Page 2 of 236 FirstFirst 12341252102 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 2356

Thread: Gary & Rhinestone's Thread on Burial and Resurrection of Christ

  1. #11
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,749
    Amen (Given)
    195
    Amen (Received)
    713
    Quote Originally Posted by RhinestoneCowboy View Post
    I don't. I'm just pointing out the implications of Christian origins if you actually examine what the texts say and apply logic to them.

    My point in that post was to show that the vision is still subjective to Paul because only he "sees" Jesus (even though it doesn't actually
    say anyone saw Jesus, but rather it only details a bright light and a disembodied voice) but anyway, the others don't "see" Jesus and are
    not blinded (they don't hear or see the vision properly) so this by definition makes the full effect of the vision subjective to Paul.
    Okay, so if we assume Paul saw and heard a vision only, then what?

  2. Amen Meh Gerbil amen'd this post.
  3. #12
    tWebber RhinestoneCowboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    590
    Amen (Given)
    13
    Amen (Received)
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by seanD View Post
    Okay, so if we assume Paul saw and heard a vision only, then what?
    The appearance to Paul was a vision and he places this vision in the same list of the other appearances without distinction in 1 Cor 15:5-8.
    Therefore, we must at least accept the possibility that the other "appearances" were understood to be some type of "vision" as well. Make
    sense?

  4. Amen Meh Gerbil amen'd this post.
  5. #13
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,749
    Amen (Given)
    195
    Amen (Received)
    713
    Quote Originally Posted by RhinestoneCowboy View Post
    The appearance to Paul was a vision and he places this vision in the same list of the other appearances without distinction in 1 Cor 15:5-8.
    Therefore, we must at least accept the possibility that the other "appearances" were understood to be some type of "vision" as well. Make
    sense?
    Not really because that logic doesn't make sense to me. So your argument goes like this: since Paul wasn't specific about the appearances they all had, they therefore must have all had the same appearances as Paul did? Is there a reason you feel Paul would have been specific if we assume the appearances were in fact different?

  6. Amen Meh Gerbil amen'd this post.
  7. #14
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,435
    Amen (Given)
    1080
    Amen (Received)
    4116
    Quote Originally Posted by RhinestoneCowboy View Post
    This is a possible interpretation but it is not necessitated by the text. Usually, people are guilty of reading into Paul the later accounts of the empty tomb and physical corpse
    revivification that appears in the gospels but is actually nowhere found in Paul's letters. They just assume it must be there because the texts must harmonize somehow.

    Paul makes it clear in the preceding verse 1 Cor 15:40 that there are two different types of bodies.

    "There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another."

    He then follows through with this same idea again in 1 Cor 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."

    So since Paul makes it clear that there are different types of bodies, this must be taken into account when analyzing the rest of the text.

    This heavenly exchange of bodies is further emphasized by Paul in 2 Cor 5:1-4.

    "For we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this tent we groan, longing to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling—if indeed, when we have taken it off we will not be found naked. For while we are still in this tent, we groan under our burden, because we wish not to be unclothed but to be further clothed, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life."


    "The conception of nakedness is a metaphor used with some frequency in Greek philosophical and quasi-philosophical literature for the state of the soul that has left the body at death." - David Aune, (with sources cited at bottom of page) https://books.google.com/books?id=XT...page&q&f=false

    In other words, when we are born we are "clothed" in a natural/earthly body. When we die, that body is left behind and we become “naked” only to be “further clothed” in a spiritual body in heaven.

    Josephus says of the Pharisees in Jewish War 2.162 and 3.374 that they believed the souls of good men are "removed into other bodies" in heaven.

    Hellenistic-Jewish resurrection beliefs were quite diverse in the 2nd Temple Period. The sources on pages 31-40 provide a background for the
    many ways resurrection was interpreted.
    https://books.google.com/books?id=z-...page&q&f=false

    The "spiritual body" was still "physical" in that it was made of material, but Paul definitely did not envision it as a formerly dead corpse that had returned to life and left an empty tomb. That view was a later development. The spiritual body was a body in heaven, not on earth.
    Again, it clearly says that the mortal is clothed; neither lost or destroyed, and Paul certainly did believe in the physical resurrection of the body.

    Rom. 8:22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies.
    The redemption of our soma (body). There would be no need of such a redemption of our body if the new body was completely different from the old.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await our execution...

  8. Amen LostSheep, Meh Gerbil amen'd this post.
  9. #15
    tWebber RhinestoneCowboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    590
    Amen (Given)
    13
    Amen (Received)
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Again, it clearly says that the mortal is clothed; neither lost or destroyed, and Paul certainly did believe in the physical resurrection of the body.



    The redemption of our soma (body). There would be no need of such a redemption of our body if the new body was completely different from the old.
    Simply restating your original assertion doesn't address what I just said. 1 Cor 15:53 does not have the word for "body" in the Greek there.
    Paul believed there were different types of bodies, therefore what I'm arguing is completely plausible given what he speaks of is corroborated
    by what Josephus says of the Pharisees and other Greek and Jewish literature.
    Last edited by RhinestoneCowboy; 05-10-2016 at 01:59 PM.

  10. Amen Meh Gerbil amen'd this post.
  11. #16
    tWebber RhinestoneCowboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    590
    Amen (Given)
    13
    Amen (Received)
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by seanD View Post
    Not really because that logic doesn't make sense to me. So your argument goes like this: since Paul wasn't specific about the appearances they all had, they therefore must have all had the same appearances as Paul did?
    The same or similar in nature, yes. If Paul makes no distinction or gives any reason to think they're different then why are you assuming that they must be?
    Are you perhaps committed to the later gospel depictions instead of reading Paul on his own? Paul's letters, were in fact written, before any of the gospel stories
    and don't contain any of the amazing physical details found in them.

    1. Paul equates the appearances with the same verb for "appeared" ὤφθη (Greek – ōphthē) which was commonly used throughout the Septuagint to describe spiritual visionary appearances. There are other Greek words Paul could have used for "physically seeing" such as θεάομαι (theaomai) or θεωρέω (theoreo) but he does not do that in the passage. The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (vol. V, p. 358) points out that in this type of context the word is a technical term for being “in the presence of revelation as such, without reference to the nature of its perception.” In other words, the “seeing” may not refer to actual sensory or mental perception. “The dominant thought is that the appearances are revelations, an encounter with the risen Lord who reveals himself…they experienced his presence.”

    2. He includes his appearance in the same list as the others while giving no distinction between them.

    3. Paul's vision is used in order to claim apostleship in 1 Cor 9:1, arguing that he saw the exact same thing the other apostles did. The passage implies that "seeing" Jesus is a requirement for being an apostle. But Paul only "sees" Jesus in a vision implying that the other apostles must have "seen" Jesus in a similar way. Basically, he's saying "I saw Jesus just like you guys did! Can I join the apostles now?!"

    4. Throughout the entire Pauline corpus he only says that the Risen Jesus was experienced in "visions" and "revelations" so we have no reason to think that the disciples experienced Jesus in a way more physical than that.

    Is there a reason you feel Paul would have been specific if we assume the appearances were in fact different?
    Yeah. If Jesus' physical revivified corpse was actually touched, why no mention from Paul about this? Why instead do we only hear about "visions" and "revelations" of the Lord
    and never anything more physical than that? Paul does not say "Jesus appeared to me in a vision only whereas the appearances to the others involved touching a physically
    revived corpse that later flew to heaven"
    - that distinction is never made.
    Last edited by RhinestoneCowboy; 05-10-2016 at 02:02 PM.

  12. Amen Meh Gerbil amen'd this post.
  13. #17
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,435
    Amen (Given)
    1080
    Amen (Received)
    4116
    Quote Originally Posted by RhinestoneCowboy View Post
    Simply restating your original assertion doesn't address what I just said. Paul believed there were different types of bodies, therefore what I'm arguing is completely
    plausible given what he speaks of is corroborated by what Josephus says of the Pharisees.
    Again, I'm not just restating, I offered you a different scripture to make my point. I will have another one later. The "our body" that will be redeemed is not some future body since there is no reason for that immortal body to be redeemed.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await our execution...

  14. Amen Meh Gerbil amen'd this post.
  15. #18
    tWebber RhinestoneCowboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    590
    Amen (Given)
    13
    Amen (Received)
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Again, I'm not just restating, I offered you a different scripture to make my point. I will have another one later. The "our body" that will be redeemed is not some future body since there is no reason for that immortal body to be redeemed.
    Right, but we can play tennis with differing Pauline interpretations all day long. What exactly do you find implausible about my proposal in post #10?
    And why does all the evidence point to the earliest beliefs being "visions" of Jesus instead of actual physical encounters which are only found in the latest
    sources - Luke/John?

  16. Amen Meh Gerbil amen'd this post.
  17. #19
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,435
    Amen (Given)
    1080
    Amen (Received)
    4116
    Quote Originally Posted by RhinestoneCowboy View Post
    Right, but we can play tennis with differing Pauline interpretations all day long. What exactly do you find implausible about my proposal in post #10?
    And why does all the evidence point to the earliest beliefs being "visions" of Jesus instead of actual physical encounters which are only found in the latest
    sources - Luke/John?
    I'm not arguing about the visions, I'm pointing to the fact that Paul believed in a physical resurrection of our body.

    Again: Rom. 8:22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies.

    There would be no need for the future redemption of our physical body, (soma) if we were getting completely new or different bodies,

    And: Phi. 3:21 God, who will transform our lowly body (soma) that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself.

    And why would our physical body (soma) need to be "transformed" if we were getting completely new or different bodies?
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await our execution...

  18. Amen Meh Gerbil amen'd this post.
  19. #20
    tWebber RhinestoneCowboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    590
    Amen (Given)
    13
    Amen (Received)
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    I'm not arguing about the visions, I'm pointing to the fact that Paul believed in a physical resurrection of our body.

    Again: Rom. 8:22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies.

    There would be no need for the future redemption of our physical body, (soma) if we were getting completely new or different bodies,

    And: Phi. 3:21 God, who will transform our lowly body (soma) that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself.

    And why would our physical body (soma) need to be "transformed" if we were getting completely new or different bodies?
    How do you explain Paul saying there are different types of bodies in 1 Cor 15:40 and 15:44? Also, how do you interpret 2 Cor 5:1-4 in
    light of being "naked" meaning the soul has been separated from the body? What's you take on Josephus when he says the Pharisees
    believe souls are "removed into other bodies" in heaven? Paul was a Pharisee, right?

    The visions are important and a strong piece of evidence because it doesn't really support the notion of a physical resurrection but
    rather supports that the disciples experienced the Risen Christ in visions from Heaven like Paul did.
    Last edited by RhinestoneCowboy; 05-10-2016 at 06:28 PM.

  20. Amen Meh Gerbil amen'd this post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •