7

Romans 6:9 says:

For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him.

The logic here says that since Christ died and was risen, now he cannot die again.

With that same logic, we might say that Lazarus (who died and was risen) or anyone else who was raised from the dead - that death has no mastery over them either.

Obviously Christ is the son of God, so that makes him different, but Paul is making a specific argument here. Why is Paul's argument true for Christ but not for Lazarus?

  • I think this might depend on whether "since" means "because" or "after". – Matt Gutting Mar 30 '15 at 18:25
  • Welcome to the site. Good question. – fredsbend Mar 30 '15 at 19:52
8

Lazarus and others died of the "first death" and were raised back to the same earthly body as before they died. Their ultimate fate was still to be determined, be it everlasting life or the "second death" on judgement day.

Jesus died of the "second death" to pay the penalty of death for believers. He was raised up in full glory as a conquerer, and it is through Him that we have hope in the same eternal resurrection.

On a deeper note, death never had mastery over Jesus per se, except that He allowed it willingly to pay our debt. Jesus says,

"I have the power to lay it down, and I have the power to take it again" (John 10:18)

  • Oh, so Paul is saying that Christ was raised from the second death, not the first one. That makes sense to me - thanks for your answer! – Andrew Mar 31 '15 at 19:00
  • 2
    What are these "first" and "second" deaths? I've never heard of them .. – user2864740 Apr 1 '15 at 2:45
4

Christ was raised in a glorified, or spiritual body:

So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 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.

(1 Corinthians 15:42–44; NIV)

Christ's resurrected body, then, was something different than that of Lazarus:

Jesus said, "This sickness will not end in death. No, it is for God’s glory so that God’s Son may be glorified through it. ... Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep."

(John 11:4, 11; NIV)

That is, Lazarus' illness was not "unto death", the separation of body and spirit; he was raised in a natural body, not having descended into Sheol.

Jesus, on the other hand, was the first to be resurrected:

Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.

(1 Corinthians 15:20; NIV)

Paul's argument specifically refers to those who, following Christ, will be raised:

if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again.

(Romans 6:8–9)

Therefore he's referring in this passage to a resurrection like that of Jesus, not a raising back to natural life like Lazarus. That's why his argument doesn't apply to Lazarus.

  • Could you add some references please? This sounds as if it's purely your opinion; we're really looking for authoritative answers. Bible quotations that directly addressed the question would be nice. That said I think your first sentence answers the question nicely. – Matt Gutting Mar 30 '15 at 18:51
  • Please let me know if my references are still lacking. Thank you – Marc Mar 31 '15 at 12:46
  • That's better; but let's try putting the actual quotes in-line. Which translation do you typically use? – Matt Gutting Mar 31 '15 at 13:36
  • I used word and it didn't work well with this site. I'll work on that. I use many different translations and like to go to the Greek when I can. English does not translate well, this causes many issues in especially U.S. churches, small "c". – Marc Mar 31 '15 at 20:56
  • Would you object if edited the question to insert Bible quotes using the NIV? – Matt Gutting Mar 31 '15 at 20:58
1

Paul is not making any sort of argument here. he is not asking us to "follow the logic" here. After all, what logical argument would you use in a discussion centered on people rising from the dead? Paul is teaching doctrine here. He is declaring that Jesus has conquered and is the master of death.

If your understanding is that Paul is putting forward an argument that you might rebut, you are necessarily "relying on the arm of flesh" and taking an unwise course.

And you mentioned that Lazarus also rose from the dead but not of himself, again this was accomplished by Jesus. To support the idea that Paul was declaring doctrine rather than advancing an argument, Lazarus rose from the dead into mortality while Jesus arose immortal.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.