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

Re: Physical bodies in heaven

Expand Messages
  • Mike Grondin
    ... Sorry; my mind was playing tricks on me. ... The locution seems ambiguous to me. I mean, one could imagine her reaching out to him, and then he stops her
    Message 1 of 189 , Nov 2, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- John Staton wrote:
      > Mike,
      > Concerning John 20: 24-29, Thomas doesn't touch, either.

      Sorry; my mind was playing tricks on me.

      > 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.

      The locution seems ambiguous to me. I mean, one could imagine her
      reaching out to him, and then he stops her before she can actually
      touch him. I think there's purity regulations in the background here
      about coming into contact with dead bodies.

      > In general, however, I think your argument with John Sabatino
      > holds.

      Thanks!

      > 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.

      The thing is, I can't find physical proofs in any text generally
      accepted as having been written prior to the 90's. Do you see any?

      Regards,
      Mike Grondin
      Mt. Clemens, MI
    • 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.