The Resurrection Body [Archive] - TheologyWeb Campus

Dee Dee Warren

September 14th 2003, 09:25 AM

Today @ 07:06 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=211459#post211459)
John Reece:

Dear Dee Dee,

I'm at a loss to know how to respond to your post.

I proposed an objective examination of the biblical texts to try to ascertain just what they say and do not say on the subject of Christ’s resurrection body and our resurrection body.

I neither acknowledged nor denied anything about how Christ’s resurrection body relates to our resurrection body. You read into my words what you wanted to see therein, not what I said or meant.

My apologies then, I certainly do not wish to put words in your mouth. I am glad you cleared up my misunderstanding.

I did intend to start with Christ’s resurrection body, but only because it comes first in the scriptures – not because of any assumption about how His relates to ours.

Okay no problem. See I am in the legal field, what I was attempting to do was like what is done in court cases.... in the beginning, the parties set at first what they can all agree upon so that time is not given to proven things that do not need to be. If this is not one of those things, no problem at all whatsoever.

I am a guest in your house. If this is too touchy a subject for me to pursue on TWeb without being pushed into positions the scriptures have not led me into, I’m quite willing to back off and drop it.

Blessings,

John

John no subject, well practically no subject, is too touchy. This is a perfectly legitimate question. No one will (nor do I thnk that they ever could) push you into somehting you are not led into. However, I know you know that we at TWeb are committed to the historically orthodox of the physical bodily resurrection. That does not mean each of our members is, nor does it mean that a member who does not agree is not welcome to speak. You are a dear friend John. My concern is more that I will speak too strongly and insult you. I would back out of the conversation first.... you know my affection for you.

John Reece

September 14th 2003, 10:39 AM

That’s a very gracious response, Dee Dee, for which I thank you.

John Reece

September 14th 2003, 08:24 PM

Matthew 28

The Resurrection

1 Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. 2 And behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it. 3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow. 4 And for fear of him the guards trembled and became like dead men. 5 But the angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 6 He is not here, for he has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where he lay. 7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples that he has risen from the dead, and behold, he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him. See, I have told you." 8 So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 9 And behold, Jesus met them and said, "Greetings!" And they came up and took hold of (ekrathsan) his feet and worshiped him. 10 Then Jesus said to them, "Do not be afraid; go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see me." (ESV)

Jesus appeared to the two Mary’s in a body that could be held by them.

The Curtmudgeon

September 15th 2003, 01:59 PM

Yesterday @ 07:24 PM John Reece:

Matthew 28:9 And behold, Jesus met them and said, "Greetings!" And they came up and took hold of (ekrathsan) his feet and worshiped him.(ESV)

Jesus appeared to the two Mary’s in a body that could be held by them.

I've always thought this interesting, especially in view of what He told Mary Magdalene separately in John's account:

John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

I'm no Greek scholar at all, but I notice that Strong's [yes, I've read all the comments about the dangers of relying on Strong's, but it's what I've got to work with] shows this 'touch' as a different word, απτον. I've been told that this verse should be translated "Don't cling to me" or similar (implying more emotional holding on, rather than physical), but does the difference in Greek words really mean that?

Along with your point here, there is also Jesus' invitation to "Doubting" Thomas to put his finger in the nail-prints and thrust his hand into the spear wound in His side. Obviously, Jesus would not have told Thomas to do these things if he could not, in fact, do them.

The (always doubting, but never Him) Curtmudgeon

John Reece

September 15th 2003, 02:06 PM

Today @ 06:59 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=212204#post212204)
The Curtmudgeon:
. . . . .

I'm no Greek scholar at all, but I notice that Strong's [yes, I've read all the comments about the dangers of relying on Strong's, but it's what I've got to work with] shows this 'touch' as a different word, apton (gee, I hope that comes out right!). I've been told that this verse should be translated "Don't cling to me" or similar (implying more emotional holding on, rather than physical), but does the difference in Greek words really mean that?

. . . . . .

The (always doubting, but never Him) Curtmudgeon

Max Zerwick, in A Grammatical Analysis of the Greek New Testament, translates the phrase in question, "Stop clinging to me!"

John Reece

September 16th 2003, 10:40 AM

Luke 24

On the Road to Emmaus

13 That very day two of them were going to a village named Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem, 14 and they were talking with each other about all these things that had happened. 15 While they were talking and discussing together, Jesus himself drew near and went with them. 16 But their eyes were kept from recognizing him. 17 And he said to them, "What is this conversation that you are holding with each other as you walk?" And they stood still, looking sad. 18 Then one of them, named Cleopas, answered him, "Are you the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?" 19 And he said to them, "What things?" And they said to him, "Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, a man who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, 20 and how our chief priests and rulers delivered him up to be condemned to death, and crucified him. 21 But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel. Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things happened. 22 Moreover, some women of our company amazed us. They were at the tomb early in the morning, 23 and when they did not find his body, they came back saying that they had even seen a vision of angels, who said that he was alive. 24 Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see." 25 And he said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?" 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.
28 So they drew near to the village to which they were going. He acted as if he were going farther, 29 but they urged him strongly, saying, "Stay with us, for it is toward evening and the day is now far spent." So he went in to stay with them. 30 When he was at table with them, he took the bread and blessed and broke it and gave it to them. 31 And their eyes were opened, and they recognized him. And he vanished from their sight. 32 They said to each other, "Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the Scriptures?" 33 And they rose that same hour and returned to Jerusalem. And they found the eleven and those who were with them gathered together, 34 saying, "The Lord has risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!" 35 Then they told what had happened on the road, and how he was known to them in the breaking of the bread. (ESV)

Jesus appeared to the disciples on the road to Emmaus in a body they did not recognize (even though they spent time in intimate communication with him) until “their eyes were opened”, a body that suddenly “vanished from their sight” when they were enabled to recognize Him.

John Reece

September 16th 2003, 01:20 PM

Luke 24

Jesus Appears to His Disciples

36 As they were talking about these things, Jesus himself stood among them, and said to them, "Peace to you!" 37 But they were startled and frightened and thought they saw a spirit. 38 And he said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? 39 See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." 40 And when he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet. 41 And while they still disbelieved for joy and were marveling, he said to them, "Have you anything here to eat?" 42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43 and he took it and ate before them. (ESV)

Jesus, in his resurrection body, contrasted himself with “a spirit”, affirming that he had “flesh and bones”, which he demonstrated by eating broiled fish in the presence of his disciples.

John Reece

September 16th 2003, 07:59 PM

John 20

Jesus Appears to Mary Magdalene

11 But Mary stood weeping outside the tomb, and as she wept she stooped to look into the tomb. 12 And she saw two angels in white, sitting where the body of Jesus had lain, one at the head and one at the feet. 13 They said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping?" She said to them, "They have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid him." 14 Having said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing, but she did not know that it was Jesus. 15 Jesus said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you seeking?" Supposing him to be the gardener, she said to him, "Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away." 16 Jesus said to her, "Mary." She turned and said to him in Aramaic, "Rabboni!" (which means Teacher). 17 Jesus said to her, "Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'" 18 Mary Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, "I have seen the Lord"--and that he had said these things to her.

Jesus Appears to the Disciples

19 On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you." 20 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. 21 Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you." 22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of anyone, they are forgiven; if you withhold forgiveness from anyone, it is withheld."

Jesus and Thomas

24 Now Thomas, one of the Twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe."
26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you." 27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe." 28 Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!" 29 Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." (ESV)

Mary did not recognize Jesus.

Jesus appears in a room the doors of which were locked.

Jesus invites Thomas to place his finger and hands in Jesus’ hands and side.

John Reece

September 16th 2003, 09:40 PM

John 21

Jesus Appears to Seven Disciples

1 After this Jesus revealed himself again to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias, and he revealed himself in this way. 2 Simon Peter, Thomas (called the Twin), Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two others of his disciples were together. 3 Simon Peter said to them, "I am going fishing." They said to him, "We will go with you." They went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing.
4 Just as day was breaking, Jesus stood on the shore; yet the disciples did not know that it was Jesus. 5 Jesus said to them, "Children, do you have any fish?" They answered him, "No." 6 He said to them, "Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some." So they cast it, and now they were not able to haul it in, because of the quantity of fish. 7 That disciple whom Jesus loved therefore said to Peter, "It is the Lord!" When Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put on his outer garment, for he was stripped for work, and threw himself into the sea. 8 The other disciples came in the boat, dragging the net full of fish, for they were not far from the land, but about a hundred yards off.
9 When they got out on land, they saw a charcoal fire in place, with fish laid out on it, and bread. 10 Jesus said to them, "Bring some of the fish that you have just caught." 11 So Simon Peter went aboard and hauled the net ashore, full of large fish, 153 of them. And although there were so many, the net was not torn. 12 Jesus said to them, "Come and have breakfast." Now none of the disciples dared ask him, "Who are you?" They knew it was the Lord. 13 Jesus came and took the bread and gave it to them, and so with the fish. 14This was now the third time that Jesus was revealed to the disciples after he was raised from the dead.

Jesus and Peter

15 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs." 16 He said to him a second time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Tend my sheep." 17 He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, "Do you love me?" and he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you." Jesus said to him, "Feed my sheep. 18 Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were young, you used to dress yourself and walk wherever you wanted, but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will dress you and carry you where you do not want to go." 19 (This he said to show by what kind of death he was to glorify God.) And after saying this he said to him, "Follow me."

Jesus and the Beloved Apostle

20 Peter turned and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following them, the one who had been reclining at table close to him and had said, "Lord, who is it that is going to betray you?" 21 When Peter saw him, he said to Jesus, "Lord, what about this man?" 22 Jesus said to him, "If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow me!" 23 So the saying spread abroad among the brothers that this disciple was not to die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he was not to die, but, "If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you?"
24 This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true.
25 Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. (ESV)

I get the impression that the disciples did not recognize Jesus by physical appearance, but by intuition.

John Reece

September 17th 2003, 02:48 AM

1 Corinthians 15

The Resurrection of Christ

1 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, 2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you--unless you believed in vain.
3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. 11 Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

The Resurrection of the Dead

12 Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead (anastasiV nekrwn)? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead (anastasiV nekrwn), then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. 15 We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
20 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead (anastasiV nekrwn). 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. 24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For "God has put all things in subjection under his feet." But when it says, "all things are put in subjection," it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. 28 When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.
29 Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf? 30 Why am I in danger every hour? 31 I protest, brothers, by my pride in you, which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die every day! 32 What do I gain if, humanly speaking, I fought with beasts at Ephesus? If the dead are not raised, "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die." 33 Do not be deceived: "Bad company ruins good morals." 34 Wake up from your drunken stupor, as is right, and do not go on sinning. For some have no knowledge of God. I say this to your shame. (ESV)

I find in Schaff’s Creeds of Christendom that the original wording of The Apostles Creed was “I believe in the resurrection of the flesh (Latin: carnis; Greek: sarkoV), which was later emended to “resurrection of the body”.

Paul’s exact words are affirmed in the Nicene Creed: “the resurrection of the dead” (anastasiV nekrwn). The Apostles' Creed is justified in terms of Jesus' words in Luke 24:39b, ". . . a spirit does not have flesh (sarka) and bones as you see that I have."

Dee Dee Warren

September 17th 2003, 04:25 AM

John, I am not sure when you want commentary. I want to offer one quick one above. With regards to "flesh" and "body" in your last comment above...

The Apostles' Creed is justified in terms of Jesus' words in Luke 24:39b, ". . . a spirit does not have flesh (sarka) and bones as you see that I have."

Were you referring to the original version being justified? I think so, but I got confused at first.

John Reece

September 17th 2003, 08:01 AM

Today @ 09:25 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=213520#post213520)
Dee Dee Warren:

John, I am not sure when you want commentary. I want to offer one quick one above. With regards to "flesh" and "body" in your last comment above...

Were you referring to the original version being justified? I think so, but I got confused at first.

Dee Dee,

Your commentary is always welcome.

Yes, I was referring to the original version. But the revised version is justified just as well, IMHO.

My thinking has been changed (as you may have noticed) in the process of doing this study, which is why I like to do such studies. I learned in the mid-1980's that I cannot learn from the scriptures without setting aside preconceptions while paying careful attention to what the texts actually say and do not say.

John Reece

September 18th 2003, 05:29 AM

1 Corinthians 15

The Resurrection Body

35 But someone will ask, "How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?" 36 You foolish person! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 And what you sow is not the body that is to be (o speireiV, ou to swma genesomenon speireiV), but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. 38 But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body. 39 For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish. 40 There are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is of one kind, and the glory of the earthly is of another. 41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.
42 So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. 43 It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body (swma yucikon), it is raised a spiritual body (swma pneumatikon). If there is a natural body (swma yucikon), there is also a spiritual body (swma pneumatikon). 45 Thus it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 But it is not the spiritual (pneumatikon) that is first but the natural (yucikon), and then the spiritual (pneumatikon). 47 The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven. (ESV)

Back to the resurrection body of Jesus:

Those who had known him intimately did not immediately recognize Jesus by means of physical appearance alone.

He was able to move into a room the doors of which were locked, without opening the doors.

He vanished from sight when the purpose of his appearance to the disciples on the road to Emmaus was fulfilled.

Those are not characteristics of a merely physical body.

Paul expressly declares that the resurrection body is NOT the body (ou to swma) that is buried.

Paul repeatedly contrasts the body that is buried (swma yucikon) with the body that is raised (swma pneumatikon).

Whatever the similarities and whatever the continuity between the natural/physical body and the resurrection body, the scriptures indicate that the resurrection body is not a natural/physical body (swma yucikon). The scriptures expressly declare that the resurrection body is a spiritual body (swma pneumatikon).

Dee Dee Warren

September 18th 2003, 05:42 AM

Good morning John!

It is here where I think you are going astray....

Today @ 05:29 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=214377#post214377)
John Reece:

1 Corinthians 15

The Resurrection Body

35 But someone will ask, "How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?" 36 You foolish person! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 And what you sow is not the body that is to be (o speireiV, ou to swma genesomenon speireiV), but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. 38 But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body. 39 For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish. 40 There are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is of one kind, and the glory of the earthly is of another. 41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.
42 So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. 43 It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body (swma yucikon), it is raised a spiritual body (swma pneumatikon). If there is a natural body (swma yucikon), there is also a spiritual body (swma pneumatikon). 45 Thus it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 But it is not the spiritual (pneumatikon) that is first but the natural (yucikon), and then the spiritual (pneumatikon). 47 The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven. (ESV)

Back to the resurrection body of Jesus:

Those who had known him intimately did not immediately recognize Jesus by means of physical appearance alone.

He was able to move into a room the doors of which were locked, without opening the doors.

He vanished from sight when the purpose of his appearance to the disciples on the road to Emmaus was fulfilled.

Those are not characteristics of a merely physical body.

Paul expressly declares that the resurrection body is NOT the body (ou to swma) that is buried.

Paul repeatedly contrasts the body that is buried (swma yucikon) with the body that is raised (swma pneumatikon).

Whatever the similarities and whatever the continuity between the natural/physical body and the resurrection body, the scriptures indicate that the resurrection body is not a natural/physical body (swma yucikon). The scriptures expressly declare that the resurrection body is a spiritual body (swma pneumatikon).

First....

Back to the resurrection body of Jesus:

Those who had known him intimately did not immediately recognize Jesus by means of physical appearance alone.

And we have a passage telling us why. Their eyes were "holden" - that does not mean that He was in a changed form that made Him unrecognizable. He was readily recognizable in other contexts. With Mary she was distraught, and distracted. He certainly was recognizalbe at other times.. so we have one texts specifically tellings us that hte disciples on the Emmaues road were actively kept from recognizing Him, and one passage wiht a grief wrought woman who was not expecting to see Him...and other ones making no mention at all of HIs being unrecognizable which would significantly downplay the apologetic value of His appearances.

He was able to move into a room the doors of which were locked, without opening the doors.

He was able to be transported before His resurrection, ie the temptations with satan. God can use His power to do those things to any of us now. That does not speak a bit to the nature of His body, but things that His body DID. We cannot confuse what a body DID to what a body IS, and considering His deity, that is a bad assumption to make here.

He vanished from sight when the purpose of his appearance to the disciples on the road to Emmaus was fulfilled.

Peter was whisked away by the spirit after witnessing to the Eunech. This is not a good prooftext for the nature of the Body. The passages which specifically speak of the nature, show it is tangible and physical and resulted in an empty tomb and bore the scars.

Those are not characteristics of a merely physical body.

That does not follow. Peter was in a merely physical body. I am not suggesting that Christ's body was "merely" physical for that is not the orthodox teaching anyways, I am just sayng this is an unwarranted leap from those passages who's purpose was not at all to teach on the nature of Christ's body.

Paul expressly declares that the resurrection body is NOT the body (ou to swma) that is buried.

And he explains how it is NOT... ie it is NOT imperishable and NOT corruptible, but the whole flow of the passage shows it is a transformation of the body that walked the earth a real tangible physical body, not a new body with no relation to that which walked the earth or the constant contrast and reference to wha is sown in the ground being raised from the ground is meaningless. IT is raised.... it is the body, otherwise the whole referents being utilized makes no sense. The continuity is unescapable. Furthermore, we must take into consideration the euphemism for death as "sleep". What is sleeping that will "awake." The body unless one is going to hold to unbiblical soul sleep. A body that stays in the grave never awakens. Also, notice that the locations of the resurrection is always the tombs and the graves..where the physical body is located, the passage on the resurrection of the "many" in Matthew is particularly instructive.

Paul repeatedly contrasts the body that is buried (swma yucikon) with the body that is raised (swma pneumatikon).

Whatever the similarities and whatever the continuity between the natural/physical body and the resurrection body, the scriptures indicate that the resurrection body is not a natural/physical body (swma yucikon). The scriptures expressly declare that the resurrection body is a spiritual body (swma pneumatikon).

No, John you added something here that the text does not say. It is does not say it is not physical, and in light of Christ's obvious physicality and emphatic references to it,and Paul's connection of Christ's resurrection with ours, the lack of physicality is denied. The text says it is not natural, but spiritual. To take "spiritual" as not consituted of physicality is not what the text says, the spirutal is speaking of the orientation, as previously illiterated by Paul... the natural is the perishability and corruptibility, the spiritual is the imperishability and incorruptibility. It makes no sense to speak of an immaterial thing as being incorruptible.

Further, the passage later states that this event is the defeat of death. Spiritual death is already defeated at the cross. This is something not yet realized,and all that is left to defeat for us is physical death. Physical death is not defeated if our physically bodies are still physically dead.

Okay phew... sorry for the misspelling and grammar mistakes and any abruptness. It is very early in the morning......

John Reece

September 18th 2003, 06:03 AM

Dee Dee,

I did not start this thread to start an argument.

I have achieved my goal: understanding.

Blessings,

John

Dee Dee Warren

September 18th 2003, 06:32 AM

Oh I am sorry John, I didn't mean to come off as argumentative. Sometimes my way of making comments comes off that way. In posts it is hard to "see" inflections, tone, etc. I apologize for any offense.

John Reece

September 18th 2003, 06:41 AM

No offense taken Dee Dee.

:cheers:

Dee Dee Warren

September 18th 2003, 07:16 AM

For some reason, my email notification for this thread is not working... hmmm, you can disregard my PM then...

John Reece

September 18th 2003, 07:44 AM

This may not make sense to anyone but me. However, I'm going to write it anyway.

There is something about my mindset at this stage in this thread that reminds me of things said by the Professor of Semitic Languages at Duke who taught me Hebrew. At the beginning of a semester in which we were to read the book of Jonah in Hebrew, a student asked, “Dr. Stinespring, what’s the best commentary on Jonah?” To which Dr. Stinespring responded, “The best commentary on Jonah is to read it in Hebrew.”

The same student asked Dr. Stinespring what he thought regarding the story of the miraculous swallowing and release of Jonah. Dr. Stinespring said, “I take my miracles straight.”

John Reece

September 18th 2003, 12:49 PM

Matthew 22

Sadducees Ask About the Resurrection

23 The same day Sadducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection, and they asked him a question, 24 saying, "Teacher, Moses said, 'If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up children for his brother.' 25 Now there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother. 26 So too the second and third, down to the seventh. 27 After them all, the woman died. 28 In the resurrection, therefore, of the seven, whose wife will she be? For they all had her."
29 But Jesus answered them, "You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 31 And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God: 32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living." 33 And when the crowd heard it, they were astonished at his teaching. (ESV)

From R. T. France, Matthew (TNTC):

30. . . . But ‘the power of God’ (v. 29) creates a wholly new kind of life, not a mere reanimation of that which we experience now (see the argument of 1 Cor. 15:35-50). In this new deathless life there will be no place for procreation, and the exclusive relationship within which this takes place on earth will therefore not apply. It is this aspect of marriage which Jesus’ argument excludes from the resurrection life, rather than any suggestion that loving relationships have no place there. The Sadducees question may have been cynical, but the issue it raises is a real one for those who have married more than once; Jesus’ reply points them to a possibility of fulfillment of these relationships in the risen life which the exclusiveness of the marriage bond in earthly life would have rendered unthinkable. Jealousy and exclusion will have no place there
31-32. The real issue for the Sadducees was not the question of marriage but the possibility of resurrection at all. Jesus draws his argument from Exodus 3:6, part of the Scriptures which the Sadducees accepted. It is so compressed as to seem quite unconvincing. But study of the context from which the quotation is taken suggests a deeper theological reasoning than is apparent on the surface. When God spoke to Moses at the burning bush, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had long been dead, and yet God identified himself as their God. But could he be God of the dead? As Calvin comments, ‘As no man can be a father without children, nor a king without a people, so, strictly speaking, the Lord cannot be called the God of any but the living.’ It is in this context that God reveals his name, Yahweh, ‘I am who I am’ (Ex. 3:14-16), and the object of that revelation is to assure Moses of the active, saving presence of God with his people to rescue them from Egypt. Could this living, saving, covenant-keeping God establish a relationship with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob only to allow it to be terminated by death? ‘To be the God of’ implies a caring, protecting relationship which is as permanent as the living God who makes it. ‘With unsurpassable brevity this sentence say that faith in God includes the certainty of conquering death’ (Jeremias, NTT, p. 184).

I get the impression that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were not lying in tombs awaiting a future resurrection there from.

John Reece

September 18th 2003, 03:28 PM

John 11

I Am the Resurrection and the Life

17 Now when Jesus came, he found that Lazarus had already been in the tomb four days. 18 Bethany was near Jerusalem, about two miles off, 19 and many of the Jews had come to Martha and Mary to console them concerning their brother. 20 So when Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went and met him, but Mary remained seated in the house. 21 Martha said to Jesus, "Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died. 22 But even now I know that whatever you ask from God, God will give you." 23 Jesus said to her, "Your brother will rise again." 24 Martha said to him, "I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day." 25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, 26 and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?" 27 She said to him, "Yes, Lord; I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, who is coming into the world." (ESV)

Jesus is “the resurrection and the life.” I’ll keep my reflections on that to myself, lest I disturb anyone.

:cheers:

:yipee:

Dee Dee Warren

September 18th 2003, 03:41 PM

I get the impression that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were not lying in tombs awaiting a future resurrection there from.

My comments, not an argument. The Sadduccees not only denied a resurrection they denied any afterlife state at all. In proceeding to affirm the resurrection, Jesus first affirms the nonsensicalness of believing that the patriarchs no longer exist. Certainly they are physically dead, but they are spiritually alive. Jesus was not teaching that the resurrection was past there, for affirmed the future (to Him) event, thus the resurrection is not a solely spiritual event, for they were already spiritually alive. Whatever the future event was, they were in fact waiting for it, no matter how we interpret it. Since they were already spiritually alive, this is something else. It cannot simply be a raising out of Hades (ie the rich man and Lazarus) since Revelation affirms that the saints are in heaven prior to the consummation (they are under the altar).

My thoughts on Jesus is the resurrection. He always stated he is a lot of things such as the bread of life, the door, the way, the truth, meaning all these things come through Him. And as an object lesson for that statement, Jesus raises a physical body out of a physical tomb. If the resurrection that Martha asked about and Jesus commented is not a physical empty tomb resurrection, he picked a deceptive object lesson.

John, I am only commenting for you said my comments were welcome. If you want me off your thread, say the word, and it is done.

John Reece

September 18th 2003, 03:53 PM

Of course your comments are most welcome, Dee Dee.

John Reece

September 18th 2003, 04:20 PM

Mark 9

The Transfiguration

2 And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, 3 and his clothes became radiant, intensely white, as no one on earth could bleach them. 4 And there appeared to them Elijah with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus. 5 And Peter said to Jesus, "Rabbi, it is good that we are here. Let us make three tents, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah." 6 For he did not know what to say, for they were terrified. 7 And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, "This is my beloved Son; listen to him." 8 And suddenly, looking around, they no longer saw anyone with them but Jesus only. (ESV)

I get the impression that Elijah and Moses appeared in bodies visible to the disciples, at a time between their death and the doctrinally affirmed future resurrection of all bodies, from burial places in which most of the bodies would no longer exist due to processes of decomposition over long periods of time.

At some point the symbolism of biblical language and the literalism of popular interpretations part company in my mind.

To me, the Scriptures are far more profound and wondrous than any literalistic interpretation of its symbolism.

Dee Dee Warren

September 18th 2003, 04:33 PM

Hey John, no matter what school of thought, orthodox or otherwise, that anyone is coming from, they all affirm a "resurrection" that is future from the persepctive of this event. So whatever it is, it has to something "more" than existed here. We must also remember that the Pharisees had a very literal understanding of the resurrection, it is well-documented. Paul when he was on trial affirmed that his belief in the resurrection was the same as the Pharisees, the crux of which was physical. Paul would have been lying if at a minimum he did not affirm such a thing.

Also, in confirmation of Christ's resurrection, "bodies" of "many" saints came out of the "tombs" and appeared in Jerusalem. The Scripture is clear what was raised:

the bodies of the saints

Where they were raised from:

their tombs

And what they did:

They were visibly present

With the context being Christ's bodily, out of the tomb, visible resurrection.

John Reece

September 18th 2003, 05:10 PM

No argument with that.

John Reece

September 20th 2003, 08:02 AM

eipen auth o IhsouV, egw eimi h anastasiV kai h zwh, o pisteuwn eiV eme kan apoqanh zhsetai, kai paV o zwn kai pisteuwn eiV eme ou mh apoqanh eiV ton aiwna.

o speireiV, ou to swma to genhsomenon speireiV.

speiretai swma yucikon, egeiretai swma pneumatikon.

I'd like to let Jesus and Paul have the last words - words that make more sense to me without the dilutions of doctrinal spinning.

Justme

September 20th 2003, 09:43 AM

Hi JOhn,

First, I understand you have had some health problems and I hope things are going well for you.

I just wanted to put up a verse for you from NASB. With your knowledge of language you'll know if it is a good interpretation or not.

Acts 10
40 " God raised Him up on the third day and granted that He become visible,

Take care John,

Justme

John Reece

September 20th 2003, 10:22 AM

That's an interesting verse, Justme. Similar to a quote of Isaiah 65:1 (LXX) in Romans 10:20b (emfanhV egenomhn toiV eme mh eperwtwsin - "I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.").

Dee Dee Warren

September 20th 2003, 10:41 AM

Him God raised up on the third day, and showed Him openly, 41 not to all the people, but to witnesses chosen before by God, even to us who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead.

What was raised? His body. His spirit was already with God as He declared would happen on the day He died. What was dead? His body. This is a resurrection of the body, that was the only thing that could arise.

Any redefinition of this as merely a rising of the spirits from Hades does work either culturally or Biblically. Nowhere within the Jewish frame of reference was such an idea, and Paul explicitly identified his resurrection beliefs as that of the Pharisees. A physical bodily, empty tomb, kind of resurrection. Now if this body has the abilty to become invisible, that does not make it immaterial. Wind is invisible, and is not immaterial. Again, I am just trying to make plain that we must not confuse what a body does with what a body is.

Dee Dee Warren

September 20th 2003, 11:09 AM

Now this is an interesting verse, and one that deals a mortal blow to any kind of nonphysical, non empty tombs resurrection...

Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, 52 and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

This is not speaking of "grave" as the spiritual abode of the dead, it is speaking of literal graves where literal dead bodies were lain. They were split open and the the "bodies" were raised out of the graves. This is undeniable, and is done concurrently with Christ's resurrection as a demonstration, a foretaste of the Last Day for Jesus said the same words:

Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice 29 and come forth— those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.

People come forth out of their graves. Of course Jesus also provided an object lesson for this when He told Lazarus "Come forth" which is what He will say to each and every one of us, and we will.

No matter what verses might be reasonably interpreted to mean a nonphysical resurrection, they also might be interpreted to mean physical, ie they are ambiguous (and I am being generous) - these are some examples of ones which place the evidence squarely on the side of the orthodox confession. Of course I add to his amongst others Paul's confession while on trial.

John Reece

September 20th 2003, 11:10 AM

I just want to know one thing:

What does "Tibulation" mean? As in "Great Tibulation T-shirt"?

Dee Dee Warren

September 20th 2003, 11:13 AM

Hahahahahaha caught me in a spelling error. :blush:

You have been hanging out with Jaltus too long.

John Reece

September 20th 2003, 11:36 AM

Good company :smile: .

Justme

September 20th 2003, 12:01 PM

Hi Dee Dee,

I'm a bit surprised you would use those that came up out of the graves at the crusifixion. Wouldn't that be considering a resurrection which Paul wouldn't be happy about.

Hey, could that be what Paul actually was talking about in the letter to Timothy?

Actually I can't think of verses anywhere which clarify what those bodies came out of the grave to prove.

Justme

John Reece

September 20th 2003, 02:12 PM

Justme:

. . . Wouldn't that be considering a resurrection which Paul wouldn't be happy about?

Why do you say that? :huh:

Justme

September 20th 2003, 02:27 PM

Hi John,

I had a discussion on another site where a person insisted that those that came out of the tomb were part of the first resurrection(Rev 20) and he went on to say that after those were resurrected the rest of the people involved with the 1000 year reign with Christ would wait until parousia.

I don't agree with that, but I don't know any verses that cut and dry it or explain it fully.

I don't know what importance or meaning Dee Dee puts on those who came up out of the tomb.
I did want to point out however, that it would not be a good example of eternal physical resurrection.

Justme

John Reece

September 21st 2003, 10:19 AM

So far I have found nothing in the scriptures that is incompatible with my belief that when the swma yucikon that is now essential to my existence in this world rots and decomposes to the point that it no longer exists, that will be a permanent end of it. To my mind, it takes a combination of credulity and dogmatism that is foreign to my understanding of the scriptures to think otherwise.

I have no argument with those who believe that my belief is heretical. Fortunately, what is heresy in the minds of those who claim to be the true Orthodox is no longer enforceable by loss of financial support, torture, or death. Loss of respect and popular approval is a small price to pay for honesty and personal integrity.

My favorite of the sayings of the hero of my youth (John Wesley) was made regarding a subject I have long since forgotten, but the phrase sticks in my mind and is often applicable to subjects other than the one that was being addressed by Wesley: “Let him believe it who can.” That’s all I have to say in response to the avalanche of arguments that have been and will be made by the Orthodox against what I believe is true in scripture and in reality.

Dee Dee Warren

September 21st 2003, 10:24 AM

John, I have known that has been your position, and you are still a treasured friend. You know my doctrinal views on that, and there is no need to air them out again here. We will continue to pray for each other and remain in the personal respect we have, I do hope. You have always been respectful of mine, and the site's position on orthodoxy etc., and it is greatly appreciated.

John Reece

September 21st 2003, 11:04 AM

Many thanks, Dee Dee.

Justme

September 21st 2003, 12:36 PM

Hi Dee Dee,

Is it your wish that the spiritual body resurrection not be discussed on this languages forum?

I ask because I don't have any knowledge of Koine Greek and John does and I would like to hear some of his ideas on things.

Thanks
Justme

Dee Dee Warren

September 21st 2003, 01:56 PM

JustMe, the answer is yes and know. What John did here with going through the texts was perfectly fine, but to get into heavy doctrinal analysis, particularly of an unorthodox doctrine, I would request that be taken into Comparative Religions. If the discussion is more just centered around words and the text, not heavy theology then here is fine. Yes, this is a fine line, but an all out debate/conversation etc on a nonphysical resurrection, this is not really the place, but the other forum is. What may happen is that you two just intend on speaking on afew words but readers jump in and before you know it has turned into something else. The suggestion I offer is this... there is already a thread on this subject started by you a while back in C.R., why don't you psot your question there and provide the link here. I am not referring to the thread where Suede is getting the wood put to him for misrepresentations as your question would be lost in that controversy, but the thread you had started a whiles back.

Justme

September 21st 2003, 03:08 PM

Hi John Reese,

I have left a question for you on an old thread of mine at Comparitive Religions...waltz across Texas....

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=216823#post216823

Thanks
Justme

Dee Dee Warren

September 21st 2003, 05:15 PM

Dee Dee Warren:

Now this is an interesting verse, and one that deals a mortal blow to any kind of nonphysical, non empty tombs resurrection...

Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, 52 and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

This is not speaking of "grave" as the spiritual abode of the dead, it is speaking of literal graves where literal dead bodies were lain. They were split open and the the "bodies" were raised out of the graves. This is undeniable, and is done concurrently with Christ's resurrection as a demonstration, a foretaste of the Last Day for Jesus said the same words:

Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice 29 and come forth— those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.

People come forth out of their graves. Of course Jesus also provided an object lesson for this when He told Lazarus "Come forth" which is what He will say to each and every one of us, and we will.

No matter what verses might be reasonably interpreted to mean a nonphysical resurrection, they also might be interpreted to mean physical, ie they are ambiguous (and I am being generous) - these are some examples of ones which place the evidence squarely on the side of the orthodox confession. Of course I add to his amongst others Paul's confession while on trial.

Justme:

Hi Dee Dee,

I'm a bit surprised you would use those that came up out of the graves at the crusifixion. Wouldn't that be considering a resurrection which Paul wouldn't be happy about.

Hey, could that be what Paul actually was talking about in the letter to Timothy?

Actually I can't think of verses anywhere which clarify what those bodies came out of the grave to prove.

Justme

I am responding to this only on the other thread.

jesusreligion

October 6th 2003, 12:56 PM

09-16-2003 @ 09:40 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=213391#post213391)
John Reece:

John 21

Jesus Appears to Seven Disciples

1 After this Jesus revealed himself again to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias, and he revealed himself in this way. 2 Simon Peter, Thomas (called the Twin), Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two others of his disciples were together. 3 Simon Peter said to them, "I am going fishing." They said to him, "We will go with you." They went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing.
4 Just as day was breaking, Jesus stood on the shore; yet the disciples did not know that it was Jesus. 5 Jesus said to them, "Children, do you have any fish?" They answered him, "No." 6 He said to them, "Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some." So they cast it, and now they were not able to haul it in, because of the quantity of fish. 7 That disciple whom Jesus loved therefore said to Peter, "It is the Lord!" When Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put on his outer garment, for he was stripped for work, and threw himself into the sea. 8 The other disciples came in the boat, dragging the net full of fish, for they were not far from the land, but about a hundred yards off.
9 When they got out on land, they saw a charcoal fire in place, with fish laid out on it, and bread. 10 Jesus said to them, "Bring some of the fish that you have just caught." 11 So Simon Peter went aboard and hauled the net ashore, full of large fish, 153 of them. And although there were so many, the net was not torn. 12 Jesus said to them, "Come and have breakfast." Now none of the disciples dared ask him, "Who are you?" They knew it was the Lord. 13 Jesus came and took the bread and gave it to them, and so with the fish. 14This was now the third time that Jesus was revealed to the disciples after he was raised from the dead.

Jesus and Peter

15 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs." 16 He said to him a second time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Tend my sheep." 17 He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, "Do you love me?" and he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you." Jesus said to him, "Feed my sheep. 18 Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were young, you used to dress yourself and walk wherever you wanted, but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will dress you and carry you where you do not want to go." 19 (This he said to show by what kind of death he was to glorify God.) And after saying this he said to him, "Follow me."

Jesus and the Beloved Apostle

20 Peter turned and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following them, the one who had been reclining at table close to him and had said, "Lord, who is it that is going to betray you?" 21 When Peter saw him, he said to Jesus, "Lord, what about this man?" 22 Jesus said to him, "If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow me!" 23 So the saying spread abroad among the brothers that this disciple was not to die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he was not to die, but, "If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you?"
24 This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true.
25 Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. (ESV)

I get the impression that the disciples did not recognize Jesus by physical appearance, but by intuition.

I certainly hope you are feeling better by now.

The resurrection certainly proves that we live on beyond physical death which i believe was a very important point to the unbeliever regarding eternal life. However, the fact that his disciples and followers did not recognize Jesus physically, many of whom were with him for 3 years, seems to indicate to me that more is going on here than we traditionally have been taught. If I were with such a charismatic person as Jesus for three years, I think I would have studied that face and form and been able to re-trace it perfectly from memory. No, Jesus had to physically look different in facial feature and body; only recognizable by the familiar wisdom pouring forth from within Him.

So, John, would you care to post (or PM me) as to what you are thinking?
:smile:

John Reece

October 6th 2003, 02:02 PM

Today @ 05:56 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=235189#post235189)
jesusreligion:

I certainly hope you are feeling better by now.

The resurrection certainly proves that we live on beyond physical death which i believe was a very important point to the unbeliever regarding eternal life. However, the fact that his disciples and followers did not recognize Jesus physically, many of whom were with him for 3 years, seems to indicate to me that more is going on here than we traditionally have been taught. If I were with such a charismatic person as Jesus for three years, I think I would have studied that face and form and been able to re-trace it perfectly from memory. No, Jesus had to physically look different in facial feature and body; only recognizable by the familiar wisdom pouring forth from within Him.

So, John, would you care to post (or PM me) as to what you are thinking?
:smile:

Oh my . . .

I'm really happy to hear from you jesusreligion, and to have you pose a question as to what I am thinking. Because I have had a thought going round and round in my head, which I have kept telling myself I should not post unless someone where to ask me such a question as you have posed.

The thought is with regard to 1 Corinthians 15:37 and 15:44.

1 Corinthians 15

37 And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. (ESV)

1 Corinthians 15

44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. (ESV)

My thought has do with a comment I made on another thread, in which I said that it had been my observation and experience that, with regard to the fiercely controverted subject of the resurrection body, the biblical texts is are not permitted to stand unamended.

With regard to the agricultural analogy in 15:37, the fact is that when a seed is planted, the kernel stays in the ground and a form of life from within that kernel rises as something new. But the text is not allowed to mean that. Rather, it is interpreted as though the text were "what you sow IS the body that is to be", rather than what the text actually says: "what you sow is NOT the body that is to be". That's what I meant when I said that the text is not allowed to stand unamended.

With regard to 15:44, it is insisted that what the text really means is "it is sown a physical body; it is raised a physical body".

I totally agree with you that, with regard to the resurrection of Jesus and the resurrection of Christians, “more is going on here than we traditionally have been taught”.

That’s not an argument; it’s just a thought.

Thanks for asking.

Blessings,

John

drmmjr

October 6th 2003, 02:31 PM

Today @ 02:02 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=235308#post235308)
John Reece:

Oh my . . .

I'm really happy to hear from you jesusreligion, and to have you pose a question as to what I am thinking. Because I have had a thought going round and round in my head, which I have kept telling myself I should not post unless someone where to ask me such a question as you have posed.

The thought is with regard to 1 Corinthians 15:37 and 15:44.

1 Corinthians 15

37 And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. (ESV)

1 Corinthians 15

44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. (ESV)

My thought has do with a comment I made on another thread, in which I said that it had been my observation and experience that, with regard to the fiercely controverted subject of the resurrection body, the biblical texts is are not permitted to stand unamended.

With regard to the agricultural analogy in 15:37, the fact is that when a seed is planted, the kernel stays in the ground and a form of life from within that kernel rises as something new. But the text is not allowed to mean that. Rather, it is interpreted as though the text were "what you sow IS the body that is to be", rather than what the text actually says: "what you sow is NOT the body that is to be". That's what I meant when I said that the text is not allowed to stand unamended.

With regard to 15:44, it is insisted that what the text really means is "it is sown a physical body; it is raised a physical body".

I totally agree with you that, with regard to the resurrection of Jesus and the resurrection of Christians, “more is going on here than we traditionally have been taught”.

That’s not an argument; it’s just a thought.

Thanks for asking.

Blessings,

John

John,

You make a good point about the body being sown is the body that is to be. Think about it, if you plant a kernal of corn, what come up out of the ground? A stalk of corn. If you plant a kernal of wheat, what comes up? A stalk of wheat. If you plant corn, wheat doesn't come up.

Likewise our bodies. When we are resurrected, it will be our own body that is glorified.

I think that part of the reason that the disciples didn't recognize Jesus is that they weren't expecting to see him again. They had just seen him crucified and buried. No one else had been resurrected to immortality.

jesusreligion

October 6th 2003, 03:07 PM

Today @ 02:31 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=235363#post235363)
drmmjr:

John,

You make a good point about the body being sown is the body that is to be. Think about it, if you plant a kernal of corn, what come up out of the ground? A stalk of corn. If you plant a kernal of wheat, what comes up? A stalk of wheat. If you plant corn, wheat doesn't come up.

Likewise our bodies. When we are resurrected, it will be our own body that is glorified.

I think that part of the reason that the disciples didn't recognize Jesus is that they weren't expecting to see him again. They had just seen him crucified and buried. No one else had been resurrected to immortality.

drmmjr: You do not think you would recognize someone whom you were a brother to for 3 years? They walked and talked on the road to E and still they didn't recognize Jesus...I couldn't disagree more with you. Try not to fit traditional doctrine into where it just doesn't fit.

John: Interesting verses to consider. Can't help but wonder the implications of placing so much emphasis on the physical body of ours versus the spirit man which is who we really are...also the idea Jesus spoke of about being "one" with each other comes into play in my head. Also, one might consider that Jesus may have also been de-emphasizing himself as the worker and pointing to the Holy Spirit as the worker...but I have many more ideas of which I shall not say here.

:hrm:

Dee Dee Warren

October 6th 2003, 03:16 PM

DR, has it exactly right. I repeat the comments I said here before several times....

We know what the Pharisees beleived abut the resurrection.

We know that Paul explicitly said he believed the same as they.

1. There is a literal physical resurrection just s the Pharisees believed

2. Paul lied

Those are the only options. No one in orthodoxy claims that the bodies are exactly the same. No one. That is a straw man. It is a transformed perfected body, but no less physical. Jesus went out of His way to prove His physicality, He like Paul was either trying to teach soemthing there, or He was being deceptive. Notice a pattern here?

We cannot read the Scriptures divorced of the first century context, and what "resurrection" meant to the original hearers. A body that comes out of heaven while the dead body remains in the grave is NOT a resurrection and such an idea would have been patently absurd to the first century audience to call a resurrection. It would be hideously deceptive. IT is planted, IT is raised. Get a mental pictures.... something is in the ground, something comes up out of the ground. It is not a recreation but a transofrmation with an ORGANIC unity to that which is sown.

And also I remind everyone John in his epistle affirms the eternal enfleshment of Jesus. Flesh is physical. Flesh is material. And John makes the denial of that a matter of horrifying importance. Personally we are a cheeky bunch indeed who think that we can overturn two thousand years of unamimity on this topic. This is one topic where there has been the least disagreement, it is the worst of all possible essentials to deny.

John Reece

October 6th 2003, 03:17 PM

drmmjr:

Today @ 07:31 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=235363#post235363)
drmmjr:

John,

You make a good point about the body being sown is the body that is to be.

You say I make a good point.

But you missed the point: The body being sown is NOT the body that is to be, according to the text of 1 Corinthians 15:37.

Think about it, if you plant a kernal of corn, what come up out of the ground? A stalk of corn.

I have thought about it: The kernel that is sown does not come up out of the ground; rather, life comes forth from within the kernel. If it is corn that is sown, yes, it is corn that comes up out of the ground, but it is not the kernel that was sown.

When we are resurrected, it will be our own body that is glorified.

I understand what you mean and believe and have no argument with your belief.

I also have a belief, which is in accord with the scriputures: when I am resurrected, it will be in my own body, but not the corpse that will have been put in the ground. It will be, like the new life released from within the kernel of grain that stays in the ground, a new body.

Blessings,

John

John Reece

October 6th 2003, 03:23 PM

Today @ 08:07 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=235439#post235439)
jesusreligion:

drmmjr: You do not think you would recognize someone whom you were a brother to for 3 years? They walked and talked on the road to E and still they didn't recognize Jesus...I couldn't disagree more with you. Try not to fit traditional doctrine into where it just doesn't fit.

John: Interesting verses to consider. Can't help but wonder the implications of placing so much emphasis on the physical body of ours versus the spirit man which is who we really are...also the idea Jesus spoke of about being "one" with each other comes into play in my head. Also, one might consider that Jesus may have also been de-emphasizing himself as the worker and pointing to the Holy Spirit as the worker...but I have many more ideas of which I shall not say here.

:hrm:

You have interesting thoughts.

I too have "many more ideas of which I shall not say here".

Maybe we will have occassion to share more thoughts and ideas from time to time.

Blessings,

John

:cheers:

jesusreligion

October 6th 2003, 04:16 PM

Today @ 03:16 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=235463#post235463)
Dee Dee Warren:

DR, has it exactly right. I repeat the comments I said here before several times....

We know what the Pharisees beleived abut the resurrection.

We know that Paul explicitly said he believed the same as they.

1. There is a literal physical resurrection just s the Pharisees believed

2. Paul lied

Those are the only options. No one in orthodoxy claims that the bodies are exactly the same. No one. That is a straw man. It is a transformed perfected body, but no less physical. Jesus went out of His way to prove His physicality, He like Paul was either trying to teach soemthing there, or He was being deceptive. Notice a pattern here?

We cannot read the Scriptures divorced of the first century context, and what "resurrection" meant to the original hearers. A body that comes out of heaven while the dead body remains in the grave is NOT a resurrection and such an idea would have been patently absurd to the first century audience to call a resurrection. It would be hideously deceptive. IT is planted, IT is raised. Get a mental pictures.... something is in the ground, something comes up out of the ground. It is not a recreation but a transofrmation with an ORGANIC unity to that which is sown.

And also I remind everyone John in his epistle affirms the eternal enfleshment of Jesus. Flesh is physical. Flesh is material. And John makes the denial of that a matter of horrifying importance. Personally we are a cheeky bunch indeed who think that we can overturn two thousand years of unamimity on this topic. This is one topic where there has been the least disagreement, it is the worst of all possible essentials to deny.

I do not think you understand where I am coming from. No offense, but I said nothing concerning the above arguments you are making. Perhaps you have taken my comments out of context. I never stated Jesus body was not physical...what did I type that has you so enflamed? Please enlighten me...

:huh:

By the way, I am not so sure Paul had all things figured out. To say so would be to deny his humanity and capability for error...

drmmjr

October 6th 2003, 04:22 PM

Today @ 03:17 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=235466#post235466)
John Reece:

drmmjr:

You say I make a good point.

But you missed the point: The body being sown is NOT the body that is to be, according to the text of 1 Corinthians 15:37.

I have thought about it: The kernel that is sown does not come up out of the ground; rather, life comes forth from within the kernel. If it is corn that is sown, yes, it is corn that comes up out of the ground, but it is not the kernel that was sown.

I understand what you mean and believe and have no argument with your belief.

I also have a belief, which is in accord with the scriputures: when I am resurrected, it will be in my own body, but not the corpse that will have been put in the ground. It will be, like the new life released from within the kernel of grain that stays in the ground, a new body.

Blessings,

John

If it is not the same as was buried, then where did Jesus' old body go when he was resurrected. His resurrection was not only a promise of what would happen to us, but also an example of what we can expect when he returns. Jesus was raised from the dead. The spirit of life left his lifeless body. His body was then filled and re-animated by the power of God.

Dee Dee Warren

October 6th 2003, 04:29 PM

Today @ 04:16 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=235551#post235551)
jesusreligion:

I do not think you understand where I am coming from. No offense, but I said nothing concerning the above arguments you are making.

There is a history already in this conversation, so my comments were much more general, and a lot written for the "lurker."

Perhaps you have taken my comments out of context. I never stated Jesus body was not physical...what did I type that has you so enflamed? Please enlighten me...

Please do not confuse my passion for an essential of the faith with flame. I have no flame, but I tend to be overly aggresive, adn I apologize if that has offended you. Our rez bodies are patterned after Christ's. I was taking a step you may not have made yet but others (not necessarily here at this forum) have...... that our rez bodes are immaterial, thus Christ's was. That of course is consistent... consistently very wrong.

I have a burning passionate burden for the resurrection, and the proper understanding of the nature thereof. I see way too many dire warning in Scripture not to be.

And if Paul could be wrong, then there is no point in us even dicussing Scripture. I could simply say, Paul was wrong whenever I didn't agree. If we both cannot accept the Scriptures as utter truth, then there is no grounds for conversation.

drmmjr

October 6th 2003, 04:34 PM

Today @ 03:07 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=235439#post235439)
jesusreligion:

drmmjr: You do not think you would recognize someone whom you were a brother to for 3 years? They walked and talked on the road to E and still they didn't recognize Jesus...I couldn't disagree more with you. Try not to fit traditional doctrine into where it just doesn't fit.

John: Interesting verses to consider. Can't help but wonder the implications of placing so much emphasis on the physical body of ours versus the spirit man which is who we really are...also the idea Jesus spoke of about being "one" with each other comes into play in my head. Also, one might consider that Jesus may have also been de-emphasizing himself as the worker and pointing to the Holy Spirit as the worker...but I have many more ideas of which I shall not say here.

:hrm:

I don't know if they didn't recognize him or if they did but didn't think it was him. Yes, if someone came to you who you had known you would recognize him. But if you had seen that die and be buried, you wouldn't expect to see him again. So if you saw them again, you might think it was someone who looked like them.

When Mary was at the tomb and Jesus came up to her, she didn't see him for who he was. Some of that could be attributed to tears, but again, she saw him die and be buried. She wasn't expecting to see him again.

Dee Dee Warren

October 6th 2003, 04:43 PM

Again the apologetic value of the rez if very undermined if we start theorizing that he looked so different that people took it on "instinct" and "faith" that it was Him. How is that "many infallible proofs"? And there is no big deal if His appearance was altered somewhat. I don't expect to look exactly the same, I could live without pimples and wrinkles and stuff. But it will be my real body perfected and sinless - not a "new" body that is only "mine" because my personality inhabits it. That is not a rez by any first century definition of the word. We cannot divorce the word from its culture.

John Reece

October 6th 2003, 05:34 PM

Today @ 09:22 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=235556#post235556)
drmmjr:

If it is not the same as was buried, then where did Jesus' old body go when he was resurrected?

That's a very good question.

Acts 2

29 "Brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne, 31 he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption (Nestle-Aland and LXX: diafqoran). (ESV)

That prophecy does not apply to me. My flesh will decay.

This is a sense in which the resurrection of Jesus is unique. I believe this is not the only sense in which His resurrection is unique.

Again, I repeat: This is not an argument; it is simply my belief.

Dee Dee Warren

October 6th 2003, 06:11 PM

That still would not make our resurrection any different from Jesus' empty grave resurrection as evidenced by the miracle that God performed concurrent with Christ's resurrection, the raisng of many long dead saints from out of their graves. That would be quite a confusing sign if we were never to believe that our graves would be empty, as would the raising of Lazarus which was done in the midst of the teaching of the rez on that last day.

But that does raise an interesting question (one of many) contra Harris, again the predominance of the resurrection of Christ's flesh.

jesusreligion

October 6th 2003, 08:01 PM

Today @ 04:29 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=235559#post235559)
Dee Dee Warren:

There is a history already in this conversation, so my comments were much more general, and a lot written for the "lurker."

Please do not confuse my passion for an essential of the faith with flame. I have no flame, but I tend to be overly aggresive, adn I apologize if that has offended you. Our rez bodies are patterned after Christ's. I was taking a step you may not have made yet but others (not necessarily here at this forum) have...... that our rez bodes are immaterial, thus Christ's was. That of course is consistent... consistently very wrong.

I have a burning passionate burden for the resurrection, and the proper understanding of the nature thereof. I see way too many dire warning in Scripture not to be.

And if Paul could be wrong, then there is no point in us even dicussing Scripture. I could simply say, Paul was wrong whenever I didn't agree. If we both cannot accept the Scriptures as utter truth, then there is no grounds for conversation.

Dee Dee:
I'm not offended nor am I up on all the different discussions regarding this topic on TWeb.
I simply am saying that I believe there is more going on with the resurrection than we may understand and perhaps even more than Paul understood. Consider this verse...

John 11:25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live.
John 11:26 "And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?"

Jesus is saying more here than what the traditional teaching has to offer. Martha, to whom Jesus is speaking, was looking at resurrection like many of us today view it - an event that will occur "one day." Jesus is pointing out that HE IS the resurrection...in other words, look at Him and SEE the resurrection...His Life. It is an invitation to follow His example of how to live, follow the Father and be. Jesus was making a statement to bring the resurrection into the NOW and into your own life...and not place it into the future (some day).

By the way, those of you who have problems with this interpretation, remember...Jesus stated that he speaks in parables. "Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive." These verses I pointed out are a parable that needs understood with spiritual ears through the Holy Spirit.

Waiting for stones to come my way! --->:rock:

Blake Reas

October 9th 2003, 06:49 PM

10-07-2003 @ 01:01 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=235727#post235727)
jesusreligion:

Dee Dee:
I'm not offended nor am I up on all the different discussions regarding this topic on TWeb.
I simply am saying that I believe there is more going on with the resurrection than we may understand and perhaps even more than Paul understood. Consider this verse...

John 11:25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live.
John 11:26 "And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?"

Jesus is saying more here than what the traditional teaching has to offer. Martha, to whom Jesus is speaking, was looking at resurrection like many of us today view it - an event that will occur "one day." Jesus is pointing out that HE IS the resurrection...in other words, look at Him and SEE the resurrection...His Life. It is an invitation to follow His example of how to live, follow the Father and be. Jesus was making a statement to bring the resurrection into the NOW and into your own life...and not place it into the future (some day).

By the way, those of you who have problems with this interpretation, remember...Jesus stated that he speaks in parables. "Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive." These verses I pointed out are a parable that needs understood with spiritual ears through the Holy Spirit.

Waiting for stones to come my way! --->:rock:

Bombs away! :rock:

:rofl: