Why did Jesus refuse to confirm the Old Testament law to stone the woman caught in adultery?

The particular passage in question is found in John 8:3-11. It reads, in context (emphasis added):

“Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst, they said to Him, ‘Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, IN THE VERY ACT. Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?’ This they said, TESTING HIM, THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING OF WHICH TO ACCUSE HIM. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear. So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to them, ‘He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first’ [better: ‘let Him throw THE first stone’]. And again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. Then those who heard it, BEING CONVICTED BY THEIR CONSCIENCE, went out one by one, beginning with the oldest even to the last. And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had raised Himself up and saw no one but the woman, He said to her, ‘Woman, where are those accusers of yours? Has no one condemned you?’ She said, ‘No one, Lord.’ And Jesus said to her, ‘Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.'”

We need to understand that Jesus did NOT come to destroy the law (Matthew 5:17-20). He did not come to declare that the Ten Commandments were obsolete and that adultery was no longer a sin. At the same time, the passage in John 8 points out that the scribes and Pharisees came to test or tempt Him, so that they could accuse Him. In what way was this a test?

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible points out:

“Had our Lord condemned the woman to death, they might have accused him to Pilate, as arrogating to himself the power of life and death, which the Romans had taken away from the Jews [compare John 18:31]; besides, the Roman laws did not condemn an adulteress to be put to death. On the other hand, if he had said she should not be put to death, they might have represented him to the people as one who decided contrary to the law, and favored the crime of which the woman was accused.”

We also need to keep in mind that Christ had not come in the flesh to condemn or destroy, but to save human life (compare Luke 9:56). It was simply not His purpose to get involved in the affairs of this world. For instance, He refused to become judge or arbitrator over those who fought over their inheritance (compare Luke 12:13-14).

John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible points out:

“Christ came not into the world to act the part of a civil magistrate, and therefore refused to arbitrate a case, or be concerned in dividing an inheritance… Nor did he come into the world to condemn it, but that the world, through him, might be saved [John 3:17]…”

Christ expects this same kind of approach and conduct from His disciples today. He told Pilate that His servants–either His angels or His disciples–would not fight, as His Kingdom was not (and still is not) of this world (John 18:36). That is one reason why Christ’s disciples are opposed to joining the military or voting in governmental presidential elections or serving on a jury.

We should note that Christians, who live under the conditions of the New Covenant, are NOT to carry out or participate in any way in the execution of criminals. As we explain in our free booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound”:

“God gave Israel certain national laws, for instance in Deuteronomy 16 and 17, dealing with the punishment and, in certain cases, the execution of criminals. Converted Christians are servants of the New Covenant, which gives life (2 Corinthians 3:6). They are not to judge or condemn another person. Christ said that he who is without sin may cast the first stone (John 8:7). At the same time, we are told that nobody can claim to be without sin (1 John 1:8). Therefore, Christians are not to participate, for instance as jurors, in the judicial systems of this world. In addition, the Church today is not to carry out the death penalty, either. Rather, the ministry is to preach today reconciliation and eternal life (2 Corinthians 5:18–21).”

Under Old Testament law, both the adulteress AND the adulterer had to be stoned (Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22), if they had been convicted based on the accusations of at least two witnesses (Deuteronomy 17:6). In addition, the witnesses had to cast the first stones (Deuteronomy 17:7). We can see from the foregoing that the situation before Christ did not even come close to such a “trial” and “conviction” and “sentencing,” as required by the law.

First, even though the woman was allegedly caught in the very act of adultery, the accusers did not present the man. Secondly, when Christ challenged them by pointing out their hypocrisy, they all disappeared, so that Christ and the woman were left without any accuser. No valid or legal judgment was pronounced by any competent judge, and even if it had been, the witnesses had disappeared so that the sentence could not have been carried out.

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible states: “They had accused her, but they had not proceeded to the act expressive of judicial condemnation.”

Based on all of these factors, Christ told the woman that He did not condemn her to death either. Barnes elaborates:

“This is evidently to be taken in the sense of judicial condemnation, or of passing sentence as a magistrate, for this was what they had arraigned her for. It was not to obtain his opinion about adultery, but to obtain the condemnation of the woman. As he claimed no civil authority, he said that he did not exercise it, and should not condemn her to die.”

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible adds the following thoughts: “It would have been strange if Jesus, when he was not a magistrate, and had not the witnesses before him to examine them, and when she had not been tried and condemned by the law and legal judges, should have taken upon him to condemn her.”

Compare also Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: “The law appointed the hands of the witnesses to be first upon the criminal, and afterwards the hands of all the people, so that if they fly off, and do not condemn her, the prosecution drops.”

However, Christ admonished the woman not to continue sinning. Even though Christ did not claim “civil authority,” He nevertheless showed that He “regarded the action of which they accused her as sin” (Barnes), and He commanded her to cease from sinning–especially from the act of adultery. If we apply Christ’s comments, that He was not “condemning” the person, in a spiritual sense, we have to conclude that Christ forgave the woman her sins. God forgives us upon true repentance (compare Acts 2:38; Acts 17:30; 1 Kings 8:33-40). Christ, knowing our thoughts and hearts (compare Luke 5:22), could and would have seen that the woman before Him had deeply repented of her sin, and so Christ forgave her. We find, in similar instances, that Christ forgave sins upon repentance (compare Luke 7:36-50). At the same time, Christ cautioned the woman caught in the act of adultery, not to return to her former adulterous conduct (compare John 5:14).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Salt and Commitment

On Saturday, July 26, 2008, Kalon Mitchell and Michael Link will give split sermons, titled, respectively, “Salt” and “Commitment.”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at 12:30 pm Pacific Time (which is 2:30 pm Central Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock

A new StandingWatch program has been posted on StandingWatch, Google Video and YouTube.  It is titled, “Is War With Iran Coming Soon?” In the program, Norbert Link is discussing the fact that we are hearing more and more the warning that Israel may strike Iran militarily before the end of this year. Is this possible or likely? What consequences would such an attack have for the United States and the rest of the world? Does the Bible give us any information as to what IS going to happen?

The following video-recorded sermon by Norbert Link was posted on Google Video:

Bible Study–In the Name of Jesus Christ, November 11, 2005

We are preparing for a free Public Bible Lecture, to be conducted by Norbert Link on September 7, 2008, at the Hilton Garden Inn in Fort Collins, Colorado. The lecture will address developments in the United States and Europe in the light of biblical prophecy. More information will be forthcoming.

Why did Jesus ask John just prior to His death to take care of His mother Mary?

Some have concluded that Jesus was Mary’s only child, and that He therefore asked John to take care of His mother after His death, as there was nobody else in His immediate family who could have done so. However, this is not what the Bible teaches.

We read in John 19:25-27:

“Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother… When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, ‘Woman, behold your son!’ Then He said to the disciple, ‘Behold your mother!’ And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home.”

Almost every biblical scholar agrees that the “disciple whom Christ loved” was the disciple John (Compare for additional references, John 13:23; 20:2; 21:7). Especially in John 21, John identifies himself as the “disciple whom Jesus loved” (compare verses 20-24).

The fact that Jesus entrusted John, who was possibly one of His nephews [compare comments in the “People’s New Testament”], with the care of His mother, does not mean, however, that Mary did not have other children. The Bible clearly reveals that Mary and Joseph had additional children, AFTER Jesus was born.

Our free booklet, “Jesus Christ–A Great Mystery,” proves this fact in great detail in chapter 3, “Christ’s Relatives,” on pages 28-30. You might want to read the entire passage in the booklet, but here are just a few highlights:

“The ‘Virgin Birth’ is clearly taught in Scripture. However, the Bible does not teach that Mary stayed a virgin for the rest of her life. We read in Matthew 1:25 that Joseph ‘did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son.’ The word ’till’ or ”until’ signifies that after the birth of Jesus, Joseph DID ‘know her,’ that is, he did have a sexual relationship with her…

“Luke 2:6–7 confirms this: ‘So it was, that while they were there, the days were completed for her to be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn Son…’ The Greek word for ‘firstborn’ is, ‘prototokon.’ It means, ‘first-born,’ but it does not describe an only child. The word for ‘only-born’ is ‘monogenes.’ In Luke 7:12, the word ‘monogenes’ is used, when describing a person who was ‘the only son of his mother.’

“The Jews knew that Jesus was not the only son of Mary. They knew very well that Jesus had brothers and sisters. We read the account in Matthew 13:53–56: ‘Now it came to pass, when Jesus had finished these parables, that He departed from there. When He had come to His own country, He taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished and said, “Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works? Is this not the carpenter’s Son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this Man get all these things?”‘…

“Some teach that Christ’s ‘brothers’ were in fact Christ’s cousins. This is the official position of the Roman Catholic Church, although this has recently been criticized by Catholic scholars who have concluded that the brothers were, in fact, Christ’s real brothers and not His cousins. The word for brother is ‘adelphos.’ This Greek word is used in Matthew 1:2 and 4:21, clearly referring to literal brothers. The word for cousin is ‘exadelphos,’ meaning ‘from brothers.’ When the Jews pointed out in Matthew 13 that Christ’s brothers were with them, they used the word ‘adelphos,’ not the word ‘exadelphos.’

“Some propose that the brothers and sisters mentioned in Matthew 13 were Christ’s spiritual brothers and sisters, not His physical siblings. But… the Bible makes a clear distinction between Christ’s physical brothers and His spiritual brothers. In addition… Christ’s physical relatives did not believe in Him and so they could not possibly have been referred to as Christ’s spiritual brothers and sisters.”

Why, then, did Jesus ask John, rather than His brother James, to take care of Mary?

We need to realize that at the time of Jesus’ death, none of His brothers believed in Him. Also, John was the ONLY disciple who stayed with Christ until He died–showing His dedication and bravery and the intimate relationship between Christ and His disciple whom He loved. Christ KNEW that John would take care of His mother–more than His half-brothers would have been able or willing to do–and that from the very moment (or the “same hour”) of His death.

Even though the Bible does not specifically and expressly say why Jesus chose John, there are several important hints. Most commentaries which understand that Jesus HAD brothers and sisters, also give plausible explanations, based on Scripture, as to WHY Christ entrusted His mother to His beloved disciple who BELIEVED in Him–rather than to one of His brothers who did NOT believe in Him at that time of His death.

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible points out, in John 19:26, that Jesus said, in effect:

“‘… take that disciple whom my power shall preserve from evil for thy son; and, while he considers thee as his mother, account him for thy child.’ It is probable that it was because the keeping of [Mary] was entrusted to him that he was the only disciple of our Lord who died a natural death, God having preserved him for the sake of the person whom he gave him in charge. Many children are not only preserved alive, but abundantly prospered in temporal things, for the sake of the desolate parents whom God hast cast upon their care. It is very likely that Joseph was dead previously to this.”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible elaborates, as follows:

“This was an honour put upon John, and a testimony both to his prudence and to his fidelity. If he who knows all things had not known that John loved him, he would not have made him his mother’s guardian. It is a great honour to be employed for Christ, and to be entrusted with any of his interest in the world… It would be a care and some charge to John; but he cheerfully accepted it, and took her to his own home, not objecting the trouble nor expense, nor his obligations to his own family, nor the ill-will he might contract by it… [Some commentaries say] that she lived to remove with him to Ephesus.”

Tradition and historical records report that John was later accompanied on his missionary travels by an elderly woman, who–it is felt–was none other than Mary, the mother of Jesus.

We might also add that John had more writing to do. At least five writings of his have been preserved and are part of the Holy Scriptures. He wrote the “gospel of John” (of which Mary was undoubtedly a good source of information), three letters (1 John; 2 John; and 3 John) and finally the last book of the Bible–the book of Revelation, while banished to the isle of Patmos.

It is true, that ultimately, as we explain in our afore-mentioned booklet, at least three of Christ’s four brothers came to the faith (James, Simeon and Jude, who wrote the letter of Jude). Perhaps Jose or Joseph became converted, too. We are also informed that James became a very influential leader in the early Church, and that he wrote the letter of James. But that happened LATER. Before then, Christ’s brothers were unbelieving and hostile toward Christ (compare John 7:5). They might have been envious and even perhaps hateful toward Him. He referred to them as enemies within His own household–being without honor in His own home.

At the time of the crucifixion, Christ did not think that Mary needed to experience further agonies from her own family. It was more than enough that she had to observe the brutal death of her beloved Son–feeling the sword piercing through her own soul also (Luke 2:35). Christ, in His wisdom and foresight, entrusted His mother to the care of John, knowing that he would be able to provide for her the physical and spiritual needs which Mary needed the most at that difficult time in her life.

As explained in our afore-mentioned booklet, tradition tells us that James, after his conversion and leadership role in the early church in Jerusalem, experienced a violent death in his faithful service to Christ. IF Mary was still alive by that time, a further transition of care for her would have been necessary. Christ, foreseeing this, entrusted the care of His mother to John, knowing that John would die long AFTER the death of His mother.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

The Good Samaritan

On Saturday, July 19, 2008, Norbert Link will give the sermon, titled, “The Good Samaritan.”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at 12:30 pm Pacific Time (which is 2:30 pm Central Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock

Reminder: Memorial Service for Paul Voss on Sunday, July 13, 2008

As we announced before, Paul Voss, a long-time deacon in God’s Church, died on May 23, 2008, at his home in Oregon. A memorial service for Paul will be conducted on Sunday, July 13, 2008, at 1:00 pm, at the Seventh-Day Adventist Church, 2701 East 8th Street, (Paradise Valley), National City, California 91950. All family members and friends are invited to attend. Please contact us for any questions.

The following video-recorded sermon by Norbert Link was posted on Google Video:

Bible Study–Marriage–Physical and Spiritual, June 28, 2008

This week, a new StandingWatch program was recorded, titled, “Is War With Iran Coming Soon?” In the program, Norbert Link discusses the fact that we are hearing more and more the warning that Israel may strike Iran militarily before the end of this year. Is this possible or likely? What consequences would such an attack have for the United States and the rest of the world? Does the Bible give us any information as to what IS going to happen?

Norbert Link recorded also the German version of the program, titled, “Kommt Krieg mit Iran?”

Did Jesus violate His own words, when He first said to His disciples before His crucifixion that He would drink no more wine, and when He later drank wine before His death?

Actually, this question has puzzled quite a few people. It is important to read all the relevant passages in context.

We read in Matthew 26:27-29 that Jesus gave wine to the disciples, symbolizing His shed blood for the forgiveness of sins. The entire passage reads (Authorized Version throughout, unless otherwise mentioned):

“And He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament [covenant], which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

In the parallel passage in Mark 14:25, He is quoted as saying: “Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” Compare, too, the wording in Luke 22:18.

These passages do not only refer to wine per se, but also to any product or “fruit” of the vine–including grape juice or vinegar.

Later, during the crucifixion, we read indeed that Jesus first refused to drink of the fruit of the vine which was offered to Him.

Matthew 27:34 tells us:

“They gave Him vinegar to drink mingled with gall; and when he tasted thereof, he would not drink.” The parallel passage in Mark 15:23 clarifies that the “vinegar” was actually cheap or “sour wine.” We read: “And they gave him to drink wine [New King James Bible: “sour wine”] mingled with myrrh: but he received it not.” The passage in Luke 23:36 explains further that the soldiers offered Him vinegar or sour wine, at least in part, to mock Him.

W.E.Vine explains in his “Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words,” that the Greek word for “vinegar,” i.e., “oxos,” “denotes sour wine, the ordinary drink of labourers and common soldiers.”

But then, just before His death, we read that Jesus partook of some fruit of the vine. This occurred, in part, in fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy in Psalm 69:21 (“… in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink”). During biblical times, vinegar was usually produced from grapes (compare the reference of “vinegar made from wine,” in Numbers 6:3). So, the Old Testament prophesied that Jesus would drink vinegar or sour wine just before His death.

We read in Matthew 27:48:

“And straightway one of them ran, and took a spunge, and filled it with vinegar [New King James Bible: “sour wine”], and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink.” Compare the parallel account in Mark 15:36.

John informs us in his account that at that time, Jesus DID drink from the vinegar or sour wine. We read in John 19:28-30:

“After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst. Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar [New King James Bible: “sour wine”]: and they filled a spunge with vinegar [“sour wine”], and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had RECEIVED the vinegar [“sour wine”], he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

Many commentaries explain why Jesus did not drink from the “sour wine” earlier, but why He drank from it now. For instance, the Nelson Study Bible writes:

“‘Sour wine’ was not the same as the drugged wine that had been offered to Jesus earlier (‘wine mingled with myrrh’; see Mark 15:23). Jesus did not take that wine because He wanted to die fully conscious. He did take a sip of this wine; one of the agonies of crucifixion was incredible thirst, added to the terrible pain.”

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible states to John 19:29:

“This was probably that tart small wine which we are assured was the common drink of the Roman soldiers. Our word vinegar comes from the French vin aigre, sour or tart wine… This vinegar must not be confounded with the vinegar and gall mentioned [in Matthew 27:34], and [in Mark 15:23]. That, being a stupefying potion, intended to alleviate his pain, he refused to drink; but of this he took a little, and then expired…”

The commentary of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown agrees, stating:

“The vinegar mingled with gall [Matthew 27:34], or the wine mingled with myrrh [Mark 15:23] was offered to Jesus before his crucifixion as a stupefying draught… The vinegar in this case was offered in order to revive Christ. John does not mention the stupefying draught.”

The Broadman Bible Commentary adds: “… because this drink [in John 19:29] was not drugged (as in Mark 15:23; Matt. 27:34) but acutely produced a refreshing effect, Jesus willingly received it.”

To summarize, most commentaries agree that the “vinegar,” or “sour wine,” which Christ refused, was a mixture of vinegar and a narcotic herb which had pain-killing effects, while the second, which He accepted, was the common drink of workers and soldiers known as posca, which was a mixture of vinegar, water and eggs.

What most commentaries fail to explain, however, as far as we can see, is HOW and WHY Jesus COULD drink from the sour or tart wine–the “vinegar”–even though He had said earlier that He would not drink from the fruit of the vine until He would do so WITH HIS DISCIPLES in His Father’s Kingdom. When He drank vinegar or sour wine–which was “fruit of the vine”–, He was not yet in His Father’s Kingdom–nor did the disciples drink with Him, either.

To repeat, it is important to realize that the “vinegar” that Jesus drank just before His death, was “wine vinegar” or “sour wine.”
According to Easton’s Bible Dictionary, the “vinegar” mentioned in John 19:29-30, “… was the common sour wine… daily made use of by the Roman soldiers.” Both Nave’s and Strong’s Greek Dictionary agree that this was sour wine.

The question still remains: How could He drink wine vinegar–a product or fruit of the vine–even though He had said that He would NOT drink of the fruit of the vine until His return to earth at the time of His Second Coming?

It is important to read Jesus’ statements in context. Returning to Luke 22:14-16, we see that Jesus, when saying that He would not eat or drink THEREOF, referred to the symbols of the New Testament PASSOVER. The entire account reads as follows:

“And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat THIS PASSOVER with you before I suffer: For I say unto you, I will not any more eat THEREOF, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”

He went on to say, in verse 18, that He would not drink of the fruit of the vine “until the kingdom of God shall come,” and He distributed the bread–symbolizing His broken body–to be eaten by His disciples (verse 19).

Christ did NOT say that He would not drink any more of any fruit of the vine–vinegar, sour wine, grape juice, etc.–and He did not say that He would not eat anymore any bread, until His return to establish and set up the Kingdom of God. He ONLY made reference to the symbols of bread and wine as part of the New Testament Passover of which He would NOT partake UNTIL He had established the Kingdom of God here on earth.

On the other hand, we read that Christ apparently DID eat bread with two of His disciples after His resurrection, but before His ascension, and, of course, before His return to establish the Kingdom on earth, which has not happened yet. Luke 24:30-31 reports that “… it came to pass, as he sat AT MEAT with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave it to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.”

In addition, John 21:9, 12, 15 reports that the resurrected Jesus had breakfast with His disciples–eating bread and fish (as they had done on previous occasions, compare Matthew 14:13-21; 15:32-37).

In any event, Jesus did not say that He would not eat bread or drink wine until His return. He only spoke of the symbols of bread and wine in the context of the annual New Testament Passover celebration. The Bible does not contradict itself in any way–but it sometimes requires diligent research of the Scriptures to see why and how “the things are so.”

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

The Mount of Olives

On Saturday, July 12, 2008, Dave Harris will give the sermon, titled, “The Mount of Olives.”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at 12:30 pm Pacific Time (which is 2:30 pm Central Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock

Reminder: Memorial Service for Paul Voss on July 13, 2008

As we announced before, Paul Voss, a long-time deacon in God’s Church, died on May 23, 2008, at his home in Oregon. A memorial service for Paul will be conducted on Sunday, July 13, 2008, at 1:00 pm, followed by a potluck, at the Seventh-Day Adventist Church, 2701 East 8th Street, (Paradise Valley), National City, California 91950. All family members and friends are invited to attend. Those who would like to participate in the potluck should plan to bring enough food for themselves and one extra person. Please contact us for any questions.

Can you explain what is meant by the word "glorification"? In what way will we be glorified–and in what way was Jesus glorified?

We read in Romans 8:29-30 that God will glorify those whom He has called in this day and age. It is explained in verse 29 that He predestined those whom He foreknew “to be conformed to the image of His Son.” Even though the Scripture says, in verse 30, that He already “glorified” them, this is still a future event, but it is absolutely certain to occur.

John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible explains that “they are already glorified in Christ, their head and representative… It is an observation of a Jewish writer… that a thing ‘which is decreed to be’, is spoken of in the past tense: ‘this is the Scripture style concerning things decreed, and such is the glorification of all God’s elect.'”

As Christ was glorified, so His true disciples will be glorified. We read about Christ’s glorious appearance in Revelation 1:14-16: “His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and His eyes like a flame of fire… and His countenance was like the sun shining in its strength.” His glorified state is also described in Revelation 2:18: “These things says the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire…” Christ was a glorified God being before He became a man, and He was anticipating the time, just prior to His death, when He would be glorified once again. He prayed to the Father in John 17, stating in verse 5: “And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself [literally: alongside Yourself], with the glory which I had with You before the world was.”

When Christ was resurrected, after having been dead and buried in the grave for three days and three nights, He was raised AS a glorified Spirit being. He was not resurrected as a physical human being and then subsequently glorified. Rather, at the exact time and the very moment of His resurrection, His physical body, which had not seen decay or corruption, was changed into a spiritual body. Christ was resurrected in glory. He ascended to heaven in glory. We read in 1 Timothy 3:16, that Christ was received up in glory, with a glorified spiritual body.

Please note these excerpts from our Q&A, “Do you teach a resurrection of the physical body?”:

“When God the Father resurrected Jesus Christ, He changed His physical body (which was still in the grave) into a spiritual body. That is why Christ could later walk through closed doors, and why He could make Himself visible and invisible, as He pleased. We should also note that Christ, when He again became a Spirit being, which is invisible to the human eye, could manifest Himself as a human being, even so much so that He appeared to have flesh and bones (Luke 24:39-40). Of course, as a Spirit being, He did not really have flesh and bone, but He was able to manifest Himself in such a way. Jesus did speak of ‘a spirit’ not having flesh and bones as He did (verse 39). However, He was speaking of demonic spirits not being able to manifest themselves in the flesh. (Compare our free booklet, ‘Angels, Demons and the Spirit World,’ pages 42-43). We have the example of Christ and two angels appearing as men and eating a meal in the time of Abraham (Genesis 18:1-8). This example shows that God (who was Christ in the Old Testament account) and faithful angels could manifest themselves in the physical domain as men.”

It is important to understand that true Christians who died will be resurrected in glory at the time of Christ’s return, or, if they are still alive, they will be changed into glory–or glorified–at that very same time.

We read in 1 Corinthians 15:35-49:

“But someone will say, ‘How are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come?’ Foolish one, what you sow is not made alive unless it dies. And what you sow, you do NOT SOW THAT BODY THAT SHALL BE, but mere grain–perhaps wheat or some other grain. But God GIVES IT A BODY as He pleases, and to each seed its own body. All flesh is not the same flesh… there are also celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies… There is one GLORY of the sun, another GLORY of the moon, and another GLORY of the stars; for one star differs from another star in GLORY. SO ALSO IS the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, IT IS RAISED IN GLORY. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, IT IS RAISED A SPIRITUAL BODY. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body… And as we have borne the image of the man of dust (Adam), we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man (Jesus Christ).”

Notice this! We will be RAISED IN GLORY. We also read in verses 51-53 that “we shall all be changed–in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.”

When we are changed to or raised in glory, we will bear the image of the glorified Jesus Christ, as we read earlier, in Romans 8:29.

We also read in 1 John 3:2: “We know when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.”

Christ will return in glory—in the glory of the Father and in His own glory. When we will be like Him, we will also be glorified. We will also appear in glory, as Colossians 3:4 states. We shall see Him as He is—and we cannot see the glorified Christ as He is, unless we ourselves are glorified Spirit beings.

If we died in Christ, we will be resurrected in glory. If we are still alive at the time of Christ’s return, we will be changed into glory—and that in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the time of the last trumpet, as we read in 1 Corinthians 15. David said in Psalm 17:15 that he will be satisfied when he awakes in God’s likeness.

Philippians 3:21 tells us that Christ will transform our lowly body that it will be conformed to His glorious body.

When we are glorified, as Christ is glorified, then we will be immortal Spirit beings–like Jesus Christ is. We will be members of the God Family–as Jesus Christ is the Son of God–a glorified member of the God Family. We will be God beings–as Jesus Christ is a God being. Remember, Jesus Christ is the firstborn among many brethren. We are to become like Christ. We are to rule with Christ on this earth (Revelation 20:4). We read in Romans 8:17: “… if [we are] children, then heirs–heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be GLORIFIED TOGETHER.”

For more information on our glorification and on our real and awesome potential, please read our free booklet, “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God.”

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

©2024 Church of the Eternal God