By Samuel M. Frost, Th.D.
My methodology in doing any exegesis is to first note the “co-text” (the immediate surroundings of a text), within the larger “context” (see, Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective, Michael Halliday; Ruqaiya Hasan; Frances Christie – Oxford University). With this, I wish to explore the Gospel of John and the author’s usage of the term, “the dead.”
He uses the term 8 times (2:22; 5:21, 25; 12:1, 9, 17; 20:9; 21:14). 2:22 speaks of Jesus’ resurrection from “the dead.” 5:21, 25 speaks of the general resurrection of “the dead.” The group of verses in chapter 12 are in reference to Lazarus, “who he had raised from the dead.” The final two verses are in reference, again, to Christ’s resurrection from “the dead.” Thus, in an interesting lay out, Christ’s resurrection is mentioned first, followed by the announcement that “all the dead” shall be raised in chapter 5. This is then illustrated as to what John means by “the dead,” using Lazarus as the example of what “the dead” means. Jesus, too, is to be “raised from the dead” and this, “according to the Scriptures” (20:9) – which means the Hebrew Scriptures taught resurrection of the dead.
Interestingly enough we are given the time when the dead shall be raised in John 6: 39, 40, 44, 54; 11:24 (again, Lazarus); 12:48 (again, set within the context of Lazarus’ resurrection from the dead). The time when the dead shall be raised is explicit: “the last day.” Both the righteous and the wicked will be raised “in the last day” (12:48, compared with 5:28). In 5:28, “the dead” is replaced with the equivalent idea phrase, “all who are in the tombs.” The dead. The word, “tomb” or “grave,” is also used in John quite a bit (5:28, 11:17, 31, 38; 12:17; 19:41, 42; 20:1-4, 6, 8, 11). We find the same groupings in reference to the general “all” the dead, Lazarus, and Jesus’ tomb from which he came out as one raised.
It is Jesus himself who says that he will raise the dead “in the last day,” which logically means he must first be raised in order to raise the dead. Jesus’ resurrection comes before the last day. None the less, John pictures his very bodily resurrection “from out of the tomb” as the meaning of what resurrection will be for “all who are in their tombs.” And, if this does not suffice, Lazarus, who is greatly focused upon only in John, gives a prime example of what “resurrection,” “tomb,” and such mean.
Martha, like John, also separates Lazarus’ miracle of resurrection in the “here and now” from the “last day” resurrection in the future (11:24). Lazarus’ resurrection miracle is not the resurrection in the last day, but illustrates strongly what that resurrection will be like. Lazarus, of course, would die again and will be raised again in the last day, and from that point, will never die again. John, in order to avoid any gnostic tendencies, is making the distinction between the “now” work of the Spirit and the “last day” finality of resurrection from the tomb.
With this in mind, I wish to focus on the text of John 5:25 wherein it is stated, “Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live” (ESV). There are two rhetorical statements in v.25a that are familiar in Johannine literature: “truly, truly I say to you”; and “an hour is coming, and now is.” The latter statement is unique to John (4:21, 23; 5:25, 28; 16:2, 25, 32). Withing these statements, there is found a division between, “and now is” (4:23; 5:25; 16:32), and the rest which omits this clause. This has led scholars to note the difference between what is present, and what is yet future from the standpoint of the time Jesus spoke these words.
For example, at the time Jesus spoke, “They will put you out of the synagogues. Indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God” (16:2), the time of the persecution of the disciples had not yet begun. The future form of the verb, “they will put” highlights this fact. However, in 16:32 we read, “Behold, the hour is coming, indeed it has come, when you will be scattered, each to his own home, and will leave me alone. Yet I am not alone, for the Father is with me.” This is because Jesus was speaking near the time of his arrest and their immediate scattering.
In the text of 5:25 we find, “and now is” only to be followed with the omission in 5:28. 5:28 is a future event, and the time of that event is forcefully answered in the next section: John 6: 39, 40, 44, 54; “in the last day.” This begs the reader, then, to ask, “in what sense are the dead now hearing the voice of the Son of God”? With this in mind, we cannot fail but to also mention the future form in the last part of v.25, “will live.” When will they live? Is this a future in time, or a rhetorical future? If the latter, then we can say that at the time they hear, they will live. However, this can also be exegeted as a further reference to the future resurrection in 5:28: those that now hear, they will live again in the last day.
It is at this point that we must ask, what is meant by “the dead” here? As we have already seen, John’s use of the term, “the dead” is always in reference to those who have actually passed away. This would be the lone exception if we were to take the term to mean those who are biologically alive, yet spiritually dead (not regenerated). It is this interpretation that we find in many commentaries. The reason for this is because of the phrase, “and now is” that the dead are hearing the voice of the Son. Jesus is speaking to living people (the dead) who are hearing (believing) his words and “coming to life” in the regenerating work of the Spirit. Needless to say, then, 5:25 is speaking of the spiritually dead (though very much biologically alive) whereas 5:28 is referring to the time when the biologically dead will be raised again in the last day – or so it has been popularly interpreted. This line of thought is further cemented in the idea that regeneration is a sort of “spiritual resurrection,” which for those who “hear” will bring about their actual resurrection in the last day to “glorification.” Further, in the literature, this is portrayed as a singular aspect of resurrection in two stages for the individual believer (hearer). Regeneration (now) ultimately generates bodily (biological) resurrection. For other interpreters, there are actually two resurrections: a spiritual one (regeneration), and a later physical rising from the dead. As such, Revelation 20 (based on the idea of John’s author as also the author of that work) is interpreted as both highlighting a spiritual resurrection (at the inauguration of the thousand years) which culminates in a physical resurrection after the thousand years. Both Amillennial and Postmillennial schemes utilize this approach to some degree.
We are entirely within exegetical rights to question this popular interpretation. Theoretically, based on the overwhelming use of “the dead” in John as referring to those actually dead (biologically), can it be interpreted in 5:25 that “the dead” there also means those who are biologically dead? I believe that it can.
First, we are surely within bounds to note that in every use of “the dead” in John, it refers to the biologically dead. This would mean that 5:25 is the lone exception. However, this also gives us ample grounds for objection. The burden of proof would rest on those arguing for the spiritually dead. If Jesus, here referring to himself as the Son of God, is who he says he is (as John says he is), then those who have died, like Abraham, or Isaiah, yet are alive post-mortem with God, prior to resurrection in the last day (which is future), then Jesus is claiming that those who have died and who are yet “with God” post-mortem acknowledge that he is, indeed, the Son of God. It is an extraordinary claim.
In the co-text of 5:25 we have a rather large section of Jesus’ words from 5:19, which is prompted by the idea that Jesus made himself “equal to God” (5:18). Thus, from 5:19-47 Jesus is actually defending this idea: he is equal to God. In 5:21 we read, “For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will.” This would not have fallen short on Jewish ears. In the Hebrew Scriptures, God “raises the dead” – and God alone. Yet, Jesus is claiming that this power is also “given” to him. Of course, Elijah raised the dead as a Prophet of God, but it was God through him that did so. Elijah never claimed to be equal to God. Jesus is. Elijah did not give life. God through Elijah gave life back from the dead. Here, Jesus is stating that he gives life to the dead. This is backed up by an even more extraordinary claim: “all judgment” (Greek, all the judgment) is given to the son (5:22). The eschatological judgment of the dead (all the dead at the judgment) is given to the son. The son will be the final arbiter of who gets in, and who is left out! This is an absolutely amazing claim coming from a man standing before them! Who could claim such a thing?
“Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him” (5:23). That is, if you honor the God of Abraham and Moses, as you claim to do, then you must honor also the son; one who is equal to Abraham’s God. If not, then at The Judgment, you will find yourself in danger. Abraham truly honored God (as all would have acknowledged), and so now that the son has come, who is equal to God, Abraham was, in effect, also honoring the son (who was not known to him at the time). Abraham’s faith in God is counted also as his faith in the son, who is equal to God. Abraham, if alive, would have believed the son, and surely would have acknowledged Jesus as equal to God. In fact, “Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad” (8:56). This brings us to an interesting exchange between the theologians and Jesus.
John 8:39-59 has been the subject of great discussion, as this section is titled, “Jesus and Abraham.” Although several points can be made, the one concerning us is the obvious one made by the Pharisees: Abraham is well long dead (52), so it is impossible that he should have kept Jesus’ word (52). Jesus was not alive when Abraham was (!). There is also emphasis on Abraham’s death and the death of all the prophets (53). Thus, not only did Abraham, who is dead, see Jesus’ day, but he (and implicitly the prophets as well; see John 12:41) and the prophets saw it. They get the point of the obvious (57), and then Jesus delivers the rhetorical blow: “before Abraham was, I am” (58). This, if Jesus was an ordinary man, is blasphemy (59); an outrageous claim.
To our point, John is stating that “the dead” have already heard the voice of the son of man – and those who have heard (in heaven) shall be raised from the dead in the last day. Abraham saw Jesus, since Jesus frequently ascended and descended to and from heaven (John 3:13), where the saints in glory await resurrection in the last day. We may align, also, the vison of the 24 Elders in heavenly glory, prior to resurrection of the dead which occurs at the end. Similarly, the author of Hebrews suggests the same imagery with a “great cloud of witnesses” (12:1), who are the dead saints listed in chapter 11 of that work. Concluding, the author wrote that Mount Zion (heaven) is occupied by “the spirits of the righteous made perfect” (12:23) who await to inherit the inhabitable earth (2:5). We find remarkable parallels in Second Temple literature as well, notable in Wisdom 3:1-ff; 4:16; 5:16-ff. Equally, Paul’s idea of “absent from body, present with Ha-Shem” (2 Corinthians 5:1-ff.) would not have been a new or foreign idea in first century Judaism. From Abel onward, the saints, upon death “in faith” (Hebrews 11:13) were made present with the Lord in heaven, awaiting “together with us” (current, or present readers, Hebrews 11:40) the resurrection. John is operating under this same idea. The dead hear the voice of the son of man, and know who he is, including Abraham. Abraham saw the son of man with the advent of the son of man, and rejoiced. Thus, the prophets and Abraham attest to who Jesus is, whereas as section of those who were Jews did not.
What John has effectively done is bridge the gap between those saints of old, before Christ, and the advent of Christ in the present. Jesus makes an astounding claim that those who believe in his word, as he was then presently speaking, are saved. This would mean, possibly, that those who lived before Jesus arrived were entirely cut off. How did Abraham know that Jesus existed, since he lived so long ago and died? Abraham, it is countered, believed in God (the Father), had true faith in God, and in the purpose of God for the future. As such, Abraham (and Moses, and the prophets) died “in faith” in what God would bring about as fact in the future. The one who is going to bring that about is Jesus. Since these faithful ones died “in faith,” their temporary existence in heaven, prior to resurrection (the fulfillment of what they were promised), denotes their being “alive to God” in heaven. As such, with the arrival of the son of man, and their seeing and hearing that arrival, Jesus has their stamp of approval. He has their endorsement. Logically, then, if a Jew did not believe in Jesus’ words, then quite obviously, they would not be believing in a man endorsed by Moses! It matters not that we have no reference to Moses ever seeing or taking about “Jesus” by name in the Hebrew Bible. Moses is alive with God in heaven, and thus, prior to resurrection, has seen the glory of the son of man already. This move bridges the OT saints with the NT saints in the “same gospel” announced to them, as well as us today.
Vigilate et Orate 