Comment Thread for The Resurrection of Jesus - Apologiaphoenix vs Gary

[Mikeenders]

Gary is correct.
Nor is there any reason to believe in a resurrection of anything other than the ordinary human body that existed prior to Jesus' death.

[psstein]

Mike is correct, which is why Slick is wrong.

Paul emphasizes that the resurrected body is more than just flesh and bone. It has different properties; it is transphysical (as Wright puts it). It can do things a normal body cannot.

[Mikeenders]

Actually If I am reading this article right

https://carm.org/jesus-resurrection-was-physical

Slick is saying the same thing we are just emphasizing that its the same body to counter the teaching that jesus only rose spiritually. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong because it was a quick read for me but I got the sense slick agrees its a transphysical body with the raising and transforming of Jesus' physical body. Perhaps thats what Tabibito meant as well

[tabibito]

I do acknowledge that there is a difference between resurrection from the dead as applies to Christians who have died, and resurrection from the dead such as Lazarus experienced.

So the question arises as to whether Jesus' resurrection was the same as that of Lazarus, or whether it was the same as that of the resurrected Christian.

What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain.

And I don't think it a viable theory that the Christian's pre-death body is re-animated.

What would make it necessary for Jesus to have a super-normal body upon resurrection? There is nothing to indicate that he did anything after his resurrection that was not fully within his capabilities prior to his death.

[Christianbookworm]

Some speculations about the resurrection body make me wonder if the speculators read too many comic books. Because one guy(Randy Alcorn, Heaven) speculated that we may be able to see really far away and see really tiny stuff up close. Now, does that sound familiar?

[Gary]

I have no problem with your definition. But you are agreeing that conservative Christians are asserting that a dead body was reanimated, correct? The reanimated physical body may have been infused with some new supernatural powers, but it was still the same body.

[Christianbookworm]

In the sense that a butterfly used to be a caterpillar?

[Mikeenders]

I have no problem with your definition. But you are agreeing that conservative Christians are asserting that a dead body was reanimated, correct? The reanimated physical body may have been infused with some new supernatural powers, but it was still the same body.

CB has nailed the answer to your question with a fitting analogy. Its a transformation that includes the old butterfly's previous body. since we have the example of Jesus we know it looks much like the old body but its immortal

[psstein]

What would make it necessary for Jesus to have a super-normal body upon resurrection? There is nothing to indicate that he did anything after his resurrection that was not fully within his capabilities prior to his death.

Luke 24:36, Jesus appears out of thin air.

John 20:26, "A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, 'Peace be with you!'"

Jesus could enter through a locked door?

[Christianbookworm]

Luke 24:36, Jesus appears out of thin air.

John 20:26, "A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, 'Peace be with you!'"

Jesus could enter through a locked door?

Teleport? Of course, the confounding variable is that Jesus is fully God as well as fully man, so one does not know whether He could have pulled off those acts before the Resurrection or not also.

[Gary]

Ok, Stein, so do we now agree on what resurrection is: the reanimation of a dead body that has been infused with supernatural/divine qualities. I assume you believe that Jesus had the power prior to his crucifixion to do everything he could do after his crucifixion, so his powers did not change, only the "humanness" of his body. Jesus no longer needed to eat, drink, or eliminate, although he could do so if he chose to (such as eating broiled fish), nor would his resurrected body become sick. But it was the same body and the dead tissue had been revived (reanimated) to life.

Ok, that settled, Stein: Show me where my position on any issue related to the early Christian belief in Jesus Resurrection is contrary to the overwhelming majority scholarly opinion. And if you cannot, why do I need to read more Christian scholars' books if my positions are not out of the mainstream? What exactly am I going to learn by reading more scholarly books? Isn't the real reason you want me to read more books is that you will not be satisfied that I am sufficiently informed on this subject until I have adopted your conclusion that a bodily resurrection/reanimation really did occur in first century Palestine??

My position on the early Christian BELEIF in a resurrection is not outside of NT scholarship. It is my conclusion regarding the historicity of the event itself that you don't like; a conclusion that is shared by every living non-Christian NT scholar.

[Gary]

Luke 24:36, Jesus appears out of thin air.

John 20:26, "A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, 'Peace be with you!'"

Jesus could enter through a locked door?

If he could teleport to the highest pinnacle on the temple and walk on water, I'm sure he could walk through a closed door...if he really did any of these supernatural acts.

[Mikeenders]

I do acknowledge that there is a difference between resurrection from the dead as applies to Christians who have died, and resurrection from the dead such as Lazarus experienced.

So the question arises as to whether Jesus' resurrection was the same as that of Lazarus, or whether it was the same as that of the resurrected Christian.

Lazurus is a good point and I would agree that was simply a re animation

What would make it necessary for Jesus to have a super-normal body upon resurrection? There is nothing to indicate that he did anything after his resurrection that was not fully within his capabilities prior to his death.

the necessity is not for what he did post resurrection but for our benefit. Our entire salvation is based on accessing what he has through our union with him. added to that he would need to have that spiritual body to ascend and live in a physical/spiritual body at the right hand of God- anyway verse 20 seems to state they are the same - Jesus resurrection being merely the first to be followed by similar "fruit" of believers being transformed

"But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep."

thats how i have read it anyway.

[Christianbookworm]

Well, post Resurrection, it would be impossible for Jesus to die ever again.

[Mikeenders]

I do acknowledge that there is a difference between resurrection from the dead as applies to Christians who have died, and resurrection from the dead such as Lazarus experienced.

So the question arises as to whether Jesus' resurrection was the same as that of Lazarus, or whether it was the same as that of the resurrected Christian.

Lazurus is a good point and I would agree that was simply a re animation

What would make it necessary for Jesus to have a super-normal body upon resurrection? There is nothing to indicate that he did anything after his resurrection that was not fully within his capabilities prior to his death.

the necessity is not for what he did post resurrection but for our benefit. Our entire salvation is based on accessing what he has through our union with him. added to that he would need to have that spiritual body to ascend and live in a physical/spiritual body at the right hand of God- anyway verse 20 seems to state they are the same - Jesus resurrection being merely the first to be followed by similar "fruit" of believers being transformed

"But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep."

thats how i have read it anyway.