body we
will ever have, that someday we will have a perfect body and an eternal life, it no longer matters
what other people think or what they do to us. You can face the worst that life throws at you with
joy and hope. When we see that Jesus has broken the boundaries of death and that his death and
resurrection somehow include us all, our perspective on death and tragedy changes. Peace in the
midst of the storm is really possible.
I would go even a step further. The same divine power that raised Jesus from the dead is
more than sufficient to transform even this life in tangible and miraculous ways. Through the
Holy Spirit, resurrection power is unleashed within this age and within this life. As we focus our
attention on the death and resurrection of Jesus, the power of the resurrection becomes real in the
present. See Jon Paulien, Meet God Again for the First Time (Hagerstown, MD: Review and
Herald Publishing Association, 2003), 137-159.
186
Brunt, 352. Note Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, (Mountain View, CA: Pacific
Press, 1911), pages 209-210: The Sadducees held that there would be no resurrection of the
body; but Jesus tells them that one of the greatest works of His Father is raising the dead, and
that He Himself has power to do the same work (John 5:25). The Pharisees believed in the
184

40
This present aspect to the resurrection is particularly the focus in the Gospel of John,
renowned for its emphasis on realized eschatology.187 In John 5:19-29, Jesus contrasts two kinds
of resurrection. There is the eschatological resurrection, the hour is coming, in which both
righteous and wicked are raised to different fates (John 5:28-29).188 But there is also a present,
spiritual resurrection, the hour is coming and now is, in which eternal life becomes a present
reality for those who believe in Jesus (verses 24-25).189 Those living in this present reality are
described as having passed over from death to life (verse 24 present tense).190 While the

resurrection of the dead. Christ declares that even now the power which gives life to the dead is
among them, and they are to behold its manifestation. This same resurrection power is that which
gives life to the soul dead in trespasses and sins. Eph 2:1. That spirit of life in Christ Jesus, the
power of His resurrection, sets men free from the law of sin and death. Phil. 3:10; Rom.
8:2.The dominion of evil is broken, and through faith the soul is kept from sin. He who opens his
heart to the Spirit of Christ becomes a partaker of that mighty power which shall bring forth his
body from the grave.
187
Jon Paulien, John: Jesus Gives Life to a New Generation, Abundant Life Bible
Amplifier (Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1995), 123: The Gospel of John seems to have little interest
in the future end of the world. Instead, it asserts that what others view as a future reality has
become a present reality in the work of Christ. This is not to say, however, that John is
completely uninterested in future eschatology, as a number of texts make clear (John 5:28-29;
6:39, 40, 44, 54; 12:48; 14:1-3). See ibid., 124-125; Brunt, 354-355. Nickelsburg (ABD, 5: 690)
points out that there are two sets of Johannine texts that stand in tension with the general
emphasis on present eschatology; texts that assert the resurrection of Jesus Himself before He
ascended to heaven (John 20:19-23), and texts that speak about a future resurrection and
universal judgment on the basis of deeds (John 5 and 6 texts quoted above)..
188
Haenchen agrees that this passage refers to bodily resurrection at the end of time but
argues that it is a later insertion into the gospel intended to correct the absence of such a
perspective in the gospel actually written by John. He believes the original author of the gospel
had no concept of a future bodily resurrection. Ermst Haenchen, John 1: A Commentary on the
Gospel of John Chapters 1-6, translated by Robert W. Funk, in Hermeneia A Critical and
Historical Commentary on the Bible, edited by Frank Moore Cross (Minneapolis: Fortress Press,
1984), 253-254.
189
Haenchen, John 1, 252.
190
Paulien, John, 120-122.

41
language is different from Romans 6 or Ephesians 2, the essential meaning is the same.191 Faith
in Gods power to raise the dead is an important component of life-transforming faith in the
present.192 The two resurrections are also intertwined in John 6:54: He who eats my flesh and
drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. We will have more to
say about the practical implications of belief in the resurrection in the next major section of this
paper.
Major New Testament Resurrection Texts193
John 11:20-27194
In this passage Jesus proclaims that he is the resurrection and the life (11:25). He then
uses the resurrection of Lazarus as an acted parable to demonstrate the assertion (38-45).195 At
the time of the resurrection Lazarus has been in the tomb for four days. This was proof to the
Jewish onlookers that it was a genuine resurrection. Jews of the time believed that resuscitation
of a corpse is only possible in the three days after death.196
This passage demonstrates that the Christian hope transcended the beliefs of Judaism at
the time. Marthas statement in verse 24: I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the
191

Brunt, 354. Oepke argues that in Romans 6 the resurrection is already a present
possession for believers, although the future resurrection is the primary emphasis in Paul. Oepke,
TDNT, 1: 371.
192
Brunt, 357. Notice the interplay between the two in the eleventh chapter of the Book of
Hebrews.
193
For a review of the resurrection texts in the Book of Revelation see Beate Kowalski,
Martyrdom and Resurrection in the Revelation to John, Andrews University Seminary Studies
41 (1, 2003): 55-64.
194
For more detail on this passage see Paulien, John, 186-187.
195
Paulien, John, 89-90.
196
Paulien, John, 185.

42
last day," was perfectly in harmony with Jewish belief.197 But Jesus had something more to
reveal to her. What she did not yet know was that Jesus Himself was the basis of her hope in the
resurrection. Beyond that, resurrection is more than a future event, it is a living hope made real
through the personal presence of Jesus.198 This living presence renders the present kind of death
as of no consequence.199
This explains the meaning of John 11:26, where Jesus says that those who believe in Him
will never die.200 We see believers dying all the time. Did Jesus mean that the body dies, but the
soul continues to live in Christ? Here is where the dialogue between Jesus and His disciples in
verses 11-16 of this chapter becomes instructive. For Jesus the death that believers die is not
really death, it is only temporary like sleep (11-14). Though believers may sleep like Lazarus,
they will never die in the ultimate sense. Death need not be feared any longer. Believers may
sleep but they will never truly die.

1 Corinthians 15:12-26
197

Ernst Haenchen, John 2: A Commentary on the Gospel of John Chapters 7-21,

translated by Robert W. Funk with Ulrich Busse, in Hermeneia A Critical and Historical
Commentary on the Bible, edited by Frank Moore Cross (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1984), 62.
198
Brunt, 354. In the Gospel of John, the evangelist goes to great pains to show that the
second generation of Christians, those who had never experienced the physical presence of Jesus,
were at no disadvantage in comparison with those who had. In John the miracles of Jesus did not
require His physical presence. Water turned to wine in another part of the house than where
Jesus was. The noblemans son was healed 16 miles away. Jesus does not offer the paralytic His
hand, the man gets up on his own. The blind man is healed at the Pool of Siloam, 1200 yards
from the place where Jesus spoke to him. Jesus does not touch Lazarus but calls to him. In this
way the Gospel shows that Jesus word is as good as His presence. Through the Holy Spirit
believers have as much access to Jesus miraculous, resurrection power as those who
experienced His physical presence. See Paulien, John, 19-23. See also Brunt, 355.
199
Brunt, 354-355.
200
Brunt, 355.

43
In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul begins by affirming that the death and resurrection of Jesus
Christ is of first importance to the gospel (15:1-4).201 The language there clearly indicates that
this is a bodily resurrection after a burial.202 Then in verse 12 he gets to the main point at issue.
Some individuals related to the Corinthian Church were saying that there is no resurrection of the
dead.203 Pauls response makes clear that Christian faith is an integral package that includes both
Christs resurrection and the believers resurrection, and that the two resurrections are of the
same kind.204 If any part of the package is removed, all is lost.205 Without the resurrection,
preaching is vain (15:14), faith is futile, and we are all still in our sins (verse 17). Any other view
of things fails to reach beyond this world (1 Cor 15:18-19).206
201

Kirk R. MacGregor, I Corinthians 15:3B-6A, 7 and the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus,

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society (June 2006): 225-234. MacGregor affirms the
above in interaction with scholars who believe First Corinthians 15:3-7 affirms a spiritual rather
than bodily resurrection for Jesus.
First Corinthians 15:11 (ESV) summarizes the earlier verses with so we preach and so
you believed. The key to the gospel is four lines in verses 3-5, each beginning with that (o[ti),
which express the following: Christ died, He was buried, He was raised and He appeared. The
first and the third lines are accompanied by according to the Scriptures, so they seem to be the
key concepts. The fact that He was buried (line two) proves that He actually died. The fact that
He appeared to many (line four) proves that He was raised. So the key assertions of this passage
are that Jesus died (first line) and that he was raised from the dead (third line). This is the essence
of the gospel and no one can rightly understand the death and resurrection of Jesus unless one
uses the Hebrew Scriptures to interpret them (Krentz, 107). The essence of the gospel is the
death and resurrection of Jesus.
202
Wright, Resurrection, 317-329.
203
It is impossible to say exactly what motivated this kind of thinking, it is possible that
the Corinthians were influenced by an early type of Gnostic thinking. See Brunt, 350.
204
Conzelmann, 265; Wright, Resurrection, 332.
205
Brunt, 350.
206
Conzelmann, 266. And it is clear in First Corinthians 15 that Paul has bodily
resurrection in mind, not just any kind of post-mortem existence. See Jerry L. Sumney, PostMortem Existence and Resurrection of the Body in Paul, Horizons in Biblical Theology 31

44
In verse 20 Paul asserts unequivocally that Jesus was in fact raised from the dead. This
was not a solitary act, but is bound up with the believers hope for the resurrection. Christ is the
first fruits, so His resurrection is the assurance of more resurrections to come (verses 22-23). As
such He is the counterpart of Adam (15:22), His actions affect the whole human race.207 Christs
resurrection involves a victory, not only over death, but over every power and authority that
troubles life here on earth (25-27).208 The resurrections of Jesus and the believer are here tied
together theologically.209

2 Corinthians 5:1-10
The Greek words for resurrection do not appear in 2 Corinthians 5:1-10, yet this
passage is clearly relevant for our purpose.210 Paul is contrasting the earthly tent of our present
humanity with the building from God that is our future hope.211 One could infer that Paul is
here supporting the idea of the immortality of the soul. For example, he refers to the body as an
earthly tent. He also speaks about being away from the Lord in the present body (2 Cor 5:6)
and the future presence with the Lord as being away from the body, as if it were something

(2009): 13-16.
207
Krentz, 108. We will have a lot more to say about Adam a little later, from page 57
through the end of the paper.
208
Greidanus detects an allusion to Genesis 3:15 in verse 25. This would extend the
reference to Adam typology. Sidney Greidanus,Preaching Christ from the Narrative of the Fall,
Bibliotheca Sacra 161 July-Sept 2004): 264.
209
Brunt, 351.
210
Marvin Pate sees this passage as relevant, not only for the issue of resurrection, but
also with relation to Adam Christology, the topic of the last section of this paper. Scott
Hafemann, Review of C. Marvin Pate, Adam Christology as the Exegetical and Theological
Substructure of 2 Corinthians 4:7 - 5:21 (Lanham, MD/New York: University Press of America,
1991) in Journal of Biblical Literature 113:2 (Summer 1994): 346-347.
211
Brunt, 351.

45
that could be lightly discarded (2 Cor 5:8). But there are a number of problems with imputing an
immortality of the soul conclusion on Paul.
For one thing, nowhere does Paul speak of a soul or of any existence distinct from the
body. There is no hint of a division of humans into two parts.212 He speaks of the earthly tent as
being destroyed rather than separated from the soul. Paul does not desire a state of nakedness,
which is what he would feel like without the earthly tent. If the intermediate state were conscious
existence of the soul with Christ, why would he reject such a condition?213 But Paul does not
wish to be unclothed, he wishes to be further clothed, and that will occur at the resurrection,
which becomes clear later on in the chapter (2 Cor 5:15)214 and echos the language of the latter
part of 1 Corinthians 15, where mortality gives way to immortality only at the return of Christ.215
So the heavenly building of 2 Corinthians 5:4-5 must refer to the believers glorious
resurrection body, which replaces the mortal body (the earthly tent) at the parousia.216 Pauls
focus in 2 Corinthians 5 is not an intermediate state for part of his person, but the ultimate fate of
his person as an embodied whole. Unlike his earthly tent, his future body will be eternal.217

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18
The earliest reference to the resurrection of Jesus in the New Testament is probably the
212

H. Wheeler Robinson, The Christian Doctrine of Man, third edition (Edinburgh: T & T
Clark, 1934).
213
Sumney, 21-23.
214
In 2 Corinthians 5:15 the language of resurrection is clearly used (tw/| u`pe.r
auvtw/n avpoqano,nti kai. evgerqe,nti).
215
Brunt, 351-352; Wright, Resurrection, 364.
216
Pate, 121, as summarized in Hafemann, 347.
217
Calvin J. Roetzel, As Dying, and Behold We Live: Death and Resurrection in Pauls
Theology, Interpretation 46, no. 1 (January 1992): 15. Eschatological expectations frame the

46
one in First Thessalonians 4:13-14.218 Its seems the Thessalonian believers were ignorant
regarding the fate of loved ones who had died since they were converted (4:13).219 In verse 14
Paul seeks to solve that problem by drawing a parallel between the death and resurrection of
Jesus and the death and resurrection of the believer.220 If Jesus was raised from the dead, those
who believe in Him will also be raised.221 Paul does not say that the deceased ones are conscious,
or in some sense alive.222 Instead he says that they are asleep and will remain so until the
resurrection of the dead when Christ will return (verses 15-16).223 There is a future hope for the

entire letter of First Thessalonians (1:10; 5:10, 23). See Humphrey, 331-332.
218
Leclerc, 101. On First Thessalonians as the first New Testament book to be written,
see D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo and Leon Morris, An Introduction to the New Testament
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 293-294, 347-348; Bart D. Ehrman,
The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, fourth edition
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), 309; Helmut Koester, Introduction to the New
Testament volume two: History and Literature of Early Christianity, Hermeneia Foundations
and Facets Series, edited by Robert W. Funk (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982), 112; Werner
Georg Kuemmel, Introduction to the New Testament, revised edition, translated by Howard
Clark Kee (Nashville: Abingdon, 1975), 257-260; Abraham J. Malherbe, The Letters to the
Thessalonians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, The Anchor Bible, edited
by William Foxwell Albright and David Noel Freedman, volume 32B (New York: Doubleday,
2000), 75.
The passage in 1 Thessalonians 4 is very closely paralleled in Pauls later statement in 1
Corinthians 15:23. See Wright, Resurrection, 337.
219
Malherbe, 264. After looking at several options in the literature, P. H. R. Van
Houwelingen (The Great Reunion: The Meaning and Significance of the Word of the Lord in
1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, Calvin Theological Journal 42 [2007]: 311-312) suggests that the
Thessalonians lack of familiarity with the idea of bodily resurrection led them to misunderstand
Pauls initial teaching.
220
van Houwelingen, 313: The resurrection of the dead is anchored in the resurrection of
Jesus. See also page 317.
221
Humphrey, 333; Malherbe, 266.
222
Brunt, 349.
223
Sleep, of course, was a widespread ancient euphemism for death. See F. F. Bruce, 1 &
2 Thessalonians, Word Biblical Commentary, edited by David A. Hubbard and Glenn W.

47
dead, along with those who are alive when Jesus comes.
But what does Paul mean when he says that God will bring with him those who have
fallen asleep (verse 14)?224 Some read this as saying that those who have died in Christ (and
supposedly went to heaven at death) will return with Jesus when he comes. But this
interpretation contradicts Pauls own teaching that the resurrection of dead believers occurs at
the Second Coming, not before.225 In verse 14 Paul is not saying that God brings the dead
Christians down to earth when Jesus comes, instead He brings them back up from the ground
through Jesus!226
This fits the earlier model in verse 14. Jesus rose from the dead, then ascended to heaven,
it was not the other way around. So it is with the believer. We are raised from the dead and only
then are carried up to heaven. It is only then that the saints are with the Lord. If people went to
heaven when they died, they wouldnt need to ascend at the Second Coming.
But there is more. If Paul taught the Thessalonians that the dead believers were already in
heaven, why were they grieving like those who had no hope?227 If the problem was their
ignorance of that fact, why didnt Paul tell them? Paul, therefore, clearly did not believe that the
saints go to heaven when they die. Instead he comforted the Thessalonians by telling them that

Barker, volume 45, (Waco, Texas: Word Books, Publisher, 1982), 95; van Houwelingen, 310.
224
The Greek word for bring (a;gw) can also mean take. The only way to translate
correctly is by observing the context. See Danker, 16-17.
225
Robert Jewett, The Thessalonian Correspondence: Pauline Rhetoric and Millenarian
Piety, HermeneiaFoundations and Facets Series, edited by Robert W. Funk (Philadelphia:
Fortress Press, 1986), 94-96.
226
Humphrey, 332-333.
227
Sumney (20) points out that Paul comforts the Thessalonians with a resurrection at the
Second Coming, he makes no mention of an intermediate state. The passage refers to an
extinction followed by a re-creation of those who died.

48
when Jesus comes they will be reunited with those they have loved.228

Practical Implications of the Biblical Doctrine of Resurrection

The concluding question that should haunt all efforts at theology is, What difference does
it make? So the Bible teaches the resurrection, so what? What are some practical implications of
the Bibles teaching on this subject? How does the study of the resurrection make us better
persons than we would otherwise be? I here turn to some practical implications of the biblical
doctrine of the resurrection.

Community
We noticed in our survey of the Old Testament material that the earliest intimations of
resurrection were all related to the community. Resurrection language in Hosea, Isaiah and
Ezekiel spoke first to the restoration of the community and only second to the physical
restoration of the bodies of Israels saints. Thus, it should not surprise us if one of the most
powerful implications of the resurrection has to do with restoration of Gods people as a
community.
People die one at a time, in the process being separated from their community. According
to belief in the immortality of the soul, that individualism continues in the afterlife. Believers go
to heaven one by one after death in isolation from their earthly community. This teaching fits
with our Western individualism. But the writers of the Bible could not conceive of fellowship
with God apart from community.229 Christ is the head of the body and partnership with Him
228

The Thessalonians had feared that at the Second Coming the living would leave the
dead behind. See van Houwelingen, 312, 324.
229
Brunt, 363.

49
includes fellowship with the community of believers.
The doctrine of resurrection underlines the corporate nature of biblical thought. In the
words of John Brunt, This corporate nature of participation with Christ is much clearer when
the NT concept of resurrection, as opposed to the notion of the immortality of the soul, is
understood. It means that all receive the final reward together as community.230 According to
Hebrews 11, the great saints of the Old Testament have not yet received their final reward, but
God had foreseen something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect.
Heb 11:40.
The resurrection from the dead, consequently, is not individualistic, but involves the
restoration of the whole community.231 The righteous dead all rise up together, and those alive
receive translation at the same time. We die individually, but we rise up together.232 All enjoy the
blessings of eternity together.233 So true and full community in eternity requires that the
resurrection come first! And the purpose of the resurrection is to restore the community.

Attitude Toward Life and Death

The doctrine of resurrection also affects our attitude toward both life and death.
230

Brunt, 363.
Lucas, 303-304. In the words of John Goldingay, [Resurrection] happens to
individuals, but it does not happen to them individually. . . it is not the means of them enjoying
individual bliss, but of them having a share in the new life and glory of the people of God. See
John E. Goldingay, Daniel, Word Biblical Commentary Series, edited by David A. Hubbard and
Glenn W. Barker (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1989), 318.
232
In First Thessalonians 4:17 the key theme is togetherness. The dead are raised to rejoin
the living believers. And they rise up into the air together to meet Jesus there. It is only then that
they are together with the Lord.
233
Sakae Kubo, God Meets Man: A Theology of the Sabbath and Second Advent
(Nashville: Southern Publishing Association, 1978), 136.
231

50
Immortality of the soul scorns the value of the human body and the physical world, seeking
something better in the absence of the flesh. In the process, there is a subtle pride. If immortality
is something I possess inherently, then I have significance in my own right. Resurrection, on the
other hand, puts all significance in the capacity of God to recreate us from inanimate material. In
other words, resurrection puts the focus on God while immortality puts the focus on us. All the
glory goes to God rather than us.234 But while resurrection affirms the humble status of human
beings in relation to God, it also affirms the goodness and importance of the present created
order. God does not abandon His creation, the substance of hope lies within creation, not beyond
it.235 In simpler terms, according to the Bible, physical life is good.236
Believers nourished in the biblical world view, therefore, have a realistic attitude toward
life and work in the present world. Some Christians, looking forward to the future world, become
apathetic about this one. But the life-affirming nature of the resurrection hope compels us to
work for the good of others in the here and now.237 But this tension between the now and the not
yet also provides a strong dose of realism.238 Adventist Christians know that our work in the
234

Brueggemann, 33.
Wright, Resurrection, 86-87. Ellen White states that the resurrection body will be
recognizable, affirming the value of the present body and of human activity in this life. The
Desire of Ages, 804.
236
Brunt, 364.
237
Brunt, 364-365.
238
There have always been two different types of Adventism. Both are grounded in the
Scriptures and nourished by the Spirit of Prophecy. Yet we have never been able to fully
integrate the two. On the one hand, Seventh-day Adventism is an apocalyptic faith, drawing its
identity from the remnant of Revelation and the book Great Controversy, seeking to live apart
from the world and preserving its moral and theological boundaries in the face of other faiths and
many outside challenges. On the other hand, Seventh-day Adventism is a healing influence,
drawing its identity from the healing and teaching ministry of Jesus and books like The Ministry
of Healing (Idem, The Ministry of Healing [Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing
235

51
present is a participation in Gods work. But it is also an anticipation of Gods ultimate work.
This tension keeps us from making an idol out of our efforts to bless and to heal in this life.
Because God will raise us up one day, we can spend ourselves and take risks for the sake of
others in this life, yet know that what we work for is not the ultimate thing. Life is a gift, to be
embraced and valued, but not at the cost of eternity.239
The doctrine of the resurrection also gives believers a realistic attitude toward death. If
bodily life is valuable we will promote life and fight against death. Death is not a friend. It is not
a natural part of life, a right of passage. Rather, it is an enemy. But more than this, it is a defeated
enemy! We can fight death with confidence because we know that its victories are temporary and
ultimately it will not prevail. We can be on the side of health and life and peace without
becoming discouraged that our efforts will somehow prove meaningless in the end. The enemy
we fight wins many battles but is destined to lose the war.240
This view of life and death also guards us against other pitfalls. Since we know that there

Association, 1905]), reaching out to the world and ministering to its needs, seeking and gathering
scattered gems of truth that are out there and nurturing affirming relationships with people of
other faiths and perspectives. The former perspective could be loosely associated with the
mission of Andrews University and the latter with Loma Linda. Both mandates are divinely
ordained and biblically supported. One could argue that if all we had from the pen of Ellen White
was The Great Controversy, Loma Linda University would not exist. On the other hand, if all we
had from her pen was The Ministry of Healing, our evangelism would probably be vastly
different than it presently is. The reality is we live with the same tension exhibited by the biblical
doctrine of resurrection, a tension between the now and the not yet, between an affirmation of
bodily life and a longing for a perfect world that is yet to come. I first encountered this
perspective in Malcolm Bull and Keith Lockhart, Seeking a Sanctuary: Seventh-day Adventism
and the American Dream, second edition (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2007), 1118.
239
Brunt, 365.
240
Brunt, 364.

52
is no conscious life outside the body, we can avoid the deceptions of channeling or attempting to
communicate with the dead. All such purported communication is a deception that can lead us
astray from the foundation of a biblical world view. The doctrine of the resurrection keeps our
eye firmly fixed on the true realities, which inoculates us against deception.241

Immortality and Human Nature

The biblical doctrine of the resurrection has significant implications for the doctrine of
human nature and the way human beings can attain to immortality. The creation account makes it
clear that human life is derived from God.242 Immortality is not innate to humanity, but is a gift
from God,243 sustained in the original context by access to the Tree of Life (Gen 2:9, 22-23) and
conditional upon obedience.to God (Gen 2:16-17).244 Resurrection of the body is not a natural
transition from one state to another, it is nothing less than a miracle in which God re-creates that
which had ceased to exist.245 That miracle occurs at the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, where
mortality is swallowed up by immortality, and death is swallowed up by victory (1 Cor 15:5154).246 Teachings like the immortality of the soul or reincarnation deny the finality of death apart
from a miracle of Gods re-creative power.
Bodily resurrection is also grounded in the organic unity of human nature.247 There is no
241

Brunt, 364.
Gen 1:26-28; 2:7; Acts 17:25, 28; Col 1:16-17.
243
Damsteegt, 350.
244
Brueggemann, 33.
245
Ibid., 33; Brunt. 364.
246
Damsteegt, 351.
247
Ibid., 352-353; I. Howard Marshall, Being Human: Made in the Image of God,
Stone-Campbell Journal 4 (Spring 2001): 61. The soul is not separate from the body, able to
exist apart from it, according to Genesis 2:7 the soul is the entire person, made up of a physical
242

53
human consciousness in the absence of a body. At the same time, death is not total annihilation,
it is described as a sleep, a state of temporary unconsciousness in which a person awaits the
resurrection.248 Belief that the dead are somehow conscious apart from the body prepares
Christians to accept spiritualism. So the bodily nature of resurrection is an important safeguard
against the deceptions of the End-time.249

Resurrection and Adam Typology

My assignment involves summarizing the biblical picture regarding resurrection and then

body imbued with a breath or life principle from God. At death the physical body returns to the
ground (Gen 3:19) and the life principle returns back to God (Psa 146:4). The soul has no
conscious existence apart from the body and there is no biblical text that unequivocally suggests
that at death the soul or the spirit survives as a conscious entity, the contrary is the case (Ezek
18:20; Matt 10:28). At death there is no difference between human and animal (Eccl 3:19-21).
Wright (Resurrection, 373) describes this life principle in these words, [The dead] are
safe in the mind, plan and intention of the creator God.
248
Damsteegt, 352.
249
Ibid., 354. N. T. Wright pays significant attention to the idea of an intermediate state.
Since resurrection comes at some distance from death in most cases it raises the question as to
what occurs between the moment of death and the moment of the resurrection, or as Wright
(108-109) likes to put it, the resurrection is about bodily life after life after death. The one does
not immediately follow the other. While Wright is not as clear as Adventists are on the
unconsciousness of the intermediate state, he is very clear that this gap in time implies that there
is no immediate resurrection to heaven. The full resurrection comes at the End and the dead
wait in their graves until that moment.
See further his summary comments in Wright, Resurrection, 203. According to him,
between death and resurrection humans are in a post-mortem existence. This is not an
immortal soul in the Platonic sense, but belief in Yahweh as creator is sufficient explanation for
the dead being held in some kind of continuing existence by divine power rather than in virtue of
something inherent to their own nature. While his language is troubling from and Adventist
perspective, it is not far from the Adventist idea that in death the life principle (Damsteegt,
353) is held in the mind and heart of God awaiting the day when God re-creates the body out of
nothing in a form that is recognizably similar to what was before. In contrast to the Adventist
position, Wright is unclear whether there is any kind of consciousness in the intermediate state.

54
trying to break some new ground with regard to the role of Jesus death and resurrection in the
context of Adam typology.250 I will explore that typology briefly and then draw some
conclusions for how the death and resurrection of Christ, in the context of Adam typology, can
impact spiritual life and growth today.251

Adam Typology in the Old Testament

The concept of Adam typology is clearly present in the Old Testament, although it has
not had major emphasis within scholarship. The first instance of Adam typology is probably
within the Flood story.252 The Hebrew language used in the Flood story is parallel to that of the
first major account in Genesis, the Creation. The Flood is described in terms of the destruction of
the original creation. God takes His own creation apart, much as a child might take a Lego
creation apart piece by piece. He then rebuilds it piece by piece in the same language and style
as the original creation.
In the process, Noah, the chief figure in the Flood story, is described in parallel to the
250

Within the wider Christian world, the Adam-Christ analogy within the writings of Paul
has been a major foundation of Reformed theology. The Westminster Confession specifically
cites Romans 5:12-19 as proof that the guilt of Adams sin was imputed to all humankind. See
Peter J. Leithart, Adam, Moses, and Jesus: A Reading of Romans 5:12-14, Calvin Theological
Journal 43 (2, 2008): 257 and note 3.
251
Scholars debate whether typology is predictive or retrospective. This issue is not
relevant for the purposes of this paper. I believe God is quite capable of intentionally imbedding
foreshadowings of His future acts if He so chooses and also to model later acts on earlier ones
out of simple consistency. Im not sure we can tell the difference most of the time and most of
the time we dont need to in order to get the point of the text.
252
Warren Austin Gage, The Gospel of Genesis: Studies in Protology and Eschatology
(Winona Lake, IN: Carpenter Books, 1984), 11-12; John C. L. Gibson, Genesis, The Daily Study
Bible Series, volume one (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1981), 192.

55
original Adam through specific language in the Hebrew text.253 For example, at creation, the
animals are brought to Adam, in the flood story the animals are brought to Noah.254 Note also the
similarity of language in the instructions God gives to Adam and Noah in Genesis 1:26-30 and
9:1-3.255 In Genesis 9:1-3 Noahs diet is prescribed by God in similar terms to that of Adam in
the original creation.
Noah is described, therefore, as a second Adam, a new Adam.256 In fact, the very
253

A fairly detailed exposition of these parallels can be found in Kenneth A. Mathews,

Genesis 1 - 11:26, The New American Commentary, edited by E. Ray Clendenen, volume 1a
(Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1996), 414-415. See also Gage, 136-137.
254
Pairs of creatures that have the breath of life in them came to Noah and entered the
ark. (Gen 7:15, NIV). The language of this text, and the unique phrasing of breath of life
recalls not only the dominion of Adam over the animals (Gen 1:26, 28; 2:19-20) but the creation
of Adam himself (Gen 2:7).
255
Mathews, 399-401; R. R. Reno, Genesis, Brazos Theological Commentary on the
Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2010), 124-125; John H. Walton, Genesis, The NIV
Application Commentary, edited by Terry Mucks (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001), 341343.
Genesis 1:26-30 (with major parallels to 9:1-3 in italics): Then God said, Let us make
man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the
air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.
. . God blessed them and said to them, Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and
subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature
that moves on the ground. Then God said, I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of
the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to
all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the
ground--everything that has the breath of life in it--I give every green plant for food. And it
was so.
Genesis 9:1-3 (with major parallels to 1:26-20 in italics): "Then God blessed Noah and
his sons, saying to them, 'Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth. The fear and
dread of you will fall upon all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air, upon every
creature that moves along the ground, and upon all the fish of the sea; they are given into your
hands. Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants,
I now give you everything. . . '"
256
Gibson, 192; Reno, 128.

56
language of the Hebrew is explicit. The Hebrew root word for "Adam" (haadam ~d"a'h')
means earth.257 Using the very same Hebrew term Gen 9:20 says, Noah, a man of the soil
(adamah hm'd"a]), proceeded to plant a vineyard.258 Noah was a man of the earth. Was
Adam a man of the earth? And the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground
(adamah)259 and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living being.
(Gen 2:7) Furthermore, just as Adam fell into sin and shame by eating from the fruit of a tree
(Gen 3:5-10), Noah shamed himself by drinking from the fruit of the vine (Gen 9:20-23). It also
says of Adam that when he ate the fruit, his eyes were opened (Gen 3:5,7). It says of Noah that
after he became drunk, he awoke and he realized what had happened to him (Gen 9:24).260
One additional Adam typology from the Old Testament will suffice for our purpose. It
comes in a surprising place for Adventists, Daniel chapter seven. The vision of the chapter
begins with darkness, a stormy sea and the winds of heaven churning up the great sea.261
257

William L. Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament,
based upon the lexical work of Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1971), 4; Terry A. Armstrong, Douglas L. Busby and Cyril F. Carr, A Readers
Hebrew-English Lexicon of the Old Testament, volume 1, Genesis-Deuteronomy (Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, 1980), 129. Greidanus (264 playfully translates Genesis 2:7 as the earthling was
made from earth.
258
While Brueggemann does not note the word play, he does affirm the connection with
Adam (Gen 1:28; 2:15). Walter Brueggemann, Genesis, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for
Teaching and Preaching, edited by James Luther Mays (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1982), 89. See
also Mathews, 414-416.
259
Mathews, 415-416.
260
Other parallels between Noah and Adam are the language of curse (Gen 3:14, 17; 9:25)
and blessing (1:28; 9:26), nakedness (3:7, 10-11; 9:24), and the Hebrew expressions %AtB.
(2:9; 3:3, 8; 9:21) and [d;y" (3:7; 9:24). Mathews, 414-415.
261
Goldingay, 160. Note that in the Aramaic (in this case, Dan 7:2) and the Hebrew (in
the case of creation [Gen 1:2] and the Flood story [Gen 8:1]), the word for wind can also be

57
Then the story moves to a number of animals who appear to be coming out of that sea.262 Then
the story shifts to a son of man, who has dominion over those animals in Daniel 7:13-14.263
Who is this Son of Man? The instinctive Adventist answer is Jesus, and that is correct
according to Jesus own self-understanding. But there is a deeper dimension in the original
context. The vision of Daniel 7 is built on the backstory of a new creation. In that context, the
Son of Man of Daniel 7 functions as a Second Adam,264 who is prophesied to deliver Daniels
people from the earthly powers that had dominated them up to that point in time. So when New
Testament writers apply the concept of a Second Adam to Jesus, they are interpreting the Old
Testament along similar lines to the way Old Testament writers themselves interpreted earlier
Old Testament texts.265

Adam Typology in the New Testament

translated as Spirit. The choice of translation is a judgment call based on the context. But the
original readers would note the unusual choice of words here as an allusion to the original
creation narrative.
262
These animals, of course, represent a series of nations as well. And the combination of
a stormy sea and animals of different kinds evokes the great creation myths of the ancient
world as well as the stories of creation in the Bible. Tremper Longman III, Daniel, The NIV
Application Bible Commentary, edited by Terry Mucks (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999),
181-183.
263
I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a
son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. 14 And to him
was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should
serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom
one that shall not be destroyed. Dan 7:13-14, ESV. Because the languages are different
(Aramaic in Daniel 7 and Hebrew in Genesis 1) the verbal parallels are not as strong as the
parallel themes and structures in the two accounts.
264
Goldingay, 150.
265
In addition to these two Adam typologies, Gage sees both Israel in general and David
in particular being described in relation to Adam within the Old Testament. See Gage, 66-72.

58
Adam typology in the New Testament is more than a theory, it is grounded in explicit
references.266 In Romans 5:12-21 the first Adam is a pattern for the one to come (Jesus
Christ).267 Through Adam, sin and death came into the world.268 Through Christ these two
consequences were reversed for the entire human race.269 In 1 Corinthians 15:45-50 the contrast
266

This is particularly true in the writings of Paul. See Maya Weyermann, The
Typologies of Adam-Christ and Eve-Mary, and their Relationship to One Another,Anglican
Theological Review 84 (summer, 2002): 609-626. See also Gerald Bray, Adam and Christ,
Evangel 18:1 (Spring, 2000), 4-8; Alistair Drummond, Romans 5:12-21, Interpretation 57:1
(January 2003): 67-69; Don Fortner, Discovering Christ in Genesis (Darlington, England:
Evangelical Press, 2002): 53-54; Greidanus, 263. Morna Hooker argues that Paul was influenced
by the account of Adams fall in Genesis 1-3 through the letter to the Romans. See Victor Paul
Furnish, Review of From Adam to Christ: Essays on Paul, by Morna Hooker, in Journal of
Theological Studies 43:1 (April 1992), 197.
Scholars have generally placed Pauls Adam typology in either a Gnostic or Jewish
stream of thought. The Gnostic background has been increasingly denied in recent years and the
Jewish perspective is generally favored. Seyoon Kim, on the other hand, has demonstrated that
the Adamic framework of Paul is grounded in the Damascus Christophany. He argues that Paul
saw Christ as the image of God in that encounter and then worked backward from that
experience to the Genesis texts, seeing Christ as the last Adam who has come to restore Israel
and bring about the new creation. See Gladd, 298, note 7.
267
Rom 5:14, NIV. The English Standard Version uses the interesting language a type of
the one who was to come. The entire passage (Rom 5:12-21) is constructed in binary form
(Adam/Christ, death/life, sin/righteousness, etc.), with the antithetical parallel between Adam
and Christ being at the core of the argument (Greidanus, 263; Karl Kertelge, The sin of Adam
in the light of Christs redemptive act acording to Romans 5:12-21, Communio 18 [Winter
1991]: 502-513; Leithart, 263; Marshall, 55). Weyermann (611) believes that First Corinthians
was prior to Romans and that Romans 5 was an expansion of Pauls Adam typology first laid out
there.
268
For Paul, death is not natural to humanity, it is not the result of the earthly and bodily
constitution of human beings, but it is rather the specific result of Adams choice in Genesis 3.
As source of the human story of sin, Adam became the archetype of sinful humanity, the
personal symbol of all. See Weyermann, 611.
269
According to Gerald Bray (4) the story of Adam lies behind the entire book of Romans
up to that point, even though Adam is not specifically mentioned until the latter half of chapter
five.

59
is drawn between the first Adam and the last Adam (1 Cor 15:45 in most translations).270
While the name Adam is not used there, the same is true also for verses 20-22 271 and indeed the
point of Romans 5 is made even more closely. Verse 21 makes the point that as death came to all
through the actions of a single person, so the resurrection came to all through the resurrection of
Jesus.272 So there is a direct correspondence between the death of Adam and the resurrection of
Jesus Christ. Through the cross God dealt with Adams sin and through the resurrection He dealt
with death. So the death and resurrection of Christ are interpreted through the lens of the First
and Second Adam.273
270

See above from pages 33-35. See also Marshall, 55, 58; Padgett, 160-161 and John
Pester, Jesus Christ: Last Adam, Life-Giving Spirit, Affirmation and Critique 3:4 (October
1998): 17-26. Paul here reverses the interpretation of Philo to make his point (Krentz, 108;
Wright, Resurrection, 353). Philo believed that there was a distinction between the Adam of
Genesis 1 and the Adam of Genesis 2. The first Adam in Genesis 1 was entirely spiritual, formed
by the word of God, and therefore a heavenly being. Philo identifies the Adam of Genesis 1 as
the Logos in contrast to the molded man Adam of Genesis 2. This second Adam was formed
from the ground and was therefore part earthy and part spirit. So he fell into sin while the
heavenly Logos/Adam of chapter one did not. By way of contrast, Paul sees the Adam of
Genesis 1 and 2 as the same, earthly and mortal. Jesus, in Pauls case, is the second Adam,
empowered by the resurrection into a life-giving spirit (1 Cor 15:45). His resurrection
anticipates that of the believer, who will bear the image of the heavenly Adam at the end (15:49).
See also Steenburg, 104-105.
271
Conzelmann, 267-269, 280, 284. See also Krentz, 108.
272
Weyermann, 610.
273
Adam-Christ typology can be traced all the way back to some of the earliest church
fathers. See Weyermann, 612-613. According to Irenaeus, the human race offended God in the
first Adam, by not obeying His command, but is now reconciled to God in the second Adam. See
Against Heresies, 5, 16, 3 (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Alexander Roberts and James
Donaldson, American Reprint [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1989], 1: 544); see also Clark M.
Williamson, Atonement Theologies and the Cross, Encounter 71:1 (Winter, 2010): 5-6.
Hippolytus view was similar to Irenaeus. He saw Jesus Christ as the new, better creation of
Adam, the new and perfected human being. He received the heavenly Logos from the Father and
the earthly humanity from the old Adam, through the virgin. See Contra Noetum, 17 (The Ante-

60
In Jewish thinking of the time, Adam was the primal man, in whom the whole of
humanity is contained.274 The effects of Jesus resurrection are universal and cosmic, just as
Adam had a universal effect in the beginning.275 As the second Adam, Jesus can also be called
the image of God (2 Corinthians 4:4, Colossians 1:15, Hebrews 1:3),276 a clear reference to the
Genesis account (Gen 1:26-28).277 Adam was the image of God in the original creation.278 But in
the new creation, Jesus takes the place of Adam.279 He becomes Adam as Adam was intended to
be. Although the explicit links between Adam and Christ are relatively few, the theme is

Nicene Fathers, edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, American Reprint [Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990], 5: 230).
274
Conzelmann, 268-269; Kertelge, 509.
275
Krentz, 108; John Pester, Living Under the Divine Administration through the Divine
Dispensing of the Processed Christ as the Last Adam and Life-Giving Spirit: The Gospel
Presented in 1 Corinthians 15, Affirmation and Critique 10:1 (April 2005): 32; Weyermann,
611.
276
Gage, 33. D. Steenberg (The Worship of Adam and Christ as the Image of God,
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 39 [1990]: 98-99) would add Philippians 2:6-11 to
the list as would Hooker (Furnish 197). Philippians 2:6 speaks of Christ being in the form of
God, a synonymous expression.
277
In The Life of Adam and Eve (13-15) the image of God in Adam is associated with the
fall of Satan, who refuses to worship Adam even though he has the face of God. It is in his
capacity as representative of the human race, ruler of the world and bearer of a visible likeness to
God that he is held out to the angels as the object of a single act of devotion. See R. H. Charles,
editor, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, volume two
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913) page137; James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament
Pseudepigrapa, two volumes (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985) 2: 252, 262. There is a
comparable passage in the Sibylline Oracles (8: 442-445). See also Mathews, 171; Steenberg,
96-97.
278
Not only so, but the original Adam was able to pass that image on to his descendants
(Gen 5:3). Cf. Wright, Resurrection, 356.
279
And like the first Adam, He is able to pass His image on to those connected to Him (1
Cor 15:49). Cf. Wright, Resurrection, 356.

61
significant throughout the New Testament in implicit form.280 In order to fully understand this
Adam Christology we need to go back to the first chapter of Genesis.281
280

There are a number of suggestions in the literature: Kim Coleman Healy (Christ the
Gardener, Parabola 26:1 [Spring 2001]: 73-79) sees Adam typology in the gardener of John
20. Cf. DAngelo, 122. Ulrich Mell (Jesu Taufe durch Johannes [Markus 1:9-15] zur
narrativen Christologie vom neuen Adam, Biblische Zeitschrift 40 [2, 1996]: 176-177) argues
that Mark portrays Jesus as the newly created Adam, the goal of Gods creation. Philip
Oakeshott (A Watchman for the House of Israel: Son of Adam, Faith and Freedom 59:2
[Autumn-Winter 2006]: 138-145) argues that the phrase Son of Man is originally a reference to
Adam. If that is true, references to Adam in the New Testament would be multiplied. The fact
that the appearance of the phrase in Daniel 7 is already in the context of Adam typology (as seen
above) would support Oakeshotts conclusion. Carl L. Taylor (Jesus, the Prodigal Son,
Covenant Quarterly 57:1 [Fall 1999]: 36-48) argues that the Prodigal Son story of Luke 15 is
based on Adam typology. One later Jewish idea was that Adam was originally the creator of the
cosmos, the Yotser Bereshith. See Steenburg, 103. This may suggest some Adam typology in
references to Jesus as the creator in places like John 1 and Colossians 1. Gage (83) sees Adam
typology in the Lambs slaying of the dragon that serpent of old (Rev 12:7-10; 20:1-15).
281
A less explicit but still significant text is Revelation 3:14, where Jesus is referred to as
the ruler (or beginning) of Gods creation. The underlying Greek word for ruler or
beginning (arche, avrch,) is ambiguous. The root meaning of the word arche is first. So
arche can mean old or beginning, as in archaeology (study of old things or first things).
On the other hand, it can also mean ruler the first in the kingdom and the source of power and
authority. The English language expresses this latter Greek foundation in words like patriarch
(rule by the father) and monarchy (rule by one). So the Greek word arche has a double
meaning, resulting in two different ways of translating it.
The very first verse of the Greek Old Testament begins with arche. In the beginning
(en arche, evn avrch/|) God created the heavens and the earth. Rev 3:14 reminds us of
Genesis 1:1 and the original creation. Calling Jesus the ruler of Gods creation is a reference to
Adam, who had dominion over the original creation (Gen 1:26-28). Such connections between
Jesus and Adam are not unique to Revelation, they are common throughout the New Testament.
Within Revelation itself, the second Adam typology is also alluded to in mentions of the tree of
life (Rev 2:7; 22:2), which is clearly a reference to the original creation (Gen 2:9; 3:22, 24).
There is also a parallel expression to ruler of Gods creation in Rev 1:5 the ruler (archon) of
the kings of the earth.

62
Adam As Adam Was Meant To Be
The beginning of the story of Adam is found in Genesis 1:26-28. While the name
Adam doesnt usually appear in translation, it is found in the Hebrew haadam.282
Then God said, Let us make man (~d"a', adam) in our image, in our
likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the
livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.
So God created man (~d"a'h'*, ha-adam) in his own image, in the image of
God he created him; male and female he created them.
God blessed them and said to them, Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the
earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every
living creature that moves on the ground.
Gen 1:26-28
In the story of Genesis 1 the image of God manifested itself in three basic relationships,
highlighted in the text above.283 (1) First of all, Adam was in relationship with God.284 As the
image of God he had great dignity but was clearly in an inferior position to God.285 He was
dependent on God as his mentor or teacher. God was the Creator and Adam was the creature.286
282

The Hebrew term haadam generally means humanity as a whole. Only in Genesis 4-5
is it tantamount to a proper name. Gibson, 69; Mathews, 163, 172-173; Skinner, 32-33.
283
This positive assessment of the human race is unusual in the Old Testament. Generally
the creatureliness, dependence and weakness of humanity is the focus (Job 4:17-19; 5:7; 14:1-2;
Psalm 39:4-6; 62:9; 103:13-17; Eccl 3:19-20; Isa 40:6-8; Jer 17:5-6, 9). Only Psalm 8 comes
close to this high view of human nature. See Gibson, 71-73 and comments by Walton, 136-145.
For a discussion of various options for the meaning of the image of God in the Old Testament
see Marshall, 50-55.
284
In all of Genesis chapter one God does not speak to any creature other than the original
man and woman. Brueggemann, 31.
285
Adam was the first creature in Genesis not created according to its kind but
according to the image and likeness of God. Douglas P. Baker, The Image of God: According to
Their Kinds, Reformation and Revival 12:2 (Summer 2003): 98.
286
Some of the early fathers of the eastern church suggested that since Christ preexisted
eternally, the original Adam was created in the image of Christ, so the relation between the two
is even closer than suggested on the surface of the New Testament. Seely Joseph Beggiani, The
Typological Approach of Syriac Sacramental Theology, Theological Studies 64 (2003): 545.

63
Adams relationship with God was that of a subordinate to a superior.
(2) The image of God included both male and female.287 Adam and Eve were designed
for relationship with each other. God did not create Adam to be alone. He created the human race
for relationship among equals, regardless of gender or ethnic background (all ethnic groups share
the image of God and ancestry from Adam).288
(3) The image of God also included dominion over the earth.289 Adam ruled over the fish
of the sea, the birds of the air, and the creatures that move along the ground. Adam and Eve were
to be like mentors to the animals, the plants, and the whole environment.290 These three
relationships can be illustrated as follows:
287

Brueggemann, 33-34; Andrew Louth and Marco Conti, Genesis 1-11, Ancient
Christian Commentary on Scripture, Thomas C. Oden, general editor (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 2001), 27; Mathews, 164; Marshall, 53.
Gladd (301) observes that Genesis 5:1-2 repeats the language of Genesis 1:27 with the
further clarification that he named both male and female Adam (~d"a') in the day that they
were created. So Adam or the man in some sense applies to both genders.
288
Gibson, 85-87.
289
Brueggemann, 32; Gibson, 80-81. This theme was picked up strongly in early Jewish
literature. In 2 Enoch 31:3 Adam was created to rule and reign over the earth. He is uniquely
superior to every other created thing. In 2 Enoch 30 he is portrayed as a microcosm or symbol of
the entire cosmos. The rabbis also theorized that God created him of dust taken from all parts of
the earth, therefore, Adam represents the whole creation. See Steenburg, 102.
290
This is most clearly brought out by Graeme Goldsworthy, Gospel and Kingdom: A
Christians Guide to the Old Testament (Minneapolis, MN: Winston Press, 1981), 54; see also
Gibson, 77-80; Gladd, 299; Reno, 54.

64

ADAM S THREE RELATIONSHIPS

God

Others

Others

Earth

In terms of the original Adam, all three relationships were seriously damaged at the
Fall.291 Instead of seeking relationship with God, Adam became afraid of Him. Instead of
enjoying intimacy with each other, Adam and Eve fell into blame and shame. With the coming of
sin, the earth began to resist Adams dominion.292 So as a model, Adam was perfect in his
creation, but flawed on account of his sin.293 The effect of sin on Adams three basic
relationships can be illustrated as follows.

291

Gage, 27; Mathews, 252.

One of the consequences of sin was Adams exile from the Garden (Gen 3:24-25). Pate
(127) sees this exile as the background for Pauls Adam typology in 2 Corinthians 5:6-10. Based
on Hafemann, 347.
293
Skinner, 78.
292

65

The Consequences of Sin

(APPLIED)

(NATURAL)

AFRAID

BICKER

EXILE

PAIN

DECAY

THORNS

The New Testament, however, describes Jesus as the Second Adam. He is Adam as
Adam was meant to be.294 Just as the original Adam had three basic relationships, so did Jesus.
Jesus came to restore what was lost on account of Adams sin.
(1) A Relationship with God. The first of Adams relationships to be broken was his
relationship with God. But Jesus came to be Adam as Adam was meant to be. So Jesus had a
perfect relationship with God, modeled on the perfect relationship Adam had with God before
the Fall.295 For example, in John 14:28 Jesus said, . . . the Father is greater than I.296 It was as
the Second Adam that Jesus said things like, I do nothing on my own but speak just what the
Father has taught me (John 8:28), and I have obeyed my Fathers commands and remain in his
love (John 15:10).
294

Hans Boersma, Eschatological Justice and the Cross: Violence and Penal
Substitution, Theology Today 60 (2003): 186-199; Williamson, 5.
295
Fortner, 54-55. Most of the Early Church Fathers made this connection. See Louth and
Conti, 27.
296
There are some who believe this text expresses that Jesus was inferior to God by
nature. But that is a misunderstanding of the text. Jesus is not inferior to God in His divine
nature, but as the Second Adam He has taken a position of subordination to the Father. He was

66
(2) Relationship with Others. Adam wasted no time putting the blame on his wife as
soon as sin came in (Gen 3:12).297 In contrast, Jesus had a perfect relationship with others. His
whole attitude to others was one of service. In acts of loving service He illustrated the perfect
relationship God intended for Adam and for all human beings.298 Jesus carried His willingness to
serve all the way to death.299
(3) Relationship with the Earth. In addition to a perfect relationship with God and with
others, Jesus also had a perfect relationship with the environment. He was Adam as Adam was
intended to be.300 Like Adam, He had dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, the
wind and the waves. He was Adam as Adam was intended to be. This is delightfully illustrated in
a number of New Testament stories.301 The three relationships of the Second Adam are

demonstrating the relationship with God that Adam was intended to have.
297
Gibson, 131: Skinner, 77-78.
298
Brueggemann, 34. Two verses state this with clarity: For even the Son of Man did not
come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many. Mark 10:45. Who
being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made
himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. Phil 2:6-7.
299
In serving other people, Jesus demonstrated what a perfect relationship among human
beings would be like. If everyone exhibited the desire to serve and benefit others, we wouldnt
have strife, war, or most other problems of today. In His life on earth, He had the kind of
relationship with other people that Adam was intended to have in the original creation. The ideal
other relationship is beautifully illustrated by the foot-washing service. Jesus knew Who He
was. He knew that He had come down from Heaven where He had been a member of the
Godhead from eternity (John 13:3). Nevertheless, He willingly performed the act of a slave (Phil
2:6-8). He stooped down to wash His disciples feet. It is that sort of attitude that brings peace
and harmony into our relationships with others. No wonder Paul said, Your attitude should be
the same as that of Christ Jesus. Phil 2:5.
300
Brueggemann (34-35) notes that Jesus care for creation is evidence that He is the true
Image of God, the true human.
301
For example, one day Jesus was out with His disciples in a wooden sailboat on the Sea
of Galilee. But the boat ran into a storm. Jesus was asleep in the back while the waves were
lashing the boat and the rain was pouring down. The disciples feared that the boat was going

67
illustrated in the following box, along with sample texts:

down so they roused Jesus and asked Him to intercede for them. He stood up in the boat, put up
His hands and said, Peace, be still. The wind and the waves immediately obeyed Jesus (Matt
8:26-27). He had dominion over the earth. He was Adam as Adam was intended to be.
The original Adams dominion included dominion over the fish of the sea (Gen 1:26, 28).
One night the disciples went out fishing without Jesus (John 21:2-11). Why did they go out at
night instead of during the day, when it would be more pleasant? Because of their chosen method
of catching fish. There are two basic types of fishing: net fishing and lure fishing. Lure fishing
requires light so that fish can be attracted to some object that looks tasty or interesting to them.
When the fish bites at the object, it gets caught by the hook. So lure fishing works best in the day
time.
With net fishing, on the other hand, your task is to surprise fish and catch them unawares,
if possible. Thats why net fishing works best at night. At night the fish wont always see the net
coming. The disciples spent the whole night net fishing, but without success, they caught
nothing. Morning came and the sun was beginning to rise over the Galilean hills. They had one
last chance to surprise some fish. They cast the net into the shadow of the boat. Fish swimming
in the bright sunshine might wander into the shadow of the boat and get caught before they
realize a net is there.
About this time there was a man standing on the beach, not far away. This Man knew a
lot about preaching, but He seemed to know very little about fishing. He called out to these
disciples, Cast your net on the right side of the boat (John 21:6). That would have been the
sunny side.
The disciples must have thought He was crazy but they did it anyway. What happened?
Fish came into that net from all over the lake. Big ones. Lots of them. Jesus didnt have to know
the art of fishing, at least in human terms. He had dominion over the fish and could tell them
what he wanted them to do. And 153 huge fish filled the disciples nets. Why? Because Jesus
was Adam as Adam was intended to be.
On another occasion Peter was talking about the need to pay some taxes. Jesus not only
directed a fish to catch the appropriate coins, He also directed it to grab onto Peters hook so he
could retrieve the coins (Matt 17:24-27). Jesus had dominion over the fish of the sea (Gen
1:26,28). Jesus had dominion over every living thing. Jesus was Adam as Adam was intended to
be.
Do you remember Jesus last ride into Jerusalem? When He rode over the Mount of
Olives on an unbroken colt (Mark 11:1-7)? Have you ever tried that? Its a frightening thing to
ride an unbroken colt unless your name is Jesus. When Jesus sat on that colt, however, it obeyed
Him like a trained animal. It recognized its master. Jesus was Adam as Adam was intended to be.

68

ADAM AS ADAM WAS INTENDED TO BE

God
(Subjection)

Mark 10:45, cf. John 13

Othe rs

John 14:28; 15:10; 8:28-29

(Loving Service)

Othe rs

Acts 10:38
Phil 2:5-7

John 21:4-6
Matt 17:27
Mark 4:35-41

(Dominion)

Earth

Mark 11:1-7

As the Second Adam, Jesus experience was modeled on that of the first Adam. Like the
first Adam, Jesus was put to sleep and an opening was made in His side (Gen 2:21-22; John
19:31-37). Out of that opening came the substances with which God created the church blood
and water (1 John 5:6).302 In 1 Corinthians 11:2-3 and Ephesians 5:25-32, Jesus is described as a
Second Adam and the church as a Second Eve the bride of Jesus Christ.303 Just as Adam and
302

Beggiani, 555-556.
Ibid., 555-556; Craig Blomberg, 1 Corinthians, The NIV Application Bible
Commentary, edited by Terry Mucks (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 210; Andrew T.
Lincoln, Ephesians, Word Biblical Commentary, edited by David A. Hubbard and Glenn W.
Barker, volume 42 (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1990), 379-382; Annette Merz, Why Did the Pure
Bride of Christ (2 Cor. 11.2) Become a Wedded Wife (Eph. 5.22-33)? Theses about the
Intertextual Transformation of an Ecclesiological Metaphor, Journal for the Study of the New
Testament 79 (2000): 135-146; Charles H. Talbert, Ephesians and Colossians, paideia
Commentaries on the New Testament, edited by Mikeal C. Parsons and Charles H. Talbert
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2007), 142-144.
303

69
Eve were married in the Garden of Eden, so Jesus becomes the husband of His church.304 New
Testament writers saw Adam in all of Jesus life and experience. In this case Jesus was Adam as
God created him and Adam as he was intended to be.
To speak christologically, then, in a real sense Jesus reflected the reality of Adams
experience before the Fall. He lived in perfect relationship with God. He lived the life of a
servant in His relationship with others. He acted out Adams dominion over the animal kingdom
and over the earth. He was Adam as God intended Adam to be. In order to redeem the fallen
Adam it was necessary for Him to do and be that which the original Adam was intended to do
and be.
But that is not all there is to say about the relationships between the original Adam and
the Second Adam. Not only did Jesus act out the commission of the unfallen Adam, He also
succeeded where Adam failed.305 He was tempted along the same lines that Adam was tempted,
beginning with appetite.306 But He did not yield to any of Satans temptations. He walked the
ground where Adam walked and conquered Satan at exactly the same points where Adam failed.
Jesus relived Adams experience and redeemed Adams failure. He was not only Adam as Adam
was intended to be, He became what Adam was not.307
304

Merz, 131-147. This typology was also picked up by some of the early fathers of the
church. They not only saw the church as a new Eve in its relation to Christ, but they also
constructed elaborate parallels between Mary, the mother of Jesus and Eve. Both Mary and the
church were considered helpers to the new Adam. See Weyermann, 613-624. Mary was seen as a
type of the church which gives birth to Christ among the believers, and the church is also the
new Eve which is the bride and consort of the Lord. Weyermann, 625.
305
Fortner, 54-55; Kline, 770.
306
Greidanus, 272.
307
Crucial to this whole dynamic is the understanding, based on the Old Testament, that
the image of God can be passed on from one to another. Genesis 5:3 specifically states that when

70
More than this, the second Adam reaped the consequences of the first Adams sin.308 The
consequences of sin in the Garden were thorns, nakedness, sweat and death (Gen 3:7, 11, 17-19,
22-24). These are the very things Jesus Christ experienced in the Christ-event; the sweat of
Gethsemane (Luke 22:44), the crown of thorns (Matt 27:29; Mark 15:17; John 19:5), the
nakedness and death of the cross. As the Second Adam, Jesus reaped the consequences of
Adams sin as the representative of the human race.

A New History
This strange, but biblical Christology has enormous implications for the human race. It is
one of the most powerful messages of salvation in the entire New Testament. From a New
Testament perspective, the original Adam was the father and progenitor of the entire human race.
What happens to him happens to us all (Romans 5:12-21). And here is where the gospel comes in
powerfully to our experience.
As the Second Adam, Jesus walked over the ground we all personally experience. Like
Adam, we have a history of failure, dysfunction and disgrace. Our relationship with God, our
relationships with each other, and our relationship with the earth are all broken. But the story of
the Second Adam tells us that Jesus has walked the ground that we have walked, He has
redeemed our personal histories and made it possible for us to succeed where our ancestor Adam
Adam gave birth to Seth, he fathered a son after his own image. So the image of God, which
Adam had received (Gen 1:26, 28) in the Garden, could be passed on to his children. Paul
understands elsewhere (Rom 5:12-21) that this image was flawed by sin. But the same principle
applies in 1 Corinthians 15:49, where the man of dust produces us in his own image, but the
Second Adam, the life-giving spirit of 1 Cor 15:45, reshapes us into his own likeness. See
Gladd, 297-309, especially 302-303.
308
Gage, 46-47.

71
failed. Our flawed personal histories can be replaced by His perfect history.309 That leaves us
with hope that we can be more like the Second Adam and less like the first Adam.
But there is more. Jesus not only redeemed Adams failure, He also reaped the
consequences of Adams failure.310 When Adam sinned, he suffered the consequences of sin in
his case thorns, sweat, nakedness, and death. So He not only redeemed Adams broken history
(and thereby ours) but accepted its consequences so that, in Christ, we can walk in newness of
life (Rom 6:3-6). The New Testament as a whole ties the fullness of Jesus experience to
Adam.311

The Great Reversal

If we had the time at this conference we could extend parallels like this to nearly all the
major characters of the Old Testament. Jesus is not only the new Adam, He is the new Isaac, the
new Moses, the new Israel, the new Joshua, the new David, the new Solomon, and so on. I have
dealt with these many parallels in my book Meet God Again for the First Time.312 For New
Testament writers, it was vital to connect the life and work of Jesus to every character and
experience of the Old Testament. And most of these characters were much more flawed than
Adam was in Genesis 1 and 2. So Jesus fully takes upon himself humanity, in Him God meets
309

There is something of a foundation to this new history concept in the way the Old
Testament writers speak of Israel as the bride of God. Weyermann (614) suggests that this theme
is found extensively in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hosea, Ezekiel and possibly the Song of Solomon. As
we have seen in our look at the resurrection in the Old Testament, the individual use of a
typology may be rooted in the communitys history and experience. In the New Testament,
likewise, the reign of God is compared to a marriage feast (Matt 25:1-13; Rev 19:6-10) and Jesus
Himself is the bridegroom (Matt 9:15; John 3:29).
310
Fortner, 55-56.
311
See Williamson, 5-6, for a list of additional parallels.

72
the human race where we are.
What we learn from these many parallels is that there is a great reversal in the experience
of Christ.313 He lived a perfect life in our human flesh, though he had to battle the full force of
human temptation. He was Adam as Adam was intended to be. On the basis of His perfect life,
we inherit eternal life and justification. What had been the original Adams by right of creation
has been purchased back at infinite cost. At the same time, although He did not deserve it, He
carried all the consequences of human sin in His body on the cross (Rom 8:3; 1 Pet 2:24). He
reaped the full force of the curse. As a result, the death and condemnation that we inherited from
the first Adam is no longer held to our account (Rom 5:19).314 This reversal can be illustrated as
312

Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1993.

This is brought out explicitly in Romans 5:17 where there is a clear parallel and
contrast between death and life. The passage is at the center of a chiasm running from verses 12
through 21 (see details in Leithart, 263). Before Christ came death was the primary authority in
human experience (death reigned Rom 5:17, NIV). Romans 5:17 suggests a transfer of
authority from death to those who receive the gifts of grace and righteousness through the
actions of the new Adam, Jesus Christ. In other words, the death and resurrection of Christ
reverses the sentence of death passed on the human race in Genesis 3, and restores the dominion
of Adam (Gen 1:26-28) which had been lost at the fall. As the representative man, Jesus Christ
retakes Adams three relationships in behalf of the human race and restores these to all who
place their faith in Him. See also Fortner, 56-57.
314
Leithart (257-273) offers an intriguing suggestion for how the Adam/Christ dynamic
works in reality. He reads Romans 5:13 (sin is not counted where there is no law) as saying
that the Law (Torah) was necessary in order for Christ to bear the sins of the whole human race.
He draws a distinction between sin and transgression (Leithart, 269). Adams sin was real
and brought real death into the world. But the Law provided a means of imputation (counting).
Specific violations of the law turn sin into transgression. With the coming of Torah, death no
longer reigns over those who do not have the Torah (Rom 5:13-14) because all human sin is now
concentrated onto Israel (Leithart, 271). Israel is the sin-bearing priest that stands in place of the
whole world (Exod 19:5-6). According to Pauls gospel, sin is concentrated onto Israel so that it
could be borne away by the Messiah (in note 29 on page 271, Leithart refers the reader to a
similar argument in N. T. Wright, The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline
313

73
follows:315

Gods Mighty Act In Christ

Obey

And

Live

(Blessing)

Disobey

And

Die

(Curse)

This great reversal was possible because in some way Jesus came to represent the entire
human race.316 He was the Second Adam, Moses, Joshua and David.317 As a result, every action
Theology [Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993], 151-152). From the time of Abraham, Israel was
destined to be the human agent of Yahwehs redemption of the world. . . . From the time of
Moses, Israel was destined to redeem the world through the Cross. With the Davidic covenant,
this sin-bearing role is narrowed to one man, the Son of David who is also Son of Yahweh, the
Son who is Israel personified. Leithart, 271-272. Through Moses, then, the actions of Christ
reverse also the actions of Adam and their impact on the whole human race (see previous note).
This explains the importance of Jesus being born under the law (Gal 4:4). It is His fulfillment
of Torah that reverses the sin of Adam.
315
Norman R. Gulley similarly ties Romans 5:19 to a great reversal from death and sin,
on the one hand, and to righteousness and life on the other. Norman R. Gulley, The Effects of
Adams Sin on the Human Race, Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 5:1 (1994): 205.
In this he is echoing the SDA Bible Commentary (SDABC, 6: 529). See also Williamson, 5.
316
God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the
righteousness of God. 2 Cor 5:21. Christ was treated as we deserve, that we might be treated as
He deserves. He was condemned for our sins, in which He had no share, that we might be
justified by His righteousness, in which we had no share. He suffered the death which was ours,
that we might receive the life which was His. With His stripes we are healed. Ellen White, The
Desire of Ages, p. 25.
317
For much more detail on these themes see Jon Paulien, Meet God Again for the First

74
of his life, death and resurrection applies in a real sense to every one of us. Our history, a history
of failure and disgrace, became His history.
Through the cross and the resurrection, the actions of Jesus perfect life become for us a
new and alternative history. Since Jesus was the representative of the entire human race, His
resurrection was an expression of Gods approval of the entire human race, including you and me
(Acts 13:32-33; 2 Cor 1:20). In His perfect thirty-three and a half years of life, Jesus walked over
the ground that you and I have walked and redeemed it. As the Second Adam and the second
Paulien he succeeded where I failed and provided a new and perfect history that belongs to me
as much as the old history does.318

The Gospel in a Nutshell

As brought out in First Corinthians 15:3-5, this is the essence of the gospel. Since Jesus
Christ was the representative of the whole human race, God communicated two messages to the
human race in His death and resurrection. First, in the death of Jesus Christ the whole human
race was judged. He represented the full reality of our sinfulness there (1 Pet 2:24). At the cross,
God counted us exactly as we are: wretched, filthy, selfish, rebellious, and worthy of death. The
human race was brought to the bar of judgment in the person of Christ at the cross. And that
humanity was condemned and executed in the person of Christ (Rom 8:3).
Second, that is not all that was communicated by the Christ event. Jesus Christ also

Time.
318

This is clearly seen in the context of 2 Corinthians 5, NIV: 14"For Christs love
compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. 15 And he
died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for
them and was raised again. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has
gone, the new has come! 21 God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we
might become the righteousness of God.
If Marvin Pate (139-143) is right, the whole background of Second Corinthians 5 is
grounded in First/Last Adam theology, expressed in the language of corporate solidarity. So my
connection of 2 Cor 5:21 with Adam typology is grounded in an intentional allusion by Paul
himself. See summary of Pates view in Hafemann, 348.

75
represented the whole human race in His resurrection. God looked at the whole human race and
saw thirty three and a half years of perfect righteousness. In raising Jesus He was saying, The
human race is acceptable to Me in Jesus Christ. At the resurrection all the promises of God to
Adam and to Israel became alive and active for us (Acts 13:32-33; 2 Cor 1:20).
The gospel, therefore, is essentially the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Cor
15:1-4). It contains two messages for each one of us. 1) We are condemned in Christ on account
of our sin, and 2) we are acceptable to God in Christ on account of His perfect righteousness. To
accept the gospel is to accept that both messages are true concerning us. We acknowledge the
fullness of our depravity. When we confess our sins, we are simply telling the truth about
ourselves, a truth already acknowledged at the cross. On the other hand, to accept the gospel is to
also acknowledge that we are acceptable to God in Jesus Christ. His righteousness, His perfect
obedience is sufficient for us. To put it in Pauls terms, in Adam the entire human race received
two things, sin and death. The cross of Christ deals with the sin part of the human dilemma and
the resurrection of Jesus Christ deals with the death part.319

The Practical Outcome of the Gospel

The truth of the resurrection has powerful practical implications. Our history as a human
race is rooted in Adam. It is a history of failure and disgrace. But Christ worked out a new
319

Both messages are needed. Both messages make the gospel complete. To proclaim one
side of the gospel without the other is heresy (truth out of balance). For example, to constantly
hammer people about their sins without the acceptance of the gospel will leave them
discouraged, in worse condition than they were before. On the other hand, to preach a gospel of
acceptance without accountability cheapens the grace of Christ. One message without the other
leads to theological extremes, but both messages together make the gospel complete. And the full
gospel makes people whole.

76
history for us. He confronted our history in His perfect life and succeeded where we failed. He
took our failed history to the cross and condemned it in His flesh. Our old history was buried
with Him in the grave and we rose with Him into newness of life (Rom 6:3-11). God made him
who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God (2 Cor
5:21, NIV). This is the New Testament gospel and there are powerful implications for our
everyday experience.
If we have a new or alternative history, we can also have a new outlook on life. We are
no longer confined to an old history that keeps us mired in failure and disgrace. We have a new
history, a new family tree, so to speak. You and I are now children of the King! As children of
the King we will behave differently, not because we ought to or we have to, but because we are
different than we were before. Many believe that the way to overcome sin in our lives is to focus
on the various sins in our lives and eliminate them one by one or piece by piece, so to speak. But
this approach has never worked for me or for anyone I know. Instead the New Testament
suggests that we overcome sin not by a focus on sin, but by a focus on Christ.320
This change of focus is critical for us. You see, life as most of us experience it is filled
with vicious cycles over which we have little or no control. People who abuse children
physically or sexually were almost always abused themselves when they were children. People
who are addicted to alcohol or drugs are seeking to deaden the pain of a past that also governs
their present. Our history is important because it controls who we are in the present. It binds us
320

Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw
off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles, and let us run with perseverance
the race marked out for us. 2 Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith,
who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right
hand of the throne of God. Heb 12:1-2, NIV.

77
with chains that seemingly cannot be broken. And in my experience this is as true in the church
as it is outside the church.
How do you break the chains of addiction? Psychologists will tell you that the only way
to stop the vicious cycles of addiction is with a new history. We have to stop doing and being
what we have been before and create a new history. But experience tells us that this is very hard
to do.321 The only way out of this cycle is through the gospel, through the new history that is
available in Jesus Christ, a perfect history. We are no longer controlled by the programming of

321

Let me illustrate why this is so by an example from my own ministry experience. Lets
say the first generation is addicted to alcohol. The father comes home late at night drunk. On the
good nights he crashes through the door and falls asleep on the floor. On the bad nights he starts
beating up on mom and when hes done with her he takes it out on his son. What will that son be
thinking? I will never be like my father! He has every intention of being different when he
grows up. But the addiction is still there.
So in the second generation that son does all he can to avoid alcohol. But the pain of his
past does not go away. The new father knows that alcohol is not the answer so he slips into
sexual behaviors to ease the pain of the past. He indulges in pornography, flirtation with other
women, and perhaps even adultery or incest. His son sees the great pain and damage that this
causes in the home. What will that son be thinking? I will never be like my father! He has
every intention of being different when he grows up. But the addiction is still there.
So in the third generation the new father does all he can to avoid the twin perils of
alcohol and sexual addiction. But he eases the pain of the past through anger. He blames and he
shames and controls his family with loud and biting words. The consequences for the family are
as great as they were in the previous two generations. What will his son be thinking? I will
never be like my father! But the addiction is still there.
What happens next? There is a good chance that the son in the fourth generation will go
into ministry. Why? Because he feels the same dissonance the previous generations felt. He sees
the devastating results of that history and wishes to do better. He enters ministry in the hope that
by saving others, he himself can be saved. I wish this were not true, but in twenty-five years of
teaching at the Seminary (Andrews University) I have heard scores of histories like the above.
Ministry, even Adventist ministry, is riddled with the victims of all forms of abuse. And some
abuse others, not only in the home but in the pulpit. The power of sin in the form of various types
of addictions is impossible to fully break without divine help.

78
our earthly past. The new history that Jesus created in his perfect life on earth becomes ours by
faith. That history interposes itself between me and my own old history. As I more and more
focus on the actions and character of Jesus, my own actions and history have less and less control
over my life.
The fuming anger Saul of Tarsus exhibited against the followers of Jesus likely arose
from a similar history of failure and disgrace. Few people in all of history have been as radically
transformed by the gospel as the Saul who became Paul. He himself confesses that as Saul he
was a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man (1 Tim 1:13). Where did this uniquely
focused violence come from? What kind of history produced this angry minister? The pages of
Sauls generational history remain blank. But in another place he speaks powerfully of the
surpassing importance of the new history in his own life. In Phil 3:4-11 he does not contrast the
new history in Christ with the worst of his old history, but with the very best:322
Instead of his sordid past, Paul here lists his multitude of qualities and achievements. It is
interesting that the good and the bad lived side by side in his old history. Yet even the best of his
history is worth nothing more than a rubbish pile in contrast with the transforming new history
available in Jesus Christ. What counts for Paul now is not what he has done, but what Christ has
322

4 . . . If anyone else thinks he has reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more:
5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of
Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; 6 as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for legalistic
righteousness, faultless. 7 But whatever was to my profit I now consider loss for the sake of
Christ. 8 What is more, I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of
knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish,
that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that
comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ--the righteousness that comes
from God and is by faith. 10 I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the
fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, to

79
done. To know Christ, to be in relationship with Him, is more important than all else. The key to
the transforming power of the gospel is to acknowledge the futility of our old history (gospel
message one based on the cross of Christ) and at the same time the blessed reality of our new
history (gospel message two based on the resurrection of Jesus).
But the practical question still remains. How does this new history actually change our
lives in the real world? What do you do when bodily cravings cry out for relief, when events
trigger traumatic emotions from the past, when negative thoughts from the old history
overwhelm? You reaffirm the reality of the new history that became yours in the resurrection of
Jesus. You reckon yourself dead to the old history and alive to the new. To some degree the old
history will always rise up inside of you as long as you are in your mortal body (Rom 8:19-23).
But when the old history does rise up to torment, you reaffirm the new history that has become
yours in Christ. You focus on Him and on His history rather than on your own. And as you
continue to do this, the new history becomes more and more natural to you and the old history
less and less desirable.323
attain to the resurrection from the dead.
323
Note how Paul and Ellen White counsel us to behave: It would be well for us to spend
a thoughtful hour each day in contemplation of the life of Christ. We should take it point by
point, and let the imagination grasp each scene, especially the closing ones. As we thus dwell
upon His great sacrifice for us, our confidence in Him will be more constant, our love will be
quickened, and we shall be more deeply imbued with His spirit. If we would be saved at last, we
must learn the lesson of penitence and humiliation at the foot of the cross. Ellen White, The
Desire of Ages, 83.
Dont you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into
his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as
Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. . . . 8
Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 For we know that
since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over
him. 10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God. 11 In

80
By nature our body parts are all governed by self. Their fundamental instinct is to protect
self, to defend self, to live for self. The problem with selfishness is that it doesnt ever work in
the long run. The good that we desire for ourselves never comes. Instead we become more and
more chained to the dysfunctional patterns of the past. A legalistic approach to life never worked
for me or for anyone I know because it leaves us chained to the selfish patterns of our old
history.
But when we spend that thoughtful hour each day with Christ what kind of history do we
see? It is His perfect history. He went about healing, ministering and serving others. He did not
live for Himself but for others. So when we die with Him we no longer have to live for
ourselves. We can live for Him who died for us. Instead of our self-centered old history, he have
a new history of healing, ministering and serving. We no longer live for ourselves but for
Him who died for us (2 Cor 5:15). His new history changes the whole direction of our lives
(what the Bible calls conversion).
It must be remembered, however, that the full fruits of the gospel take time. In my own
personal experience there was a considerable lag between my intellectual acceptance of the
gospel and my full embrace of it emotionally and physically. It is possible to know in your mind
that you are right with God and yet not feel it in your heart or in your flesh. It is possible to
know where you stand with God and yet be plagued with negative thoughts and anxieties. But
over time, as we reckon ourselves dead to sin and alive in Christ (Rom 8:11), as we spend that

the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12 Therefore
do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. 13 Do not offer the
parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God,
as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him
as instruments of righteousness. 14 For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under

81
thoughtful hour each day (DA 83), as we learn to see Christs face instead of our own in the
mirror (2 Cor 4:17-18), our emotions and our physical responses will more and more reflect the
kind of history Jesus achieved rather than our own.324
Here is where the many Adventist rules for life can be either a blessing or a curse. When
looked at as things we have to do in order to find Christ, the multitude of dietary, dress and
behavioral rules Adventism advises become a heavy burden that mires us even deeper in failure
and disgrace. We see in greater and greater detail how hopeless and miserable we really are. And
in order to live with ourselves, we hide our history and performance from each other and
sometimes even from God, the opposite of confession and repentance.
But when our standing with God is grounded outside of ourselves, when we embrace the
new history that is ours in Christ, our failures and mistakes no longer define who we are, they are
vestiges of the past. In the confidence we gain from the new history, we reject the reappearance
of the old history as an anomaly, something that no longer belongs to us. In the joy of the new
history, the rules of our faith become guidelines that help protect the gains of the new history.
They remind us not to allow ourselves to slip back into old, negative modes of thinking and
acting.
To some degree the old history will always be with us in this life (Rom 8:19-23). But the
new history that is ours in Christ enables us to reject that old history at every manifestation. We
no longer allow that old history to define us, instead we are defined by the perfect life of Jesus.
law, but under grace. Rom 6:3-14.
324
In my own case, it was almost twenty years from the day I understood the gospel
intellectually to the day I was able to fully embrace it emotionally. The gospel does not instantly
cancel the old history, but puts us in the place where we can more and more put that old history
to death and live in the light of the new history achieved for us in Christ (Rom 8:19-23).

82
Our behavior and attitudes are less and less grounded in earning Gods favor and more and more
the outflow of a life of gratitude grounded in grace (Rom 6:14). Genuine obedience is always the
outflow of grace. Any other obedience is grounded in selfishness, the desire to save ourselves at
all cost. Selfish obedience is a hindrance to both salvation and growth in character.

Conclusion
I began this essay setting the context for the Old Testament doctrine of resurrection in the
ancient world, where resurrection in biblical terms was unknown and virtually unconceived of.
While the immortality of the soul gained the ascendancy in the time of Plato, resurrection
remained inconceivable. The absence of resurrection seems also to have been the case in much of
the Old Testament, although visions of Israels restoration more and more included the
restoration of individuals to bodily life in the future. By the time of Jesus, bodily resurrection had
become the standard view within Early Judaism.
The New Testament writers accepted the standard Jewish view with one major exception.
They saw in the resurrection of Jesus a first fruit or down payment on the resurrection of the
whole human race at the end of time. Just as Jesus died and rose again, so also everyone who
believes in Jesus will rise to immortal, bodily life at the Second Coming. The New Testament
adds another significant element to the doctrine. Through the Holy Spirit the power of Jesus
resurrection begins to be exercised in the living experience of those who believe in Jesus.
Through this resurrection power, believers can not only experience Gods acceptance, but can
also be freed from the addictive power of sin and begin to live the kind of life they will
experience in eternity.

83
Exploring the Adam-Christ typology enabled us to get a clearer picture of just how the
resurrection of Jesus can make all the difference in human experience today. Through Adam the
whole human race reaped the consequences of sin and death. Through the resurrection of Jesus
Christ both death and the addicting power of sin were and are overcome in a great reversal of
fortunes. Our history and experience were placed on Him so that His history and experience can
be gifted to us. This is the key to assurance of salvation and victory over sin in our lives today.
In closing, Timothy Keller has pointed me to a great conflict in the realm of literature that
our topic sheds light on.325 It seems that we live in the first era of human history where a happy
ending is perceived as the mark of inferior art. If life is ultimately meaningless, then a happy
ending to a story is mere escape at best and a lie at worst. Happy endings are all right for
childrens stories but not for thinking adults. Grown up stories, like Seinfeld and Thirty Rock lack
narrative coherence and a happy ending. In spite of his great popularity, Steven Spielberg never
won an Oscar until he stopped making movies with happy endings.
The spiritual mentor of C. S. Lewis, J. R. R. Tolkien, tied the significance of the
resurrection of Jesus to the world we live in today. He argued that everyday people love happy
endings because they somehow sense that happy endings are not just escapist but true to reality,
in spite of what they see in the world. The most satisfying stories are those that conclude with
good triumphing over evil, peace over catastrophe and death over life.326 The world is certainly
full of danger, sorrow and tragedy, but there is meaning in things, a difference between good and
evil and a final defeat of evil and escape from death, the best of all happy endings.
325

Keller, 226-230.
Tolkien called this kind of story eucatastrophe. J. R. R. Tolkien, Tree and Leaf and
The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth (New York: Harper/Collins, 2001), 68-70; quoted in Keller,
326

84
The story of Jesus resurrection is not just another story with a happy ending, it is not just
another story that gives us a glimpse of ultimate reality, pointing to an ultimate happy ending, it
is the story that embraces all other stories. The resurrection of Jesus is the underlying reality to
which all other happy endings point. To use the words of Keller, The fact of the resurrection of
Jesus is what makes the gospel story not merely a great experience to read, but a life-changing
power. . . . it takes evil and loss with utmost seriousness, because it says we cannot save
ourselves. . . . But if we believe the gospel, then our hearts slowly heal even as we face the
darkest times because we know that, because of Jesus, life is like that.327
According to Robert W. Jenson, our culture is in crisis today because the worldhas lost
its story.328 The resurrection of Jesus is the ultimate story that certifies an even deeper and more
mysterious reality. We are involved in a cosmic conflict where the outcome is assured. Victory
will come after defeat. Weakness will triumph over strength. Rescue will come after
abandonment. Life will triumph over death. The resurrection of Jesus demonstrates that the
ultimate story is true. And if it is true, we can have hope, meaning and purpose now because we
know that life really is like that.

227.
327

Keller, 228-229.
Robert W. Jenson, How the World Lost Its Story, First Things 36 (October, 1993),
19-24; as quoted in Keller, 229.
328