An Expanded View of the Resurrection

I have always seen the resurrection as, very clearly, the reunion of the spirit with the physical body at a certain point after death. To me, the Book of Mormon, much more so than the Bible, makes this definition very clear.  The Book of Mormon prophet Alma takes great care to explain the resurrection in this way:

[I]t [referring to the first resurrection] meaneth the reuniting of the soul [spirit] with the body, of those from the days of Adam down to the resurrection of Christ.

The sould shall be restored to the body, and the body to the soul; yea, and every limb and joint shall be restored to its body; yea, even a hair of the head shall not be lost; but all things shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame (Alma 40:18, 23).

While not laying it out in such a direct way, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, as presented in the Gospels, is presented as a physical resurrection. Jesus is seen by many, eats, drinks, touches, and is touched.  Knowing that he had died, some of his disciples expected him to be a spirit, but he reassured them, saying:

And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have (Luke 24:38–39).

My previous post The History of Heaven gives further evidence that both Jews and Christians believed in a physical resurrection. With this clear picture of the resurrection as the rejoining of spirit with body, I have been quite skeptical of the use of the word resurrection for any other situation. Thus, as I have read many of Margaret Barker’s books, among others, I have been somewhat dismayed by the way in which she employs the term.  For Barker, resurrection has to do more with ascension than reunion of spirit and body. She also sees enthronement as a part of resurrection as well.

For example, I noticed, through a quick look through a few of her books (Temple Theology, The Great High Priest, and Temple Themes in Christian Worship) that she cites Hebrews 7 as evidence for the resurrection of Melchizedek. However, she is not talking about an event that took place after Melchizedek’s death, but a condition in which he was living by virtue of his initiation into the high priesthood. She says that where Hebrews 7 mentions Melchizedek as having been “raised up” (the Greek verbs are anistasthai, v. 11; anistatai, v. 15), this should not be understood as “elevated to high office” but “resurrected” (see The Great High Priest, p. 113).  For Barker, the difference between the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods is that the higher priesthood involves ascent (resurrection) rather than descent (the mode of passing on the Aaronic Priesthood).

Likewise, the ancient kings were “raised on high and anointed” (2 Sam 23:1; Ps 89:19–20).  The same theme is presented, in more detail, in many of the apocalyptic ascension texts, such as the Enoch literature. During the visionaries’ mortal lifetime, he is taken up into heaven to stand before the throne of God, anointed, clothed, and enthroned.  He becomes an immortal, heavenly being, although he may return to Earth and continue his life thereafter. For Barker, this is resurrection. Thus, she often refers to Jesus’ resurrection as having taken place before his death, not after–likely at his transfiguration or even at his baptism, where, she says, he was presented before God and anointed by the Holy Spirit.  To me, this was just a very foreign idea–I can understand how all this is a part of resurrection, surely, but, in my mind, not the most important part.

I looked into the concept in more depth. The actual Greek word behind the English “resurrection” is anastasis. Anastasis is literally “a standing up.” In its derivations, it can mean:

• to cause to rise, to raise up
• to raise up someone who is lying, sitting down
• to cause to be born
• to cause to appear, bring forward
• to raise up from death

(I don’t endorse all that it says, but for more information on the meaning of “resurrection” see this site).

I have been pondering about this idea for some time. Then the other day I read a scripture in the Book of Mormon–in Alma 40, no less, that really opened my eyes. I could have sworn that I had never read this before in my life, although I’m sure I’ve read the chapter many times. In Alma 40:15, Alma makes an interesting observation regarding alternative meanings for “resurrection”:

Now, there are some that have understood that this state of happiness and this state of misery of the soul, before the resurrection, was a first resurrection. Yea, I admit it may be termed a resurrection, the raising of the spirit or the soul and their consignation to happiness or misery, according to the words which have been spoken.

Interestingly, Alma was addressing the use of the term “resurrection”, by some, to refer to the entrance of the spirit into paradise or prison in the spirit realm after death. And he admits that this may be termed a resurrection! I was intrigued that Alma would allow for the use of the term for this situation, after he had defined the resurrection so clearly.  It appears to me that Alma knew that the word (although he wouldn’t have been speaking Greek, of course) could have multiple interpretations, and admitted that it could be used in other ways.  I now believe that this is the reason why he, in the end of ch. 40 and into 41, begins to describe the reuniting of spirit and body as “restoration.”

The soul shall be restored to the body, and the body to the soul (Alma 40:23).

For that which ye do send out (referring to the works done in mortal life) shall return unto you again, and be restored; therefore, the word restoration more fully condemneth the sinner, and justifieth him not at all (41:15).

So, although the word resurrection can have various meanings, and there is likely more to the resurrection than just the reunion of spirit and body, the Book of Mormon chooses to emphasize the “restoration” of body to spirit, and also of good or evil to the resurrected soul.  The individual will be restored to his fullest state, depending on what choices he made during life.  Although this is still my understanding of “resurrection” in its fullest sense, my mind is now more open to accepting other uses for the word, including heavenly ascent and the transfiguration.

Subscribe To Site:

Full Post Feed | Summary Feed | Comments Feed