Basic question: when did the disciples become born again?

[DannyM]

It is certain that to believe in Jesus for everlasting life requires having some idea of what everlasting life is. Now, the verse you cited (5:21), along with Martha's misunderstanding of Jesus' raising of Lazarus to be an eschatological event, along with the literal rendering of the phrase eternal life (lit. life of the ages), suggests strongly that, for the Jew, eternal life was actually the resurrection on the last day. This idea has deep roots in the OT:

• And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God ~ Job 19:26
  
  Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and eve ~ Dan 12:2-3

Job is probably the oldest book in the Bible and it records the hope of the resurrection. Daniel says it expressly. We find the same hope in Abraham, in David, in Isaiah and the other prophets . . . it permeates the OT. ?

Jac, theologically it all seems to fit like a glove. Everything about the Gospels fits in precisely with the OT and the idea of resurrection; there is no contradiction and actually CONFIRMATION, if you will, of the precise ideas of the day!!

So - if eternal life is equated with the resurrection at the end of time, which I think it is, it seems that when Jesus said He was the Messiah who would raise those who believed in Him from the dead, He was making a very specific claim: to believe in Him is to have everlasting life, because HE was the One promised since the earliest days of Scripture who would bring about the Resurrection of the Righteous to Life (and the wicked for judgment). Thus, no Jew, including the disciples, could have "believed in Jesus" without believing that He was the One who would bring about the Resurrection. ?

Yes. They believed in a resurrection, but they did not believe that it was imminent as Jesus was suggesting. In spite of the whole apocalyptic hyperbole of the age, there still appears to be an utter denial of the “imminent” end of time being as imminent as Jesus proclaimed. Now what do we make of this? Does this smack of human nature, when confronted with a personal being claiming the coming of the kingdom, retreating into denial…? Here we have a selected few presented with the Christ, but still thinking to themselves… “Well this surely cannot be THE time…?” Hence Jesus was presented with an uphill struggle the likes of neither you nor I can contemplate; imagine you walking into a pub, charismatic Jac, everyone loves and Adores you, they know you're double special, and you say that the resurrection of time is imminent… You'd be laughed at and told to behave yourself!! Think what Jesus had to deal with…?

That provides a great historical context for John 11:24ff, where Jesus says He IS the resurrection and the life.

Now, you and I, in retrospect, can fully appreciate this, because we see that Jesus Himself was resurrected. The first to be resurrected, in fact. As such, as God raised Him, so He will raise us in that resurrected image. So the theology all works out . . . certainly, the disciples believed that Jesus would raise them from the dead. Does that mean that they believed that Jesus Himself would be resurrected? Certainly, in some sense of the word, they did, because they probably had no concept of Him living forever. They probably expected Him to either grow old and die and then be resurrected with everyone else, or, on the other hand, usher in the eschatological age in which the Resurrection happened and then He Himself would receive His own glorified body. ?

You make a great point: you and I have the advantage of KNOWING that Jesus was resurrected. You know what, Jac? I think you have hit the nail full square on the head: The disciples expected a resurrection FROM Jesus, but not for years and years TO COME…Although they expected the coming, and despite all the hyperbole, they were NOT really prepared for the imminence of things to come!

In any case, I must absolutely concede to you that they did have some concept of the glorification of Jesus prior to His resurrection. I just don't think that they believed in His resurrection in the same sense that you and I do today--as you note, they simply didn't understand it. So perhaps we are both right? Perhaps belief in the resurrection was always there, but it was refined later? And if so, the "change" that took place in what one had to believe to be saved was that instead of having a general expectation of Jesus' resurrection, we must have the specific recognition that God has raised Him from the dead--that is now part of God's testimony concerning His Son.

Thoughts?

Jac, you are not conceding to me… It seems to me that we have at least jointly come to this position. I think you have put this succinctly: they believed in the resurrection but it was refined later!! I do not know if you wish to go further…Please do!! But personally I feel in agreement with you u