Resurrection of John 5:28-29


A comparison will be made between John 5 and Dan 12 to show the similarity of the two passages. The goal will be to show the best knowledge gained by the passages in unison.


Author: Michael, Whitney

Creation Date: June 3, 2008

Version: 1.0

File: John5_28.pdf



This analysis comes as an experimental study that has not been tested through peer review.


Brackets represent the insertion of notes into the presentation. This may be shown later in a better fashion.



Passages Under Scrutiny


John 5:24-25

Joh 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Joh 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.


John 5:28-29

Joh 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

Joh 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.


John 11:24-26

Joh 11:24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.

Joh 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

Joh 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?


Dan 12:2

Dan 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.


The Connection of Dan 12:2 and John 5:28-29

Outline

1. John 5:28-29 as a restatement of Dan 12:2

2. The idea of resurrection vs. awakening

3. Generalization of the word resurretion


1. John 5:28-29 as a restatement of Dan 12:2


There are several points of similarity.


Dead/Graves

First, the passages apply to those in the graves. Daniel spoke of those asleep in the dust of the earth. Jesus spoke of those in graves. In both descriptions there were people who had died and were buried.


Constraints on Application

a) Number of dead included

Both passages speak of limited applicability. Daniel spoke of the many who were asleep. Jesus spoke of those in the graves.

Daniel specifically spoke of 'many' of the dead. This is an event limited to a certain subset of all people or a smaller subset pertaining only to the Israel bloodline. It wouldn't even be all the bloodline of Israel, but only a subset of that group. The idea here is that Daniel prophesied largely concerning his countrymen and that the prophecy in Dan 12 may thereby be either of primary or exclusive application to the Israel bloodline.


Jesus spoke with a potential subset of the dead. Jesus spoke of 'they that are in the graves' which then could exclude people that were not in graves by the time Jesus uttered these words. Such constrictive words might have been understood with flexibility had Jesus not added the additional words "the hour is coming" in verse 28 and maybe connected with verse 25 "the hour is coming and now is."



b) Time limits

Daniel 12 presents a connection to a period of time. There is a count of days from the tribulation of Dan 12:1. And the same tribulation is the time marker. This time marker then may connect with the time marker of Matt 24:15,16,21

A second time marker occurs by the connecttion of Dan 12:3 with Matt 13:43 addressing the idea of the righteous shining as stars. The time connection is established with better certainty by another path, the mention of the kingdom in Matt 13:43 since the kingdom as mentioned in Luke 21:31-32 was constrained to the first century generation.


As was mentioned previously, Jesus spoke of 'they that are in the graves' and again that 'the hour is coming' which established some time limits. Jesus was confirming the fulfillment of Dan 12:2 in the first century as well as giving additional words that had to be fulfilled in the firts cenutry.


c) People addressed

Dan 12:1 addressed the "children of thy people" --this would likely apply to the fellow countrymen of Daniel, those of Israel. Again verse 1 says "thy people shall be delivered."


John 5 was speaking of events between Judeaens and Jesus. Then verse 24 spoke of those that "hears My word" --which could be applied to the people listening at the moment.

Verses 33-34 then spoke of the Judeaens rejecting John the Baptist's testimony. So again the judgment was being spoken against those of the Israel bloodline.


Caveat:

This doesn't absolutely restrict the Gentiles from being included, either with respect to the Dan 12:1 or John 5:28-29. Yet still the focus is strongly upon Judeaens.

There could be an expansion of the prophecy of Daniel when it was presented by Jesus. Jesus would of course have the authority to generalize the application of Dan 12 to include Gentiles. Such expansion, if it has merit from Jesus' words, could simply be a declaration over all people, as a new declaration which merely built upon knowledge of Daniel, going beyond what Daniel spoke.


Which of the bloodline Israel were being addressed in Dan 12:2 ?

The sleeping ones possibly were those of Israel asleep by the time Jesus spoke in John 5 or by the time of the destruction of the temple in AD70.

If interpretation is made from Rev 20:4-6, then "those in the grave" would be seen as being all believers who were beheaded before AD70. [Again the preterist view is introduced. Also there was an assumed expansion to include the beheaded Gentiles -- this is mentioned before a study has been made regarding the intended audience of the Book of Revelation.]


In this manner from the view of Dan 12:2 seen from Rev 20:4-6, the sleeping ones appear to be those who died from the time of Christ until AD70. Again though, there are indications that the prophecy applied only to a limited time period and to the people up to that time.


[There does appear to be an expansion of the scope of targeted people in the prophecy in moving from Dan 12:2 to Rev 20:4-6. But this change doesn't have enough differences to treat Dan 12:2 and Rev 20:4-6 as being unrelated prophecies]



Parallelism

The greatest showing John 5:28-29 as a restatement of Dan 12:2 occurs by the parallel structure shared by both. Dan 12:2 spoke of a judgment and a decision between the righteous and the wicked. John 5:28-29 again spoke of a dividing of righteous and wicked.


There were two paths described: one of the righteous waking to life and the other of wicked waking to condemnation.


[There should not be an automatic assignment of all prophecies such that the Gentiles, in "joining" the Church, would be treated as Judeaens or as Israel. Though, evidence may suffice to show that Dan 12:2 expands to include Gentiles.]


Error of Viewing Parallel Options as a Generic Concept.

This division into wicked and righteous will seem like a common judgment scenario and for that matter may cause the current passages as just fitting a general pattern.


It seems that the passages that meet this pattern focus on the end times alone. Some of the passages that could be assigned this pattern are:

1. Jacob and Esau - Esau sold his birthright

2. Blessings and curses of Deut 28

3. North Kingdom and Southern Kingdom

4. Dan 12:2, as being investigated, shows righteous vs. wicked

5. John 5:28-29 those doing good vs. those doing evil

6. Matt 13:24-30 Wheat and Tares 36-43, righteous vs. children of the wicked

7. Matt 25:31-46 Sheep and Goats, the sheep as righteous nations. (No mention of wicked.)


As the list of passages was initially assembled, the passages showed less consistency to an assumed pattern that even first assumed. [There may be other passages added afterwards w/o changing the comments here too.] A possibility exists that some passages will still show the generally expected pattern.


An Observation about Judgment...

Judgment implies division from the very beginning. So one group is divided from another group. There are pass criteria and failures. So each of these passages showed a division. But the pattern of wording as righteous-versus-wicked didn't appear constantly as expected.


The idea here was to show that the other righteous-versus-wicked passages were all pointing to the same end-time events in a first century time frame. Of the passages shown or implied, three, the Jacob/Esau, the North/South kingdom, and the Matt 25 were not part of the same resurrection/judgment event being investigated. But neither did these three passages speak of the wicked.


In conclusion of such investigation, no alternate or general parallel paths were found so as to nullify the parallel between Dan 12:2 and John 5:28-29. The Daniel passage and Fourth Gospel passage share the commonalities strongly enough to treat both passages as having one meaning.



Additional Parallel...

There is a coming forth -- John 5:29 "come forth" and in Dan 12:2 an "awakening." Both of these passages showed the transition from people having died into people being alert or awake. The aspect of resurrection or awakening will be investigated shortly.


The parallels seen were:

1. an awakening

2. a limited number or scope of people involved

3. an atmosphere of judging

4. a distinction between righteous and wicked

5. the target of the prophecy seemed to address the Israel bloodline



Prophecy over Israelites?

Continuation of topic: People addressed


The main investigation, or thought experiment, is about the application of the judgment phrases solely to the Israel bloodline.

The narrowing to the phrase "Israel bloodline" is used as a contrast to the idea of a prophecy to all creation, of all peoples. Beyond such a distinction, others would readily be included. The first such would be those of blood married into the Israel bloodline, such as Naoimi, and descendents. Even non-bloodline converts could be included. The main point is the general distinction first mentioned.


The narrowing isn't to exclude the idea that certain passages in Daniel speak of judgment against kings and kingdoms, as political entitities, and possibly to the countries as units having cultural continuity. But the reading of prophecies in Daniel by default refers the Israel bloodline unless the context determines otherwise.


The judgment of Daniel 12 then was a dividing of the Israel bloodline between the righteous and wicked. Again such focus of Daniel was shown in the mention in Dan 12:1 of the "children of thy people" plus the fact, or at least observation, that the Book of Daniel was written as a prophetic book to the Israel bloodline.


[Caveat upon caveat...

A question does arise regarding the Book of Daniel both as to scope of interested parties to the prophecy and to the intended audience -- if these are different topics.

The intended audience, on first observation, was the Israel bloodline since the prophecies were:

1) about the Messiah --- especially seen in Daniel 9

a) His reign -- Dan 2, 7

2) about the demise of the sin among the Israel bloodline -- Daniel 9 and 12


The interested parties

1) The kings and kingdoms of Dan 2,7,8,9

2) The "armies of the Prince" -- possibly the Roman armies or another nation's armies Dan 9:26

3) All peoples -- Dan 6:25

4) The people of the saints of the Most High -- Dan 7:25,27

]


The judgment between the righteous and wicked appeared also in Dan 9:24 "to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins ... and to bring in everlasting righteousness" (KJVR esword). Such phrasing doesn't elaborate on the end of sins. But the idea of "an end of sins" matches well with Dan 12:2 along with the contrast to the righteous. The "end of sins" reasonably occurs within the scope of a judgment.

[Implied here is that Dan 9:24 refers to Jesus, the work on the cross (to establish everlasting righteousness) and the period of time to the destruction of Jerusalem "to make and end of sins". ]


Certainly, with respect to sin and destruction, the Israel bloodline or at least its key city was the point of the prophecy. The emphasis truly is upon the city in Dan 9:24-27. Yet the same observation can be made about the target of judgment being specific to the Israel bloodline.


Effectively then, Daniel's prophecy pointed to specific judgments. The first group judged was of course the Israel bloodline. It will quickly be noted that the other judgment was against the kingdoms and kings. The key issue to note would be the abscence of any judgment against all people in the world. And such global or universal judgment is arguably what most Christians expect when reading about judgments. So there may be merit of a universal judgment of wicked and righteous, the only observation made at this point concerns the content of Daniel.


The Book of Daniel doesn't focus on global judgments. The focus was about the time of the second judgment upon Israel. Such emphasis comes from the evidence of Daniel's concern about the end of the 70s captivity to which God gave Daniel a glimpse of the more complete time of repentance, a seventy times seven period, seen in chapter 9:2,20-27.

No context had been developed within Daniel to discuss a global judgment of all men and women who ever existed.



2. The idea of resurrection vs. awakening


Having shown strong evidence of the interconnectiton between Dan 12:2 and John 5:28-29, an interesting progression of ideas will be investigated.


The investigation will rely upon the Septuagint version of Daniel. No Greek scholarship has been employed in this analysis. The following argument comes only from simple observation that potentially could be flawed.


Instead of focusing on the similarity of the two passages, there exists a significant difference.

Dan 12:2 mentioned about the awakening of those asleep in the dust. Then in some fashion the words of Jesus were recorded to speak of those in graves being resurrected. A transition from the original word "awakening" to the alternative word "resurrection" occurred in a manner that first might be ascribed to translational aberrations.


The idea should become evident that an intentional change occurred. The change likely came for the purpose of holding a few mysteries.


Starting with modern language, Dan 12:2 mentioned the awakening of those in the dust. The Greek, of the Septuagint, contained what is more of an obscure word, exegerq ¢hsontai, # 1825

edzegerthasontou, in contrast to the specific word expected for resurrection, anast¢hsh. #450, anasthasa. The situation wasn't that the word anasthasa wasn't available. Such Greek word was used in Dan 12:13.


Then when Jesus restated Dan 12:2 as seen in John 5:29, "And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation" the idea of an awakening in Dan 12:2 was replace by the word "arise" or "resurrection." This word "resurrectiton" or, in the Greek, anasthasa, then was merged from Dan 12:13 into Dan 12:2 by the authority of Jesus, a word that was to describe Daniel's future, a future most likely understood of Daniel to be the general resurrection. The words given to Daniel in Dan 12:13 were "and stand in thy lot at the end of the day."


This "standing up" of veres 13 appears to be a different resurrection since a different word is used in verse 13 than was used in verse 2. Also, the vision didn't tell Daniel that he would be part of the events described in verse 2. It would seem that Daniel was assured of his part in the normal resurrection, as mentioned in verse 13, while being introduced to another concept of resurrection in which he probably had not part, verse 2, a resurrection where he just had a vision into.


It would seem that Jesus purposefully applied the word of Daniel's benefit into the description of the awakening described earlier.


Before Jesus spoke John 5:28-29 ...

Dan 12:2 presented a concept of moving from death to being awake.

1. element of resurrection

2. element of judgment --but christians pass from judgment into life



John 5:28-29

1. If Jesus spoke in Greek on this matter, then we have the word specifically generalized by Jesus

2. If Jesus spoke in another language on this occassion, then it is possible that the Greek translator used this word in a general sense.

3. Either way, the word took on a more general meaning.



The other option is to say that the wicked are resurrected to a physical body to be cast into the Lake of Fire. (REv 20)



Reasons why Joh 5:28-29 and Dan 12:2 isn't the expected physical resurrection.

1. Not described as a regenerated and glorified physical body

2. It is a time of judgment.

3. Dan 12;2 did not use the word from Dan 12:13 meaning "to stand"

4. It occurs in the middle of time rather than as the "last day"

5. The word is applied to the wicked as well, who are not anywhere else suggested to have life again.




3. Generalization of the Word Resurrection


Ideas that should be discussed

1. Results of Showing the resurrection of Dan 12:2/John 5:28-29 as a partial resurrection

a) a distinction is made from traditional expectation of resurrection

b) the main resurrection is seen to be without any prophecy


2. Conclusion Resurrection was then applied to describe different events.

a) Jesus now is seen to make the word "resurrection" into a general term instead of specific

b) The consequence of this study should be that people will be more careful in treatment of the idea of resurrection

The options of the words in John 5:28-29 again are:

1. Jesus generalized the meaning

2. A translator of original language into Greek applied the word for resurrection

3. The meaning of "resurrection" somehow obtained a more narrow meaning by such usage


Resurrection as obtaining a more narrow meaning...

The possibility of the meaning having narrowed appears unlikely. The various passages that, in the Greek, apply the word anasthasa, appear to take on different meanings. There is no convergence of meaning one might expect in an effort to clarify, highlight and explain Dan 12:2.

John 5:28-29 itself helps clarify Dan 12:2 to some degree and to show these events as applying to those in the graves somewhere around the time that Jesus spoke. But at the same time, Jesus, or the translator, applied the word "resurrection" instead of "awaken" which then adds controversy, the controversy right now with respect to obtaining a clear understanding of resurrection.


Why wasn't "resurrection" confined to a narrower set of verses? But fewer would be worse. In actuality the number of verses that mention or even suggest the resurrection are rather few. The investigation herein also takes away what we expected to englighten the topic.



Implications of the Words for Awaken and Resurrection


Septuagint --word used in Dan 12:1

>> 2:39, 2:44 ,7:24, 8:23, 11:3, 1:20

This word also means "to stand"


[ additional places

Num 23:24, Num 24:17, 1Sam 25:29, 1Ki 3:12, Prov 24:15, Ecc 12:4 Isa 28:21, Isa 54:17

]


Septuagint -- Word used in Dan 12:13 ἀναστήσῃ

>>this spelling was just used once


Awaken, Dan 12:2...

The interpretation of this is that some people were dead but existed somewhere. Such people had not been fully destroyed and gone.


The concept of being asleep was an indication of the idea that a person was not talkative, not living, not interacting with us who can talk about Daniel now. The idea of sleep also refelected that such sleeping people would awaken in some sense.


This awakening was different than described for Daniel in Dan 12:13 where he was shown to stand, which also is, in the Septuagint, the word that would be translated as "resurrection." This is therefore the testimony of Daniel. Further investigation will help to show whether Jesus was neutral or was merging the meanings.


Jesus possibly gave the only description of the state of people after death. But even the words spoken about Lazarus and the rich man --these words were possibly describing people not covered by Dan 12:2 events, people before Dan 12:2 took effect.


So the use of the words "asleep" and "awaken" in Daniel was described from the standpoint of those living, but it was not particularly designed to describe how the sleeping people viewed things (or whether they did have any consciousness) since this was not the goal of the prophecies.


Also, a quick search of words in the scripture showed that the word "sleep" or "asleep" was not applied to those who died. Daniel then appears to have described either a new phenomena or just explained something not revealed before. The evidence balances the mind toward this being a unique phenomena, applying just to the first century.


Resurrection

Dan 12:13 was about the revelation or confirmation to Daniel that he would stand in his lot on the last day, or end of days.


1. Distinct from Dan 12:2 with nothing to say to him that these were related. And it tended to show that these were different due to the distinctions.

2. So the "end of days" was not particularly connected with the judgmental awakenings.

3. The awakening of Dan 12:2 also was not shown to be a last day, but rather had an element of continuaion implied. And even Dan 12:9 showed that the prophecy would be sealed till the "time of the end". But the Book of Revelation was an unsealing which therefore showed Revelation occurred at the time of the end.

4. The Greek word and Hebrew word translated "to stand" or "to rise up" appears to be used in an ordinary sense of being up on one's feet. There also are places where the idea is to have have power such as in Isa 28:21 where the Lord rises up (stands) in power. This usage also came in Dan 12:1 saying that Michael stood.

5. There may be a mild association that we would make, at least in English, where "to rise up" would seem to be the next step after awakening from sleep. But the connection in such sense isn't really conveyed in Daniel 12 and the association with power and even reward are more strongly implied.

6. The mention of "lot" in Dan 12:13 at least on superficial reading seems to be an inheritance, a destiny. Contrasted with Dan 12:2, the awakening speaks of everlasting life.


Now it appears that no one had entered the stage of "everlasting life" until the time of Jesus. And thus no one had been resurrected to everlasting life until after Jesus the resurrection of Jesus.



The analysis, though having an expected result, has shown support that Jesus (or the translator from any original language, if different -- this caveat will apply throughout the text) was generalizing the term.



Explanation of Dan 12:2 and John 5:28-29


Summary of these verses as e

There are several possible understanding of these verses as well as of the concept of resurrection. The understanding could be broken down into the following stages:

1. Before Daniel

2. with Daniel's writing

3. After Jesus' words

4. After Revelation


Before Daniel there was most likely a concept of resurrection. The ideas of resurrection were shown elsewhere, in another study. Though the idea is that there was a general expectancy of resurrection among mankind even since the time of the fall of man. Resurrection came into the cultures of man from the shared knowledge and experience back to Adam. With this was a sense of judgment, the idea developed that one must be perfect, as Adam had been perfect before the fall. So those who would achieve eternal life, as presented in Gen 3:22, figured they would need to be perfect as seen through God's judgment.


With the Book of Daniel in chapter 12, a new twist developed. The idea was added that an awakening would happen in the middle of times, this was the latter days, yet it was not the end of days (Dan 12:13).

This event in the middle of time showed a resurrection which involved the wicked. No such description appeared before regarding the wicked being awakened [This deserves a little bit of research]. The inclusion of the wicked then would start to give mix signals about what this awakening was about. (The expression and ideas are for presentation purposes and not found as a record of theological interpretation).

There also then would have to be questions about the situation of those that slept. Was Dan 12:2 presenting a description about people who died or was this only for special circumstances? This sort of question even went unanswered when Jesus restated the words of Daniel.


When Jesus spoke the words of John 5:28-29, some aspects of Daniel 12:2 started to become clearer. A qualitative time frame was offerred in the words "the hour is coming" which showed a nearness in the sense that time was measured in hours instead of years or generations. The events of Daniel 12 were no longer in a far future, but was brought nearby. The concepts formed that there was a judgment soon approaching that would divide the righteous from the evil ones.


Another aspect that becomes apparent is the centrality of Christ Jesus, described a bit crypticly as the Son of Man (John 5:27), in this resurrection. Though, this wasn't fully a resurrection, it was the awakening of Dan 12:2. The command to rise, or the voice to be heard, was of Jesus. (It should not be forgotten that the hearing of His voice was mentioned in John 5:24-25 -- this will have to be explored separately.)


[John 5:28 starts with "marvel not at this" which showed that Jesus was starting a new topic to help substantiate what was just said of similar nature in verses 24-25 and even to verse 27]


These words were to show that Jesus is the judge [John 5:30] Then Jesus spoke of the rejection of the people to hear John the Baptist. By mention of John, Jesus showed that the Judeaens were the ones under judgment. (verses 33-36)


The dividing according to the righteous and evil appears similar to the Wheat and Tares parable Matt 13:24-30,36-43. The confirmation that the Wheat and Tares parables fits into Dan 12 comes also from the quote of Dan 12:3 in Matt 13:43

Mat 13:43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

[And the kingdom, as mentioned in Matt 13:43 was constrained further by the words of Jesus that the kingdom would begin in that generation. Luke 21:31-32]

The division in judgment, though, was to occur as a result of the message that the people followed, whether of Jesus or of Satan, a messaged preached of the Pharisees and other leaders of that day.

[The Wheat and Tares parable has a major distinction in that the only the judgment from the view of the those alive on earth is presented. The children of the wicked are simply removed in this situation. The actual verses about awakening unto judgment were to be shown in Rev 20]


Finally Rev 20:4 and 12-15 appear to describe more details of Dan 12:2. The similarities are that both passages are seen as resurrection passages. There is the shared feature of the division between the righteous (now described as those beheaded) and the wicked (those not written in the book of life, judged for their works). The item that provides a bit of difficulty here is that the wicked are not raised until the end of the thousands years period. A clash occurs then with the implication in John 5:28-29 that the hour was soon approaching.

Also in a oonnective sense, the mention of the book of life in Dan 12:1 was mentioned in Rev 20:12,15.


This raising of the wicked, as described in Rev 20, merely was an awakening, yet was referred to with the word "resurrection" which had popularly been treated as a word of only one meaning, that of the final resurrection of believers. Now in accord with that expectation, Rev 20 actually avoided speaking of the wicked's arising as resurrection.

This was a rising to consciousness but was not a resurrection in the modern view of resurrection in that Rev 20:12-15 did not raise the wicked dead from death unto life, rather it was a rising from death unto judgment in the lake of fire. And it seems also that the flow of Revelation 20 refuses to specific this as the second resurrection. The first resurrection may not have been a contrast to this judgment of the wicked but instead may be the division from the final resurrection of all believers.


Generalizations of Resurrection


Several clues show that the idea of resurrection as representing several different ideas. Somewhere in either the intent of Jesus or in the translation to Greek the ideas of an awakening in Daniel 12:2 became included as a resurrection, a term meaning "to stand," as first actually applied in the sense of resurrection by the verbiage of Dan 12:13, in the Septuagint.


So Dan 12:13 was the full concept of resurrection, mentioned briefly, and Dan 12:2 was the concept later enveloped under the word "resurrection."


Other clues also showed that the time frame of Dan 12:2 and John 5:28-29 were in the generation of those alive to see Jesus. A rising and a judgment in the middle of time certainly does not meet the expectation of a physical resurrection at the end of days (Dan 12:13).


Even the greatest reminder of the generalized use of resurrection was that Jesus was raised as the first from death unto a physical body and seen of men in that physical body. This was indeed the first and foremost resurrection yet the circumstances of His resurrection make it different from anything before or after. Still, the proper idea is to call His return to life as being a resurrection.


Then elsewhere it will be argued that that subsequent to this resurrection of Christ Jesus, those who became believers then acquired a different sort of resurrection as well, a resurrection from being dead in the spirit to being alive to eternal life in Christ Jesus.


Conclusions

The main goal was to show the idea of resurrection as a generalized word rather than to referring to a specific single event.

An in-depth exploration showed how Daniel 12 discreetly showed two different resurrections, speaking of resurrection as having a broad meaning, or it could even be seen as three resurrections when treating the wicked as a separate type and separate event. Yet these were all basically acquiring the Greek word, anasthasa, as used only, in the sense of resurrection, within the Dan 12:13. The most significant resurrection was shown in Dan 12:13 with the use of the word anasthasa meaning "to stand" or "to rise." The awakening of the wicked was the furthest deviation from the ideal meaning since anasthasa also implies rulership or standing in power.



http://www.BibleReexamined.com


Common Law Copyright 2008 by Michael, Whitney.