Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Physical bodies in heaven

Expand Messages
  • John E Staton
    Mike, Concerning John 20: 24-29, Thomas doesn t touch, either. It would appear both gospel writers depict Jesus as offering the possibility of touch, but
    Message 1 of 189 , Nov 2, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Mike,
      Concerning John 20: 24-29, Thomas doesn't touch, either. It would appear
      both gospel writers depict Jesus as offering the possibility of touch, but
      suggesting the disciples did not do so. The only exception I can think of is
      John 20: 17. "Do not touch me" suggests Mary Magdalene was in fact touching
      Jesus at the time.

      In general, however, I think your argument with John Sabatino holds. Luke
      obviously believes the stories about eating fish and Jesus' offering the
      possibility of touch would encourage belief in the resurrection, and
      therefore that some sort of physical proofs are considered desirable if not
      essential. Where I do part company with you, however, is that I believe that
      Luke records the resurrection appearances as he believed they happened. I
      believe these stories must go back to the earliest memories of the RJ.

      Best Wishes
      JOHN E STATON
      Penistone, Sheffield UK
      www.jestaton.org
      jestaton@...
    • Patrick Narkinsky
      ... I would take a different tack: that Jesus was the first fruits of the general resurrection and that, by raising him from the dead, God has promised to do
      Message 189 of 189 , Jan 1, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        On Dec 31, 2004, at 10:44 PM, Horace Jeffery Hodges wrote:

        > The difference that most Christians would ascribe to
        > Jesus is that he is divine, being one person of the
        > triune Godhead, whereas everyone else who will be
        > resurrected (whether physically or spiritually) is
        > human, all too human.

        I would take a different tack: that Jesus was the "first fruits" of the
        general resurrection and that, by raising him from the dead, God has
        promised to do likewise for those who are "in" Christ. I take this to
        be Paul's take as well (see 1Cor 15.12-20).

        However, I doubt that that this is the average pew-sitter's view, at
        least in Evangelical circles. In my experience, their emphasis would
        be on Jesus' crucifixion resurrection as an act of atonement, and what
        was unique about Jesus was his innocence. That is, Jesus was a perfect
        sacrifice, without sin, who could therefore atone for the sins of all
        mankind. Those who take this point of view tend not to think of
        "heaven" in terms of resurrection, and even Jesus' resurrection would
        be emphasized much less than Jesus' crucifixion. Even the Left-Behind
        crowd talks about the general resurrection of the dead as being "raised
        up" or something, reserving the term "resurrection" for Jesus himself.

        Patrick

        --
        Patrick Narkinsky - patrick@...

        "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
        - Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.