Originally posted by seer
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Philosophy 201 Guidelines
Cogito ergo sum
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Morally Wrong Behavior vs. What the Civil Government Should Prohibit
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostYou mean that the decomposed body, the body that no longer exists, is transformed?Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostI would assume, exactly what is says, a spirit.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
I'm actually going to side with Seer on this one-- sort of. In 1 Cor 15:44, Paul does indeed say "a natural body is sown, a pneumatic body rises up" (Gk., "σπείρεται σῶμα ψυχικόν, ἐγείρεται σῶμα πνευματικόν"); so I disagree that the "it" which rises refers to the natural body. However, the question becomes, "What did Paul mean by a natural body as opposed to a pneumatic body?"
I do not believe Paul would have thought the pneumatic body to be non-physical. Other Greek-speaking writers that time and earlier-- including Jewish ones like Philo of Alexandria-- considered the pneumatic to be physical stuff, but a different sort of stuff than our natural bodies. This pneumatic stuff is airy, in a way (hence, "πνευμα"), and didn't interact strongly with the natural or psychic body. Interestingly, Ehrman actually discusses this exact notion in quite a bit of depth in his latest book, Heaven and Hell."[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
--Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)
Comment
-
In various of his works, Gordon Fee opines that Scripture, or at least Paul, generally intends "pneumatikos," "spiritual," to mean "having to do with the s/Spirit" or "coming from the s/Spirit," as opposed to implying a "substance."
The "s/S" nomenclature is Fee's shorthand way of saying that in many contexts, Paul saw a great deal of overlap and interplay between the Holy Spirit and the regenerated human spirit.Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.
Beige Federalist.
Nationalist Christian.
"Everybody is somebody's heretic."
Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.
Proud member of the this space left blank community.
Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.
Justice for Ashli Babbitt!
Justice for Matthew Perna!
Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!
Comment
-
Originally posted by NorrinRadd View PostIn various of his works, Gordon Fee opines that Scripture, or at least Paul, generally intends "pneumatikos," "spiritual," to mean "having to do with the s/Spirit" or "coming from the s/Spirit," as opposed to implying a "substance."
The "s/S" nomenclature is Fee's shorthand way of saying that in many contexts, Paul saw a great deal of overlap and interplay between the Holy Spirit and the regenerated human spirit.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View PostI'm actually going to side with Seer on this one-- sort of. In 1 Cor 15:44, Paul does indeed say "a natural body is sown, a pneumatic body rises up" (Gk., "σπείρεται σῶμα ψυχικόν, ἐγείρεται σῶμα πνευματικόν"); so I disagree that the "it" which rises refers to the natural body. However, the question becomes, "What did Paul mean by a natural body as opposed to a pneumatic body?"
I do not believe Paul would have thought the pneumatic body to be non-physical. Other Greek-speaking writers that time and earlier-- including Jewish ones like Philo of Alexandria-- considered the pneumatic to be physical stuff, but a different sort of stuff than our natural bodies. This pneumatic stuff is airy, in a way (hence, "πνευμα"), and didn't interact strongly with the natural or psychic body. Interestingly, Ehrman actually discusses this exact notion in quite a bit of depth in his latest book, Heaven and Hell.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostI don't know if it is the same concept that you're speaking of here, but I read somewhere that "psuchikos" vs "pneumatikos" is not about the type of matter that the body consists of, but it's mode of operations/influence. So a "psuchikos" (natural) body would be a body governed by the base natural instincts apart from the spirit of God, while a "pneumatikos" (spiritual) body would be one that is governed by the higher, spiritual aspects (and under the influence of the Holy Spirit)."[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
--Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View PostI would argue that these aren't really mutually exclusive. Again, contemporary writers including Philo thought that the substance of a thing and the essential nature of that thing were inextricably linked. In their minds, a pneumatic body would be unable, by its very nature, to be basally driven. It would still be a material thing, though.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostSo the issue would then be whether there's any indication in Paul's writings whether his use of pneumatikos and psuchikos in the context of 1 Cor 15 alludes to both the substance and essential nature (which I'm assuming you're using in the sense of "driven by") of a thing or just one or the other..."[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
--Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View PostI'm actually going to side with Seer on this one-- sort of. In 1 Cor 15:44, Paul does indeed say "a natural body is sown, a pneumatic body rises up" (Gk., "σπείρεται σῶμα ψυχικόν, ἐγείρεται σῶμα πνευματικόν"); so I disagree that the "it" which rises refers to the natural body. However, the question becomes, "What did Paul mean by a natural body as opposed to a pneumatic body?"
I do not believe Paul would have thought the pneumatic body to be non-physical. Other Greek-speaking writers that time and earlier-- including Jewish ones like Philo of Alexandria-- considered the pneumatic to be physical stuff, but a different sort of stuff than our natural bodies. This pneumatic stuff is airy, in a way (hence, "πνευμα"), and didn't interact strongly with the natural or psychic body. Interestingly, Ehrman actually discusses this exact notion in quite a bit of depth in his latest book, Heaven and Hell.
Think about it...
(for the comically challenged - that was a joke)The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostCorrect Tass, the body (flesh and blood) is mortal. The it that is raised is the mortal body made immortal. The mortal body is not discarded it is transformed.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostYes. This is just what I said. Paul is clearly saying that all the encounters with Jesus in 1 Corinthians 15 were the same as his encounter with Jesus. And we know that this was not a fleshly encounter. Paul does not believe the pneumatic body to be non-physical. He believes that the resurrection body is a
1 Cor.15:53: For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality.
Romans 8:11, 23: If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you...And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies....
Philippians 3:20, 21: But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him even to subject all things to himself.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostNo, we know no such thing. The spiritual body IS the mortal body made immortal. That is clear in the text. The mortal is not discarded or lost as Ehrman and the text made clear. That is why Ehrman said Paul would have accepted the empty tomb.
Just stop digging Tass....
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment