The Rich Man and Lazarus
-the intermediate state-
 

THE WHOLE FAMILY IN HEAVEN AND EARTH

But it is by no means necessary to translate the words in this way. The R.V. and the American R.V. render them �every family in heaven and earth� so does the A.V. also in Eph. 1:21, where we have the same subject, viz. the giving of names (as onomazo, in both places, means. See Luke 6:13) to some of these heavenly families, e.g. �principality and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but in that which is to come.�

It is not �the whole family� that is named; but every family has its own name given to it. A few verses before Eph. 3:15 we have two more of these families, "principalities and powers� (v. 10). Why then create a new thing altogether by forcing verse 17 apart from its context? These families in heaven are clearly set in contrast with the family of God upon earth. In verse 10 the earthly family is used as an object lesson to the heavenly family.

Now, these being the positive and clear statements of revelation as to man in life and in death, there are certain passages in the New Testament which seem to speak with a different voice, and to bear a different testimony. We say advisedly �seem�; for when properly understood, and accurately translated, not only is there no difference or opposition to the teaching of the Old Testament, but there is perfect harmony and unity in their testimony. The one corroborates and supports the other.

There are five passages which are generally relied on and referred to by traditionalists  viz (1) Matthew 22:32;  (2) Luke 23:43; (3) 2 Corinthians 5:6,8; (4) Philippians 1:23; (5) Luke 16:19-31. We will deal with them in this order.


THE GOD OF THE LIVING 
Matthew 22:32;  Mark 12:27;  Luke 2:38

In these scriptures it is stated that �God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.� But traditionalists, believing that the �dead� are �the living,� making God the �God of the dead,� which He distinctly says He is not. Interpreting the words in this way, they utterly ignore the whole context, which shows that the words refer to the resurrection, and not to the dead at all. Notice how this is emphasized in each Gospel:

1) �Then come unto Him the Sadducees, which say there is no "resurrection� (Matt. 22:23. Mark 12:18. Luke 20:27).

(2) The one issue raised by the Sadducees was the question, �Whose wife shall she be in the resurrection?� (Matt. 22:28. Mark 12:23. Luke 20:33).

3) The answer of our Lord deals solely with this one issue, which was resurrection.

Hence He says:

1) Matt. 22:31; �as touching the resurrection of the dead�.

2) Mark 12:26, �as touching the dead that they rise�.

3) Luke 20, �now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he called the Lord, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, for he is not a God of the dead, but of the living, for all live unto him� (v. 38).

These words were spoken by the Lord Jesus in order to prove �that the dead are raised.� Traditionalists use them to prove that the dead are �living� without being raised!  The Sadducees may have denied many other things, but the one and the only thing in question here is resurrection. Christ's argument was:

1. God's words at the bush prove a life for the dead patriarchs.

2. But there is no life for the dead without a resurrection.
 
3. Therefore they must be raised from the dead or �live again� by Him.

This argument held good, for it silenced the Sadducees. For if they are �living� now, and not dead, how does that prove a resurrection? And, moreover, what is the difference between them and those who are in �the land of the living�? For this is the expression constantly used of the present condition of life in contrast with the state of death. See Psalm 27:13; 56:13; 116:9; 142:5; Jeremiah 11:19; Ezekiel 26:20. In this last passage the contrast is very pointed; where God speaks of bringing down to death and the grave and setting His glory �in the land of the living.� The argument as to resurrection was so conclusive to the Scribes who heard Him, that they said, �Master, thou has well said. And after that they durst not ask him any questions at all� (Luke 20:39, 40).

We may as well consider in connection with this, the case of Moses and Elijah appearing on the Mount of Transfiguration. With regard to this, it is surely enough for us to remember that Elijah never died at all; (*note: although he had to have died sometime because Elijah cannot possibly be immortal, since ONLY Christ has immortality, 1 Tim. 6:16, John 3:13) and that Moses, though he died, was buried by God. The mysteriousness of his burial, and the contest and dispute between Satan (who has the power of death, Hebrews 2:14) and Michael the Archangel about "the body of Moses" (Jude 9), points to the fact of his subsequent resurrection. It could hardly have been other than about its being raised from the dead. Christ has now "the keys of the grave and of death" (Revelation 1:18). For "He was declared to be the Son of God in power by a resurrection of dead persons" (Romans 1:4 and Matthew 27:52-54). Christ was the first who "rose" (i.e. of His Own Divine power, but not the first who was "raised" by the power of God. He called the "first-fruits of them that slept" (1 Corinthians 15:20, 23), in relation to the future harvest, not in relation to past resurrections.

Christ's Word to the Dying Malefactor>  

<The God of the Living and The WholeFamily in Heaven and Earth
        



* webmaster's note