class: center, middle ## Lazarus and Jairus' Daughter - Are They Sleeping or Dead? --- ### Summary When Jesus says that Jairus' daughter is "sleeping", and says that Lazarus (the brother of Mary and Martha) is "sleeping", well, why? Were they sleeping, or were they dead? Why would Jesus put things like this? --- #### Outline - [Q: If Jesus said they were sleeping, but they were dead, isn't there a contradiction?](#4) - [Answering point by point](#5) - [First of all, the Lazarus of Luke 16 is not the same Lazarus as John 11](#6) - [Jesus' describing Lazarus as "sleeping" in John 11](#7) - [Jesus' describing Jairus' daughter as "sleeping" in Matthew 9](#8) - [It is not a euphemism this time, but something completely different](#9) - [What of Hebrews 9:27?](#10) --- ### Q: If Jesus said they were sleeping, but they were dead, isn't there a contradiction? Hebrews 9:27 says that each person is destined to die once and after that comes judgment, but: - In John 11:11 Jesus tells his disciples that Lazarus is sleeping, but then when they say that he will soon get better, then Jesus clarifies that he is dead. - Also, in Matthew 9:24, Jesus says that the girl isn’t dead, she's only asleep, but in this case he doesn’t further clarify that she’s actually dead. My question is why does he say that they’re sleeping instead of saying that they’re dead, and why does he clarify that Lazarus is dead but not the girl? Also, in Luke 16 when Jesus tells about the rich man and Lazarus, he doesn’t mention sleeping: he says that they died. Don't Hebrews 9:27 and Luke 16 go against the idea that they’re sleeping? --- ### Answering point by point There is a lot to unpack here! Some good questions. I'm going to go piece by piece. This got rather long, but hopefully it will hit all the facets. --- #### First of all, the Lazarus of Luke 16 is not the same Lazarus as John 11 Let's start with one of the easier things to address. Just like today, in antiquity, plenty of people shared names. So it is that we have: - Mary the mother of Jesus, and Mary Magdalene (among other Mary's mentioned in the NT) - John the Baptist (the Son of Elizabeth and Zechariah) and John the brother of James (who was one of the 12 Apostles) - James the brother of Jesus (who wrote the book of James), James the brother of John (who was also one of the 12 Apostles, alongside his brother), and James the son of Alphaeus (yet another of the 12 Apostles) One might go on. The point is, just like today, it was not all that uncommon for different people to have the same name. This can get confusing rather quickly. --- #### First of all, the Lazarus of Luke 16 is not the same Lazarus as John 11 And so, of course, while it is completely reasonable to line up the two people named Lazarus, the shared name alone is not proof of them being the same person. In fact, there is some evidence to the contrary: - In John 12:3, we are told that Lazarus' sister Mary anointed Jesus's feet with nard, an expensive type of perfume. Additionally, John 11:19 says "many Jews" came to comfort the sisters in the loss of their brother. From these verses and others, it is apparent that Mary, Martha, and Lazarus were relatively affluent and well-connected. - But the Lazarus of Luke 16 is a beggar---perhaps the lowest social station possible. So quite simply, from the Bible itself, it seems unlikely that these two men are the same person. --- <div class="special-content sidenote"> <strong> <a href="/site/content-features/#sidenotes">Sidenote</a> </strong> <p>I should also note that <a href="https://www.gotquestions.org/Luke-16-19-31-parable.html">some people think the account of Abraham and Lazarus in Luke 16 is just a parable</a> (rather than a recounting of something that actually happened). It's a bit tangential, but I believe this to be decidedly wrong, as we are given no indication that this is merely a parable.</p> <p>Here's what my mentor has to say on the subject:</p> <div class="special-content quote"> <strong> <a href="/site/content-features/#quotes">Quote</a> from <a href="https://ichthys.com/mail-soul-sleep2.htm">Ichthys</a> </strong> <p>Jesus most certainly does not say that it is a parable, although that is His practice when engaging in parables. Also, what other parable of our Lord's can you cite where historical people with definite names are employed? When Jesus is using a parable, the gospels generally say so. On the other hand, parables do not attribute definite historical actions to definite and precise historical people whom we know from elsewhere in the Bible as having done things they actually did not do. Finally, even were it a parable, that would still have to mean that the circumstances of the parable could not and would not teach theological error (cf. Mark 3:23-27 where Jesus' speaking "in parables" recounts an actual historical situation; Satan is certainly real and not a myth, nor is any of the information given there about the devil to be explained away). </p> </div> </div> --- #### Jesus' describing Lazarus as "sleeping" in John 11 It is very clear from John 11 that Lazarus was dead; unlike in the Matthew 9 passage (which we will get to in a moment), there can be no doubt whatsoever here on the part of anyone. For in John 11:17, we hear that Lazarus had already been entombed for four days before Jesus arrived in Bethany. So why then did Jesus employ the language of sleeping instead of death? Quite simply, he was speaking euphemistically. We still do this nowadays as well. For example, in English we might say someone "passed away" or "is no longer with us" or "went to be with Jesus" rather than bluntly saying that they died. But all of these things clearly are getting at the concept of death. --- #### Jesus' describing Lazarus as "sleeping" in John 11 An on-topic quote from my mentor: <div class="special-content quote"> <strong> <a href="/site/content-features/#quotes">Quote</a> from <a href="https://www.ichthys.com/mail-Sleep-as-Euphemism.htm">Ichthys</a> </strong> <p>Now, to address the specifics of your question [about the false doctrine of so-called "soul sleep"], I believe that the major part of the issue (and indeed the essential grounds for the origin of it historically) is the use of the euphemism "sleep" for those who have died. A euphemism, of course, is a circumlocution or certain phraseology that is "more pleasant" or "less offensive" than giving something its most direct and abrupt name. This is why the veterinarian says, "I sorry to have to tell you that your cat 'has passed'", instead of saying "Your cat is dead". And if we feel compunctions about being direct in the case of the death of somebody's pet, how much more inappropriate would it be for us to say of someone's family member "He's dead." In fact, the use of euphemism is a Spirit-inspired device. Note for example the avoidance of direct terms for sexual and other biological functions in the Pentateuch. And in terms of death, our Lord's example will stand as one which cannot be denied. For He told the disciples, "Lazarus is sleeping", whereas He was being appropriately kind in using this standard biblical euphemism for death (Jn.11:11-15).</p> </div> --- <div class="special-content quote"> <p>All this is a long way of saying that when people in the Bible say "he/she is asleep", they often mean "he/she is dead", without there being any conclusion to be drawn from the nature of the euphemism about the current state of the individual – and rightly too, since we cannot actually see the person in heaven (or torments as the case may be). The problem of course is that in English we do not use the same idiom. Our euphemisms for death are numerous, but it is not our practice to say that a person is "asleep". In our cultural view, that would seem cruel (rather than kind) because it would seem to imply that they could be "awakened" when in fact of course they can no longer be (viewing things from our secular and materialistic perspective, at any rate). However, here we do see the superiority of the biblical idiom, for Jesus does say He is going to "wake up" Lazarus – and so He does! That, of course, was a miracle that has rarely been reproduced in the history of the world. But it does show that behind the word "sleep" used in the biblical euphemism for death, there lies the possibility of awakening – not of this physical body in its present corrupt state (aside from uncommon miracles as in the case of Lazarus), but of the body transformed in resurrection at the return of Jesus Christ. We see the promise latent in the euphemism "sleep" in Martha's words to the Lord: "I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day", in response to Jesus' words "Your brother will rise again" (Jn.11:23-24). But please note that the word "rise", Greek <em>anistemi</em>, while it is the standard word for resurrection is also the standard word for getting up and waking up from sleep. So whether we are talking about genuine sleep, or miraculous resuscitation of the body as with Lazarus, or the actual resurrection and transformation of the body at our Lord's return, in all of these cases we have "sleep" followed by "rising". That is to say, unquestionably it is the body which sleeps and then rises. But when we die we are "out of [this] body and face to face with the Lord" (1Cor.5:6; cf. Phil.1:20-24). The euphemism of sleep is thus clearly and entirely directed to the body, not the spirit (the "soul", an unfortunate translation of the Hebrew <em>nephesh</em> and the Greek <em>pscyhe</em> is really where the two meet at present, "the heart"; see the link: <a href="https://ichthys.com/3A-Anthro.htm#4.%20The%20Dichotomy%20of%20Man">"The dichotomy of man"</a>).</p> </div> --- #### Jesus' describing Lazarus as "sleeping" in John 11 Because we in our culture do not use sleep as a euphemism for death in the same way their culture did, it can be harder for us to pick up on this when we read English translations and "think from the English worldview", so to speak. But in fact, to properly grasp the meaning of the Bible, sometimes we must endeavor to put ourselves in the shoes of a first-century Hebrew-speaking person from Judea (for example), and then read the Bible from that perspective. You may hear this termed "culture-sensitive interpretation" or something of the sort. It's not that the truth ever changes or anything of the sort; rather, it is simply that we must "do our homework" when it comes to interpreting the Bible according to the audience to whom it was written. And when we do that, hopefully it becomes clear why Jesus' words here are no contradiction. For we can see from John 11:13 that in saying "Lazarus sleeps" he had in fact very much meant in saying this that Lazarus was dead. That is quite literally what John 11:13 says! --- #### Jesus' describing Jairus' daughter as "sleeping" in Matthew 9 This passage appears across the Synoptic gospels: Matthew 9:18-26; Mark 5:21-43; Luke 8:40-56. It can often be helpful to read all the gospels in parallel to see how the same events are described by the different writers. Nonetheless, we'll limit ourselves to the Matthew account here, since with respect to this question of why Jesus said the girl was "sleeping", there isn't much difference. First of all, some context: - The people forming the crowd at Jairus' house were, in all likelihood, "professional mourners". The concept may seem a bit foreign to us in our time, but the idea is similar to hiring a pianist to play hymns at a loved one's funeral, or something of the sort. - These people were, to put it somewhat crudely, "there for the money". They would have been hired to perform the culturally-expected funerary proceedings, which meant a lack of decorum on their part ought not shock us as if they were family members proper, sad as that is to say. This is why these people mock Jesus' statement in Matthew 9:24. They would be thinking something along the lines of: > We were just hired to do the funeral things for this girl, and now this joker shows up and says she's not even dead, but only asleep?! Puh-lease mister, gimme a break (\*eye roll\*). Just let us get back to work so we can collect our payment. So this is the "setting of the scene" for this passage here in Matthew. --- ##### It is not a euphemism this time, but something completely different It might be tempting to think Jesus was merely using sleep as a euphemism for death here too (just like in John 11), but there are some issues with taking that approach: - First, as you are quite right in pointing out, Jesus never clarifies to say the girl was in fact dead. That would have been a very natural thing to do when the crowd began to mock him in verse 24. After all, if he really did mean in saying that the girl was sleeping that she was dead, why would he hide it then? - Second, note that Jesus shoos the people away. He kicks them out of the house, and makes them wait outside. If there were nothing else going on here---and he were merely speaking euphemistically---then why would he do this? So what *was* going on here, then? --- ##### It is not a euphemism this time, but something completely different In my opinion, the best best way to interpret this passage is that Jesus knew full well that the girl was dead, but yet He said she was sleeping, and very intentionally never clarified whether it was a euphemism or not. (Culturally, as we have said, it was in fact a euphemism in common use, but people here would still have wondered if He was being literal or not, especially when the girl actually came walking out in short order). There are two reasons for this that I can see: - Jesus (well, more specifically, his miracles) drew immense crowds. But people drawn in in by the "shiny things" and spectacle of it all would merely make it harder for Jesus to accomplish his ministry (culminating in the cross, where he paid for the sins of us all). The phenomenon can be clearly seen in, for example, Mark 1:40-45. You might also compare Matthew 9:30, Matthew 12:16, and so on. The basic idea is that Jesus, as a general rule, wanted to keep his miracles veiled and something decidedly less than shouted from the rooftops to avoid the celebrity of it all, since it interfered with the Father's Will for Him. - Even aside from his own celebrity, consider the life this poor girl would lead if Jesus raised her from the dead in an unambiguous sort of way in front of a large crowd. Himself aside, it is quite likely that He avoided doing this to spare her and her family the sheer amount of interference this would cause in the rest of their lives. --- ##### It is not a euphemism this time, but something completely different If Jesus insisted she was sleeping, sends everyone out, and then she appears a few minutes later, rumors take over and do the rest of the work. No doubt the girl and her family would receive some attention if people thought Jesus had miraculously healed her from very serious illness, but on the other hand, Jesus did that reasonably often with plenty of other people too. So after a time, the nosiness of others would die down, and they could live in peace. But if He unambiguously raised her from the dead in front of all? That's a wee bit more of a thing. There are only two other instances of Jesus raising people from the dead aside from Jairus' daughter (this passage). One we've already talked about: the raising of Lazarus in John 11. The other is the widow of Nain's son in Luke 7:11-17. One might fairly ask why then, if He might wish to avoid fame for himself and others as a matter of practicality (as I just argued for), did Jesus not try to play off these two as well (that is imply in some way that He was not actually raising people from the dead)? Some points: - In the case of the widow of Nain's son, Jesus raised him during the funeral procession. No plausible deniability there, right? And so too with Lazarus, who had already been entombed for four days before Jesus got to Bethany, like we discussed above. So one obvious reason why Jesus didn't do some "they're only sleeping" business in these cases is because it would simply be impossible. - Aside from that, there is also the fact that these were both adult men. Even with interfering busybodies (or worse) bothering them on account of the miracle, they would be capable of warding off anything problematic from them and their families (cf. John 12:10---this is no mere speculation on my part). But a young girl? Not so much. Especially given the relatively higher degree of vulnerability women were forced to contend with in antiquity. --- ##### It is not a euphemism this time, but something completely different I will acknowledge that much of what I have just said is based on inference and a degree of speculation on my part (that is, it is not as if the Bible says these things very explicitly). However, I do believe this is more than just an opinion---I believe this is the actual truth of it, indirect as it may be. For I see little other explanation that satisfies all the elements at once without having other problems. Jesus sending the people out especially makes little sense under most other possible interpretations. I should note that some people might be offended that this line of thinking suggests that Jesus intentionally misdirected the beliefs of others (critics would call it lying). To that I would ask what they think of the actions of the Hebrew midwives in Exodus 1:15-22 (and also what God thought about the actions of the midwives in that context), and also the actions of Rahab in Joshua 2 (and cf. the New Testament praise of Rahab's actions in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25). No doubt this teaching will ruffle some feathers, but part of growing up spiritually is learning to distinguish moral virtue from legalistic rules that have the appearance of holiness, but are in fact incompatible with true righteousness. <div class="special-content sidenote"> <strong> <a href="/site/content-features/#sidenotes">Sidenote</a> </strong> <p>If you want to read additional support for the interpretation I put forth, you might see <a href="https://www.ichthys.com/matthew-questions.htm#:~:text=42%29%20On%20the,protect%20their%20privacy">here</a> or <a href="https://www.ichthys.com/luke-questions.htm#:~:text=A%3A%20The%20statement,of%20our%20Lord%3A">here</a>.</p> <p>(Those links will take you to specific locations if you use a Chromium based browser, like Google Chrome or Microsoft Edge. Otherwise, search those webpages for the word "sleep", and you'll find the relevant sections).</p> </div> --- #### What of Hebrews 9:27? If Hebrews 9:27 says that people die once, then what of Lazarus and Jairus' daughter? Aren't they dying twice? Let me say, it gets even worse than just these two. What about the people mentioned in Matthew 27:50-53? Even more, if you take the two witnesses of Revelation (cf. Revelation 11:3-10) to be Moses and Elijah like I do (and there is a strong case for this, although that is ultimately a topic for a different time), then they will be walking around smiting bad guys with style some few thousand years after they last walked the Earth. Yet they are certainly said to be dead after the beast kills them (Revelation 11:7). So what gives? It will probably make skeptics scoff, but there is death, and then there is *death*. Biblically speaking, there is a difference between "resuscitation" (as was the case for Lazarus and Jairus' daughter, and all the other examples also mentioned above), and "resurrection" (in the manner of 1 Corinthians 15). Dead people are resuscitated. *Dead* people are resurrected into their eternal bodies. I'm sure that sounds all sorts of hand-wavy, but there it is. Put simply, all those who are resuscitated are not dead in the eternal sense of never again walking the earth in mortal bodies of fleshly corruption. From the human perspective, dead people are dead people. But with God's perfect foreknowledge and foreordination of all things, only those whom He does not foreknow as being resuscitated are positionally dead in the sense of being in the state they shall be in until Judgement Day. The two "types of dead" really are quite different, then, even if human beings can never tell the difference. --- #### What of Hebrews 9:27? If you'd like to read some additional Q&As on the same general question: <div class="special-content quote"> <strong> <a href="/site/content-features/#quotes">Quote</a> from <a href="https://ichthys.com/mail-transmutation%20resus%20and%20resurr.htm">Ichthys</a> </strong> <p><strong>Question #4:</strong> </p> <p>Someone had asked if Lazarus (whom Jesus raised from the dead) had died twice, and if so, how does one reconcile that with this verse?</p> <div class="special-content scripture"> <strong>Hebrews 9:27 | KJV</strong> <p>And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:</p> </div> </div> --- <div class="special-content quote"> <p><strong>Response #4:</strong></p> <p>Lazarus really was an unusual case - but not unprecedented: Jesus also raised the widow's son and the rich ruler's daughter, and Elijah and Elisha also will have what I would call a "resuscitation" to their credit during the Tribulation (Rev.11). Hebrews 9:27 was of course written in full knowledge of all these cases as Hebrews 11:35 makes clear: "[by faith] Women received back their dead, raised to life again" (and indeed, Paul himself resuscitated a young man who had fallen out of a window in Ephesus).</p> <p>The way I would look at Hebrews 9:27, which does not contradict these miracles and is not ignorant of them, is that in all of these cases there was indeed still a <strong><em>final</em></strong> physical death. Therefore nothing can or could ever stand in the way of the coming "judgment" - save Christ being judged in our place. Thus the examples of those who were temporarily brought back to life actually <strong><em>confirm</em></strong> Hebrews 9:27, because even those who benefitted from the most amazing miracle of resuscitation from the dead could not even so avoid the appointment we all have with a final, ultimate end to the physical life of this corrupt body we now inhabit. Only through the resurrection by virtue of our faith in Him who is the Resurrection and the Life do we avoid the last judgment which leads to the second death and instead pass on to life eternal in Jesus Christ.</p> <p>In Him with whom we shall live forever, the One who was judged for us, our dear Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.</p> <p>Bob L.</p> </div> --- <div class="special-content quote"> <strong> <a href="/site/content-features/#quotes">Quote</a> from <a href="https://ichthys.com/mail-aspects%20of%20resurrection.htm">Ichthys</a> </strong> <p><strong>Question #3:</strong> </p> <p>Concerning those who were raised momentarily in Matthew 27:53, how do we reconcile that with this Hebrews 9:27? How was it that these people had to die a 2nd death on this earth, although the Bible teaches us we die once.</p> <div class="special-content scripture"> <strong>Hebrews 9:27 | KJV</strong> <p>And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:</p> </div> </div> --- <div class="special-content quote"> <p><strong>Response #3:</strong> </p> <p>This verse is certainly true for the vast majority of mankind. These <strong><em>very few</em></strong> people constitute an exception – although it's not much of an exception since, following resuscitation, they again fell into the same category of us all in regard to Hebrews 9:27, eventually facing a physical death from which there would be no more reprieve – and that is the real point of Hebrews 9:27, not that we don't have to die more than once, but that we are going to exit these corrupt physical bodies eventually and then face God's judgment – either the judgment of the righteous or the judgment of the unrighteous, depending on our attitude towards Jesus Christ in this life – <strong><em>and there is absolutely nothing we can do about these facts</em></strong> (so we best draw the right conclusions).</p> <p>Certainly, the widow's son whom Elijah brought back, the Shunammite's son whom Elisha brought back, Tabitha, whom Peter brought back, and the boy who fell from the window in Ephesus whom Paul brought back are surely not around any more. By all indications they went on to live normal lives after being brought back from the dead, and then died physically as it is appointed. Whereas those who are resurrected can never die again (and there was nothing in any of these or similar cases to indicate that the physical, earthly body of these so resuscitated was changed in any way other than the miracle of resuscitation). There is also the even rarer case of transmutation. Enoch (and so far Elijah) did not meet with physical death in the normal way, yet they will be resurrected and appear before the judgment seat of Christ the same as we all will. Finally, Paul's statement in Hebrews 9:27 was made after all of the events discussed above, and from that point forward was, has been, and will continue to be true without further exceptions so far as we can tell from scripture.</p> <p>In Jesus with who we shall live forever in the glory of eternal bodies that can never die.</p> <p>Bob L.</p> </div> <!-- Footnote List --> <div class="footnotes"> <ol> </ol> </div> --- #### Outline - [Q: If Jesus said they were sleeping, but they were dead, isn't there a contradiction?](#4) - [Answering point by point](#5) - [First of all, the Lazarus of Luke 16 is not the same Lazarus as John 11](#6) - [Jesus' describing Lazarus as "sleeping" in John 11](#7) - [Jesus' describing Jairus' daughter as "sleeping" in Matthew 9](#8) - [It is not a euphemism this time, but something completely different](#9) - [What of Hebrews 9:27?](#10)