Do you believe in zombies?

[Adrift]

Not necessarily. As God, Jesus could take his own body there.

The difference is not sarx/pneumatike, but psychike/pheumatike. Jesus' resurrection body was at least in some sense physical, since he could be touched and he ate food.

Actually, "the kingdom of God" (1 Cor. 15:50). "Flesh and blood" is an idiomatic expression which should not be taken literally (compare Mat. 16:17).

As Michael Licona points out,

Source: Buried Hope Or Risen Savior: The Search for the Jesus Tomb by Michael Licona

"Flesh and Blood." The third point of contention in 1 Corinthians 15 is verse 50 in which Paul states that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable." Some scholars assert that Paul was contradicting Luke, who reported Jesus saying, "A spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have" (Luke 24:39). A significant minority of today's commentators interprets "flesh and blood" as a synonym for "physical."⁵⁷ Most scholars, however, agree that it is a figure of speech--and probably a Semitism--referring to man as a mortal being. Thus Paul meant "the living cannot inherit the kingdom of God."⁵⁸ It resembles North American "idioms that refer to a person as being cold-blooded, hot-blooded, or red-blooded. When referring to a "red-blooded male," North Americans are not contrasting him with one who is green-blooded. The color and temperature of one's blood are not relevant when these figures of speech are used. The term "flesh and blood" appears five times in the New Testament (three of these occurrences are in Paul's letters).⁵⁹ It appears twice in the Septuagint⁶⁰ and is common in the Rabbinic literature. In all of these instances, the term bears the primary sense of mortality rather than physicality.61 That "flesh and blood" is employed in this sense in 1 Cor 15:50 is confirmed by the fact that, elsewhere in 1 Corinthians 15 where the present body is described, its mortality rather than physicality is the issue.

If "flesh and blood" is understood with the majority of commentators as a figure of speech meaning "mortal," interpreting Paul as claiming in 1 Cor 15:20 that our future bodies will be "immaterial" is exegetically unfounded.⁶² He is saying that our mortal bodies in their weak state will not be what we have in the resurrection. They must be transformed. Since "flesh and blood" was a figure of speech and "flesh and bone" apparently was not, Paul is not at all contradicting Luke. Moreover, since Paul strongly hints at a resurrection of our mortal bodies elsewhere (e.g., Rom 8:11,23; 1 Cor 15:42; Phil 3:21), any interpretation of 1 Cor 15:50 that has Paul referring to an immaterial body proposes a Paul who contradicts not only Luke but also himself.


^57. For an exception, see Borg, Jesus: Uncovering the Life, 289; Donald Wayne Viney, "Grave Doubts about the Resurrection," Encounter 50 (1989): 130; Watson, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 179.

^58. Although a few of the following do not note a figure of speech, they all agree on the meaning of the phrase "flesh and blood": Paul Barnett, "The Apostle Paul, the Bishop of Newark, and the Resurrection of Jesus," Crux 30: (1994), 9; D.A. Carson, Matthew, Expositor's Bible Commentary on CD-Rom, ed. Frank Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), comments on Matthew 16:17; Collins, First Corinthians, 579; Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 289-90; Craig, Assessing the New Testament, 141; Anders Eriksson, Tradition as Rhetorical Proof: Pauline Argumentation in 1 Corinthians, Coniectanea Biblica NT 29 (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1998), 273; David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 739-41; Gundry, Soma in Biblical Theology, 166; Johnson, 1 Corinthians, 306; Keener, 1-2 Corinthians, 133; Kistemaker, Exposition of the First Epistle, 580-581; Lockwood, 1 Corinthians, 596; William F. Orr and James Arthur Walther, 1 Corinthians, Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1976), 359; Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1291.

^59. Matthew 16:17; 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12; Heb2:14.

^60. Sirach 14:18; 17:31.

^61. Rudolf Meyer, TDNT, 7:116.

^62. Ben F. Meyer, "Did Paul's View of the Resurrection of the Dead Undergo Development?" Theological Studies 47 (1986); "Jeremias' 1955 essay all but put an end to the idea that 'flesh and blood' (interpreted as the corporeal principle itself) had no part in final salvation. After 1955 that particular reading of the text of 1 Cor 15:50 was largely abandoned, few today being ready to follow Teichmann in suppressing the prima-facie sense of 'change' ('we shall all be changed') in favor of making it mean annihilation and new creation" (110).

© Copyright Original Source

[Adrift]

Those of us who know Jesus as Savior can "fly to Heaven".... no man comes to the Father except through Christ.

By then, though, there will be a new heaven and earth where there will probably be little distinction between the two. We sometimes have it in our heads that "heaven" is someplace in the clouds or outer space, and that's certainly one type of heaven, but the spiritual heaven is all around us, and in the new age, heaven will come down to earth so that I think the dividing line between heaven and earth will probably be pretty fuzzy. As NT Wright points out,



Also, there's the fact that some of us won't have to die to see the resurrection (1 Thessalonians 4), but will instead be caught up with those who have died. Also...it sounds like JimL thinks that Enoch and Elijah were resurrected. They weren't. They wait (probably in peaceful repose with the souls of those saints who have already died) for the general resurrection like the rest of us.

[One Bad Pig]

Well, of course, but I'm basically talking about us non gods. Once we are resurected we can just fly off to heaven of our own volition whenever we decide to?

I haven't the foggiest idea.

Don't know what that means. I would think that one is either physical or non physical, not somewhat physical.

"sarx" would be literally flesh; "psychikos" is the sensuous nature with its subjection to appetite and passion (Strong's). It refers to the fleshly appetites, not the flesh itself. This coheres well with Jesus saying that in the age to come the resurrected ones will not live as though married (Mat. 22:30).

Sounds pretty straight forward to me. Where do you get the idea that Paul didn't mean for it to be taken literally?

I'm guessing you didn't bother looking at the reference I gave, which uses the exact same idiom.

[mossrose]

Well, of course, but I'm basically talking about us non gods. Once we are resurected we can just fly off to heaven of our own volition whenever we decide to?

The Lord takes us up to be with Him. And wherever He is, we will be with Him.

"And so shall we be forever with the Lord.".

[Sparko]

No, I don't think that at all, but I do think that's what it says. What do you suppose happened to them anyway? What do you think they did at the holy city, did they physically ascend up to heaven?

They rose and went around preaching, then probably lived the rest of their lives and died again. Just like Lazarus did and the young girl Jesus brought back to life.

[Cow Poke]

They rose and went around preaching, then probably lived the rest of their lives and died again. Just like Lazarus did and the young girl Jesus brought back to life.

And the guy who fell out the window cause the preaching was too long.

[Cow Poke]

The Lord takes us up to be with Him. And wherever He is, we will be with Him.

"And so shall we be forever with the Lord.".

And wherever that is and whenever it is will be just fine with me.

[rogue06]

And the guy who fell out the window cause the preaching was too long.

This is about you isn't it?

[Cow Poke]

This is about you isn't it?

You nose it!

[One Bad Pig]

This is about you isn't it?

Cow Poke's church doubtless has those old timey ushers with sticks to prod awake those who are nodding off.

[mossrose]

Cow Poke's church doubtless has those old timey ushers with sticks to prod awake those who are nodding off.

Like this?

[rogue06]

Like this?

That would put them out until next Sunday!

[mossrose]

That would put them out until next Sunday!

I have a cane now, too!

[rogue06]

I have a cane now, too!

The TWIG?

The SPLINTER?

[mossrose]

The TWIG?

The SPLINTER?

It has butterflies on it!