Genesis 18 -- The LORD appears to Abraham

[Christian2]

Paul said spiritual body.

Jesus' body was raised bodily, leaving behind an empty tomb.

1 Corinthians 15:42-51 (New King James Version)

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. 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, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 45 And so it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being.”[a] The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

46 However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual. 47 The first man was of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lord[b] from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are made of dust; and as is the heavenly Man, so also are those who are heavenly. 49 And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear[c] the image of the heavenly Man.

50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption. 51 Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed—


Paul is saying that they are sown in weakness, they're raised in power. They're sown in dishonor, they're raised in glory. They're sown perishable, they're raised imperishable. They're sown natural -- bodies with all their fleshly and sinful desires and with hearts and lungs -- but raised and transformed into a new body with spiritual appetites, and empowered by God's Spirit. There is no thought about a contrast between physical verses spiritual.

If Paul had meant to draw a comparison between material verses immaterial, he had a better Greek word at his disposal, which he had already used a few chapters earlier with a similar analogy of sowing. (I Corinthians 9:11) He doesn't use that word here, though. That's more evidence that this has nothing to do with material verses immaterial. (Licona)

Mary was taken up to heaven with body and soul...

Do you expect to be "taken up to heaven" with body and soul?

I'll get to the rest of your post as I have the time.

[Tanakh Keeper]

Nope, I wanted to hear what Jews think and now I know. The obvious interpretation of Genesis 18 is that God appeared in human form. There is no other conclusion.

That's not what Jews think. It's not what G-d tells us.

[sylvius]

Jesus' body was raised bodily, leaving behind an empty tomb.

The (synoptic) stories about the empty tomb are allegory, like also the stories about the virgin birth (in Matthew and Luke).
Paul doesn't present it that way.

. There is no thought about a contrast between physical verses spiritual.

Yes there is, 1Corinthians 15:44
σπείρεται σῶμα ψυχικόν, ἐγείρεται σῶμα πνευματικόν. εἰ ἔστιν σῶμα ψυχικόν, ἔστιν καὶ πνευματικόν

This being derived from Genesis 2:7,
And the Lord God formed man dust from the ground
Hebrew "vayyitzer hashem elohim et haadam afar min haadamah"

"vayyitzer" written with two letters "yud",
Rashi:

formed: [וַיִּיצֶר, with two “yuds,” hints at] two creations, a creation for this world and a creation for the [time of the] resurrection of the dead, but in connection with the animals, which do not stand in judgment, two“yuds” are not written in [the word וַיִּצֶר describing their creation. — [from Tan. Tazria 1]

Do you expect to be "taken up to heaven" with body and soul?

No but Mary is said to be.
Which has its roots in the Torah.
Miriam, Moses' elder sister, appeared to be the source of water during the desert journey, Numbers 20: 1-2,
The entire congregation of the children of Israel arrived at the desert of Zin in the first month, and the people settled in Kadesh. Miriam died there and was buried there. The congregation had no water; so they assembled against Moses and Aaron

Rashi:

had no water: From here [we learn that] all forty years they had the well in Miriam’s merit. — [Ta’anith 9a]

The source of water being the "ed" , mist, of Genesis 2:6.

Without "ed" no man and no resurrected man.

[Christian2]

The (synoptic) stories about the empty tomb are allegory, like also the stories about the virgin birth (in Matthew and Luke).
Paul doesn't present it that way.




Yes there is, 1Corinthians 15:44
σπείρεται σῶμα ψυχικόν, ἐγείρεται σῶμα πνευματικόν. εἰ ἔστιν σῶμα ψυχικόν, ἔστιν καὶ πνευματικόν

This being derived from Genesis 2:7,
And the Lord God formed man dust from the ground
Hebrew "vayyitzer hashem elohim et haadam afar min haadamah"

"vayyitzer" written with two letters "yud",
Rashi:

formed: [וַיִּיצֶר, with two “yuds,” hints at] two creations, a creation for this world and a creation for the [time of the] resurrection of the dead, but in connection with the animals, which do not stand in judgment, two“yuds” are not written in [the word וַיִּצֶר describing their creation. — [from Tan. Tazria 1]

Paul did believe Jesus rose bodily.

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/...ter_friendly=1

No but Mary is said to be.
Which has its roots in the Torah.
Miriam, Moses' elder sister, appeared to be the source of water during the desert journey, Numbers 20: 1-2,
The entire congregation of the children of Israel arrived at the desert of Zin in the first month, and the people settled in Kadesh. Miriam died there and was buried there. The congregation had no water; so they assembled against Moses and Aaron

Rashi:

had no water: From here [we learn that] all forty years they had the well in Miriam’s merit. — [Ta’anith 9a]

The source of water being the "ed" , mist, of Genesis 2:6.

Without "ed" no man and no resurrected man.

Cite the Scriptures about Mary.

[sylvius]

Paul did believe Jesus rose bodily.

Paul mentioned two bodies, the physical body , σῶμα ψυχικόν (soma psuchikon) , and the spiritual body, σῶμα πνευματικόν (soma pneumatikon);

like also Rashi did, in his comment on Genesis 2:7.

The physical body decays.
Jewish tradition knows the luz-bone that doesn't decay and from which the resurrected body is build up.
"Luz" means also nut (almond or hazelnut).
Another name for almond is "shaked", related to "shakad"= to wake, to watch, make haste. (Jeremiah 1:11-12)
(The almond is said the first tree to blosom - but I think the hazelnut is earlier, at least in our garden...)
"shakad" in Greek is "gregoreo", you'll find at the end of Mark 13,
ὃ δὲ ὑμῖν λέγω, πᾶσιν λέγω, γρηγορεῖτε "What I say to you I say to all: WAKE!" (like the almond does)

But more I think Hebrew "luz" is a wordplay with Spanish "luz" = light.
The light that God saw to be good.

Cite the Scriptures about Mary.

Matthew 1:18,
πρὶν ἢ συνελθεῖν αὐτοὺς εὑρέθη ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου.

πρὶν (prin) denotes timelesness.

Like also the πρὶν in John 8:58

It stands for Hebrew "terem", like to be found in Genesis 2:5,
Now no tree of the field was yet on the earth, neither did any herb of the field yet grow, because the Lord God had not brought rain upon the earth, and there was no man to work the soil.
Rashi:

was yet on the earth: Every טֶרֶם in Scripture has the meaning of “not yet,” and it does not mean“before,” and it cannot be made into a verb form, to say הִטְרִים, as one says הִקְדִּים

[Christian2]

Thanks to all who replied. This topic is about Genesis 18 and not about Christianity.

If you want to learn about Christianity, post a topic in the appropriate forum.

[Tanakh Keeper]

Well, it sure ain't Judaism.

These posts are quoting Corinthian, Mathew and other chapters from the Christian bible.

[sylvius]

Well, it sure ain't Judaism.

These posts are quoting Corinthian, Mathew and other chapters from the Christian bible.

So what?

Christians contend that Genesis 18 proves that God appeared to Abraham as a man and next that Jesus is God.

Even Ratzinger Pope Benedict XVI does do so in his book "Jesus of Nazareth part two".

But this isn't supported by the NT writers.

These Christians do read it into NT scriptures and find support in ao their
false interpretation of Genesis 18.

They cannot do else, since they hold on to an anthropmorphic image of God, being idolworshippers.

[Tanakh Keeper]

I know. I found Christian2's comment funny

If you want to learn about Christianity, post a topic in the appropriate forum.

since most everything in this thread is Christianity and not Judaism.

[robrecht]

... This being derived from Genesis 2:7,
And the Lord God formed man dust from the ground
Hebrew "vayyitzer hashem elohim et haadam afar min haadamah"

"vayyitzer" written with two letters "yud",
Rashi:

formed: [וַיִּיצֶר, with two “yuds,” hints at] two creations, a creation for this world and a creation for the [time of the] resurrection of the dead, but in connection with the animals, which do not stand in judgment, two“yuds” are not written in [the word וַיִּצֶר describing their creation. — [from Tan. Tazria 1]

Interesting. Any witnesses to this interpretation prior to Rashi?

[sylvius]

Interesting. Any witnesses to this interpretation prior to Rashi?

It was indicated already: Tan. Tazria 1 = Midrash Tanchuma Parashat Tazria 1

http://www.tsel.org/torah/tanhuma/tazrea.html

וייצר ה' אלהים את האדם (בר' ב ז), יצירה אחת בעולם הזה ויצירה אחת לעולם הבא. אבל הבהמה והחיה והעוף יצירה אחת כתיב בהן ביו"ד אחת, דכתיב, ויצר ה' אלהים מן האדמה כל חית השדה (שם שם יט).

[robrecht]

Oops. Sorry, I missed the reference. Thanks!