Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras
View Post
The ‘spiritual body’ for Ehrman “is a body of a more refined substance; it is still matter, but it is a different kind of matter. When Paul thought Jesus was physically raised from the dead, that was NOT a contradiction to his claim that Jesus had a spiritual body at the resurrection. Spiritual bodies *were* physical. We too will be raised (for Paul) into spiritual bodies. At that time, we will not have “flesh,” because sin will no longer have any role to play in our existence. But when he says this, he means it in the ancient, not the modern, sense”.
“Later Christian theologians who were NOT raised in Jewish apocalyptic thinking did not make this distinction that Paul made between body and flesh, leading to all sorts of confusions. They stressed the “resurrection of the flesh,” which for Paul would have been nonsense”.
https://ehrmanblog.org/did-paul-beli...e-resurrected/
The idea that something could be "physical certainly, but specifically not material" would have been entirely alien to anybody at that time. In fact, I'm not sure that I even understand what it's supposed to mean. Paul absolutely thought that the body of pneuma was material.
As Seer clarified later, whether or not Jesus was buried in a tomb, Paul certainly believed that Jesus had been buried. It is absolutely reasonable, therefore, to say that Paul would have expected that Jesus' body was no longer in this burial spot after the Resurrection.
https://ehrmanblog.org/did-paul-beli...e-resurrected/
Comment