Are the Dead Alive Now? (NO, if you are a Sadducee!)

[wmfinck]

From footnote #24 page 257 from Jesus Christ Our Passover by Victor Paul Wierwille:

Matthew 27:52 and 53 are clearly added by scribes. Manuscript 354 in Venice, Italy, omits these verses. Though other textual documentation for this has not yet been found, it must be realized that the earliest manuscript including this section of Matthew 27 dates from the fourth century A.D. These verses must be an addition since they are contradictory to other scriptures which teach us that the dead are dead and will remain so until Christ returns. Until that time, only Christ has been raised bodily from death unto everlasting life. Textual critics as well as marginal notes in other old manuscripts have recognized these verses as later interpolations. The phrase “after his resurrection” in Matthew 27:53 demonstrates the passage is totally out of context, obviously a scribal addition.

I just couldn't pass on this one. This alone leaves me to doubt whether Wierville's writing is worthy of my attention, because his reasoning is obviously biased. "Manuscript 354 in Venice Italy" is an 11th Century miniscule, and one of hundreds of its type which exist in libraries, museums and monasteries throughout Christendom. Since Matthew 27:52 and 53 exist in hundreds of older manuscripts, and in all of the early Great Uncials of the 4th, 5th, and later centuries, it is evident to me that Wierville's logic is absolutely biased and perverted. Throw that book in the trash! All 354 proves is that some medieval scribe goofed up and missed a couple of lines while copying, something that actually happened quite frequently, or perhaps was himself a skeptic and left them out purposefully. If you want to prove that verses were added to Scripture (i.e. Mark 16:9-20), you have to point out evidence from manuscripts equal to or older in antiquity than those which contain the verses in question.

[wmfinck]

Mountainman, here is something to think about:

Acts 12:12-16 house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying. 13 And as Peter knocked at the door of the gate, a damsel came to hearken, named Rhoda. 14 And when she knew Peter's voice, she opened not the gate for gladness, but ran in, and told how Peter stood before the gate. 15 And they said unto her, Thou art mad. But she constantly affirmed that it was even so. Then said they, It is his angel. 16 But Peter continued knocking: and when they had opened the door, and saw him, they were astonished.

The disciples at the home of Mary had given Peter up for dead. So when the maiden professed to see him, they responded "it is his angel". This indicates that the disciples believed Peter's spirit would live on, even if his body were dead. The possibility of this is what the Sadducees (and today's jewish or jew-tainted materialists) deny, for which see Acts 23:8. That is why I have labeled you a Sadducee.

Paul also clearly taught the continued existence of the spirit once the body is dead:

2 Corinthians 4:16-5:1(CNT): 16 On which account we do not falter, rather then if our outer man is being destroyed, then our inner is being restored day by day. 17 For the present lightness of our tribulation, an exceedingly surpassing eternal abundance of honor is earned by us; 18 we not considering the things being seen, but the things not being seen; the things being seen temporary, but the things not being seen eternal. 1 Therefore we know that if perhaps our earthly house of the tabernacle would be destroyed, we have a building from Yahweh, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

2 Corinthians 5:6-11 (KJV): 6 Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord: 7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight:) 8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord. 9 Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him. 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. 11 Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.

I perceive that you have not yet answered MOST of what I have posted to you on this topic, except to ask questions or bring up other arguments. If you wish to engage in this honestly, please address the things that I have said directly, and do not evade the points which I have raised. For instance, if Yahweh IS the God of Abraham, and if Yahweh IS the God of the living - AND NOT THE GOD OF THE DEAD - then how could you possibly claim that Abraham is dead? His body may be dead, but that is only the vessel for his Spirit!

[Mountainman]

Wierwille died in the mid 80’s. At that time, he was the only preacher (that I knew of) who believed the bible was The Word of God. All of the other preachers would rarely mention scripture and then spend the rest of the time talking about their personal experiences. I credit Wierwille with sparking the back-to-the-bible movement that is still alive today.

IMO the knowledge that I hear coming from you and other Christian Identity researchers is greater than what I heard from Wierwille’s ministry.

He was a Universalist and believed in speaking in tongues.

His books, Jesus Christ our Passover, Are the Dead Alive Now?, Jesus Christ our Promised Seed, and Jesus Christ is NOT God, are good reads. My favorite is Jesus Christ our Passover.

He opened a can of worms several years before his death when he began teaching that the Jews of today are not the Judeans of the Old Testament. He taught that everywhere the word Jew was in the bible it should be understood as Judean.

I believe that in his later years he was trying to cause division in the ministry he built. (it is called The Way International) My suspicions are that he was introduced to Christian Identity researchers and he had doubts about what he had been preaching through most of his life.

I will read over your comments on his research and reply when I have more time to think on them.

Thanks!

[wmfinck]

He opened a can of worms several years before his death when he began teaching that the Jews of today are not the Judeans of the Old Testament. He taught that everywhere the word Jew was in the bible it should be understood as Judean.

Well, of course I do not know how he came to that conclusion, but it is definitely the correct one! It can be proven beyond doubt, that the jews of today are the descendants of Esau and Shelah, both of whom were mingled with the Canaanites, and along the way they have picked up the blood of many other races, of all sorts, in diverse places.

In scripture, we can see that the disbelieving Judaeans were actually the seed of Esau (with the Shelahites added into the mix) from the following chapters and verses:
Ezekiel 35-36; Malachi 1-2; Luke 11:47-51; John 8; Romans 9; 2 Thes. 2; and Revelation 2:9 & 3:9. Those passages, along with the testimony of Strabo, Josephus, Eusebius, and some of the Apocryphal literature, show beyond doubt that the jews are Esau.

Everywhere that the word "jew" appears in the New Testament it should be Judaea, referring to the Roman political entity that was populated by people of diverse races by that time, including both Israelites and Edomites, among others. Where the word "jew" appears in the Old Testament (and it is not there at all until 2 Kings 16:6) it should be Judahite or Judah.

[JamesTheJust]

Bill and Mountainman,

Firstly, thanks Mountainman for your response to Matt. 27. My Internet has been spotty at best, so it has been difficult to respond. After reading your rebuttal, I began a search on the various ages of the manuscripts, but was hampered due to the fact that the Internet went down.

So...thanks Bill for your response as you already have access to that information. I've heard you discussing it several times on Talkshoe. BTW: do you have a particular site you can recommend concerning the various ages of the Greek manuscripts? A google search has so many hits and it is time consuming trying to wade through them all.

This has been a lively and informative discussion and I thank all who have participated.

[Mountainman]

Re: Matthew 27:52 and 53

Wmf>>>If you want to prove that verses were added to Scripture (i.e. Mark 16:9-20), you have to point out evidence from manuscripts equal to or older in antiquity than those which contain the verses in question.

We also have God’s Word itself to compare it to. These verses do not follow the same time line or narrative and nowhere else is there testimony of people seeing:

“graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, 53. And came out of the graves after His resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.”

This does not sound like the many clear versus that teach that death is an enemy and only Jesus Christ – and only J.C. - was resurrected from the dead. These verses sound more like a script from Hollywood’s “Night of the living Dead” movie. They just don’t fit in and Wierwille is pointing out that he is not the only one who believed this.


Re: Acts 12:15

WmF>>>So when the maiden professed to see him, they responded "it is his angel". This indicates that the disciples believed Peter's spirit would live on, even if his body were dead.

The word Angel is messenger. They did not believe it was Peter, but Peter’s Spiritual messenger from God.... one of the “ministering spirits” as mentioned in Hebrews 1:14

Re: 2 Corinthians 4:16-5:1
“Therefore we know that if perhaps our earthly house of the tabernacle would be destroyed, we have a building from Yahweh, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.”

WmF>>Paul also clearly taught the continued existence of the spirit once the body is dead:

I would say this is NOT “ONCE the body is dead” rather once the body is resurrected. The dead are NOT alive now.

Re: 2 Corinthians 5:8 “We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.”

Here are Wierwille’s comments from his book “Are the dead alive now?” pgs 57-60

“The phrase in verse 8”... willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord” has brought error into people’s thinking. It is most frequently construed to say that when a person is absent from the body, he is AUTOMATICALLY an immediately present with the Lord. Most people who quote “absent from the body, present with the Lord” are surprised when they find out this is not at all what the verse says. It says, “we are.. WILLING rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord” – which is very different.

The focus of II Corinthians 4:14 through II Corinthians 5:21 is on the subject of the return of Christ, and not particularly on death.

II Corinthians 4:14:
Knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also by Jesus, and shall present us with you.

God will raise us up and present us. Paul reinforces this truth four verses later.

II Corinthians 4:18:
While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal: but the things which are not seen are eternal.

Paul says we do not look at the things which are seen: we look at the things which are not seen. Death IS seen, but the return has not yet been seen.

II Corinthians 5:1:
For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

Verse2:
For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
Verse 3:
If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
Verse 4:
For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.

Paul is speaking of the return: not to die or to be unclothed, as it says in verse 4, but to be clothed upon our glorious body at His return. The same is recorded in I Thessalonians 4:17.

Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so [houtos, in this manner, by His return] shall we ever be with the Lord.

The return of Christ is the enveloping context of II Corinthians 5:8 which says,

We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body [so long as we are in the body, the return has not come so we are naturally absent from the Lord] and to be present with the Lord.

When will we “be present with the Lord”? At the parousia, the return.

...... Present with the Lord without a new spiritual body via the return of Christ is unscriptural and savours of theosophy. For who can look or WAIT for the Saviour according to Philippians 3:20, 21 if he is ALREADY with Him or who would need the changing of his body if he has already been present with the Lord in glory for years?”

End quote.

Conclusion:

I believe that God’s Word teaches that the dead are dead and ONLY J.C. has been resurrected from the dead and he is alive NOW.

[wmfinck]

And the thief was with him in paradise. That Day! I do not agree with any of yours - or Wierville's - philosophical conclusions. Paul clearly states that to be absent from the body is to be present with Yahweh. Both John and Paul attested that their spirits had left their bodies. Your world is the world of the materialistic Sadducees.

[Mountainman]

Regarding being in paradise THAT day - sorry Christ was in the grave and his body saw corruption for 3 days he wasn't in paradise.

Regarding me being a sadducee. I disagree. I believe you are preaching the devil's doctrin about life after death. This doctrin is believed by the devil inspired religions that the House of Israel went whoring after. It was the original lie - "thou shalt not surely die" in Genisis.

BTW if I die first and if there is life after death, I'll see if I can pay you a visit and let you know you were right.

If you die first and there is life after death PLEASE don't pay me a visit. I will not believe it's you and you will scare the hell out of me.

[wmfinck]

Oh, I might just scare the hell out of you long before you die, LOL. Okay, i am sort of kidding.

The plain word of scripture has Christ saying "Today you will be with me in paradise". You care about the destiny of the body. It is the spirit which counts. You argue not with me, but with the Scripture! The point of the resurrection is to dwell here in the physical world. "Thy kingdom come, on earth as it is in heaven" is the hope of every Christian.

As for the contended verses in Matthew, you are right that there is no second Gospel witness: however they still cannot be simply dismissed for that reason alone. There has to be a firm witness testifying against them (as, for instance, Genesis 4:1 is a corrupt verse but also has many contrary witnesses) or manuscript evidence that it does not belong. In this case there is neither.

You STILL have not addressed half of the points i have raised in this thread.

Sadducee! (LOL)

[matthewott]

I have to concur with Bill, mountainman, that you have not addressed much of the scriptural evidence provided to show you proof of The Truth. I have been following this thread to a degree and have avoided making comments as I left that up to the more learned; however I cannot help myself now. I will not provide quotes from scripture or knowledge gleaned from other books. What I post comes from my Christian heritage and the LOGICAL perspective I see: How can you feel that the Breath of Life, the piece of Yahweh that every pure Adamite has, simply vanishes into thin air when this TEMPORARY physical shell ceases to operate? That's like saying that when a computer stops functioning, it's harddrive disappears with all its information until the computer gets fixed and it 'magically' reappears! Where does this Breath of Life, our SPIRIT, go? It CANNOT simply vanish until the time of the resurrection! What about Abraham's Bosom? What about Lazarus? While I absolutely applaud your fervent quest for The Truth, mountainman, I do suggest you take the evidence provided here, gleaned from MANY sources, to heart instead trying to push the doctrine of a single man who obviously knew toward the end of his ministry that his teachings were flawed.