"I Will Raise it Up" (John 2:19)

Right off that bat, it is beyond baffling to me that one can claim Jesus is God and because of this claim must also say that God died. God cannot die. Jesus died. Logically, Jesus can not be God. Any other view point on this matter is simply illogical. Can the Father die too? I mean if they are equally God then the Father should be able to die just like the Son, right? The Bible says Jehovah can't die (Jeremiah 10:10). How can they be the same when one can die and the other can't? Wouldn't that make Jehovah more of a God than Jesus since He can't die? Why does the Trinity doctrine create more questions than it answers?

 

In a conversation I had with my wife recently she cited the following scripture to me as proof of her belief in the Trinity doctrine.

 

"Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." - John 2:19 (ASV)

 

So does Jesus mean he will literally raise it up himself? Well first thing is let's understand what the Bible says about those who are dead. 

"For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing at all, nor do they have any more reward, because all memory of them is forgotten." - Ecclesiastes 9:5 (NWT)

"For the grave cannot praise thee, death can not celebrate thee: they that go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth." - Isaiah 38:8 (KJV)

 

"His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; In that very day his thoughts perish" - Psalm 146:4 (ASV)

 

The Bible makes a few things clear about the state of those who are dead. They "know nothing", "cannot hope", cannot give praise, and their "thoughts perish". Because Jesus died, all of these characteristics of being dead are applied to him. There is nowhere that indicates he is exempt from these explicit Biblical truths. Most likely, that is why Jesus compared being dead to being asleep (John 11:11). We have no conscious thoughts or actions when we are asleep. Yet, allegedly, Jesus was able to perform the action of resurrecting himself while he was in a state in which he cannot perform any action nor have any thought? Seemingly a contradiction that the Bible creates if, indeed, Jesus raised himself from the dead. 

 

Additionally, it is explicitly stated who actually resurrected Jesus from the dead.

 

"Paul, an apostle, neither from men nor through a man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him up from the dead" - Galatians 1:1 (NWT)

 

"...Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father..." - Romans 6:4 (ASV)

 

God the Father is a different person from God the Son. The Bible very specifically says God the Father raised Jesus up from the dead. Was Jesus claiming to be God the Father when he said "I will raise it up"? That wouldn't fit the Trinity doctrine if he was. Did both he and God the Father resurrect him? Since neither one of these make a lick of sense, let's just head to the next point.

"But God resurrected him by releasing him from the pangs of death..." - Acts 2:24 (NWT)

Notice the way Paul worded this verse from Acts. If Jesus has indeed resurrected himself it would seem very appropriate for Paul to state that at this moment. In a way that reinforces the idea that Jesus is God and is the same God that resurrected him. Perhaps by saying "But God resurrected himself". That's exactly what the Trinitarian claim is right? What is the reason Paul would not have noted that here? Why would Paul write it as if it was something one person did to another person? Why wouldn't Paul reiterate what Jesus stated about Jesus raising himself up? Clearly Paul knew that Jesus was resurrected by someone who Jesus was not, Jehovah God.

 

Delving deeper into this we take a closer look at Jesus' words. He figuratively refers to his body as a temple. I have referred to this person before, as I have read a lot of his research, and he nails it with this clarification of what Jesus is actually saying here:

 

"At John 2:19-22 Jesus used the term "temple" figuratively, with reference to his body, so an accurate interpretation must recognize the non-literal aspect to Christ's statements.

Any interpretation that claims that Christ's literal physical body was resurrected must ignore the context of Scripture and contradict EVERY explicit statement in the Bible regarding Christ's heavenly body.

 

The figurative language here (verse 21) makes it clear that it was not his fleshly literal body that was raised up but "the temple of his body." The parallel accounts make clear that Jesus was not talking about resurrecting his *fleshly* body here but was indicating that he would be resurrected with a *spirit* body. Mr 14:58 says: "We heard him say, I will destroy THIS TEMPLE THAT IS MADE WITH HANDS, and within three days I will build ANOTHER MADE WITHOUT HANDS."

 

So Mark adds the details contrasting Christ's body "made with hands" with the one that would be raised "without hands." Paul used this same terminology regarding the resurrected bodies of Christians (2Cor.5:1,2). He said that their "earthly house" (their present physical body) would be "destroyed" and they would a "heavenly one" "not made with hands" (1Co 15:50; Heb. 9:11). " -  BARS-ANERGES

 

To the reasonable person who desires the truth of the Bible, Jesus did not literally resurrect himself. Taking John 2:19 literal and not figurative causes countless contradictions within the context of the Bible. It contradicts what is explicitly stated about the state of the dead, the numerous declarations that the Father resurrected Jesus, and it contradicts the fact that God cannot die. One seeking the truth cannot overlook such contradictions in order to uphold a doctrine. Their beliefs must conform to these truths and further research is then required to truly understand what Jesus meant with his figurative language. I only hope I have helped you obtain that information.