Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's a great story. Poor Michael. I feel so sorry for him that he was mistaken for a Latter-day Saint. (post #53)
Hi KATZPUR
You will appreciate that it is not just Michael, but it is the concept of restoration that is unrelenting historically .
IF anyone of any religion (or no religion) enters the world of religious historical study with the honest intent to discover what early Judeo-Christianity was like, then they are, to that extent, a “restorationist” and are aiding the process of “restoration” of early knowledge regardless of their initial beliefs (which change as their knowledge and understanding grows).
The problem is that the discovery of specific early historical data, (if it is accurate and sufficient and credible), will lead the historian toward a specific model that may be different than their initial worldview and uncomfortable to those the historian presents the data to.
THE FUNNEL OF HISTORICAL STUDY AND DATA
Michael Heiser simply got caught up in what I am going to call “the funnel of historical data”.
This “funnel” is the process where all sorts of historical data relating to early Judeo-Christian history are discovered and thereby “poured into” a funnel-like analysis and what comes out is, (if it is correct data) by definition, Restorational data. (Since it is revealing more regarding early, historical Judeo-Christainity)
The moral struggle comes when the religious historical data funnels an individual toward a conclusion that conflicts with current personal religious bias or the religious bias of others.
What happens when the data demonstrates that ones own Christianity is not really historical at all?
The initial tendency for all of us is to want to confirm present bias rather than to change current beliefs.
OR, one can simply refuse to accept good data?
OR, does one re-adjust their beliefs to be consistent with new and better data?
The ability to be humble enough to “repent” and “change” our beliefs when faced with better data is part of this moral “maturity” that MysticPhD referred to in Matt 5:48, “Be ye therefore “perfect” (being morally mature).
Michael simply got caught up in historical data that funneled him into the “restorationist” camp on some historical points but he was criticized by non-restorationists. This is not rare, the same process involves the great Charlesworth (editor of the amazing 2000 page, Jewish pseudoepigraphia tomes) and the same process involved historical revelations in the Dead Sea Scrolls, Nag Hamadi Library, Oxrhynchus papyri, etc.
For example, Time magazine in 1957 placed The Dead Sea Scrolls on it's front cover and touted their discovery as the greatest religious discovery of our generation.
However, as soon as Jewish Scholars started translating it, many were frustrated at the early description of temple centric Judaism they found. (Teicher claimed it was a Christian "plant", a "hoax").
The "mainstream" Christians were also disappointed partly because it seemed to demonstrate a form of Christianity that existed prior to the time they thought Christianity should have existed (They assumed Christianity began at the time of Jesus). Thus, the Jews and mainstream Christians did not like many of the problems it raised that conflicted with their bias.
The main group that remained unfazed and very interested in the scrolls were restorationists, including the LDS (perhaps because their own biases were confirmed by the texts) and historians (again restorationists) who had already come to grips with the assumption that many of our current biases are incorrect.
I don’t think this dilemma only involves religious historians, but all of us are affected by our personal response to new and better data.
Last edited by Clear lens; 05-08-2024 at 01:10 PM..
So are you saying that you don't believe in a literal, physical resurrection, Shana? (post #24)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
You are confusing the "plant" with the "fruit" it produces, Katz. Once the "fruit" is "harvested" the plant is no longer needed. (post #31)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur
I think I'll let Shana take this one, Mystic. There are a great many Christians who believe in a literal physical resurrection. I'd like to know whether Shana is one of them or not, and only she can tell me. (post #32)
Quote:
Originally Posted by YorktownGal
Obviously, if Thomas put his fingers into wounds from the crucifixion and the sword wounds on Christ's side, so yeah, Jesus body was literally raise up from the dead.
Is Christ still in his body? No. )Post #39)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur
This sounds contradictory, YG. Do you believe Christ is Heaven with His resurrected body or not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by YorktownGal
Christ is not in his body now. As to the physical location of his body is a mystery of faith. As his body was a fully human body, after 2,000 years, it's dust.
There are many, many opinions regarding resurrection. However, I think opinions will have more weight if we try sharing more data and reasoning and explanations behind our various religious opinions.
1) THE IMPORTANCE OF THE CHRISTIAN RESURRECTION TO ANCIENT JUDEO-CHRISTIANITY
The physical resurrection of Jesus was one of the most profound and important claims of early Judeo-Christianity.
For early Judeo-Christianity, the physical resurrection of Jesus was tangible evidence for both his divine nature and for an Atonement wrought by him.
Just as the Resurrection is physical proof of the Messiahs divine Sonship, (the outward evidence that he was all he and the prophets said he was), if Jesus did not have the power to rise from the tomb; did not have power to save the body, then he did not have power to save the soul, nor the power to forgive sins. Paul reminds us that “if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.”
Part of what set Christianity apart is not simply it’s claim of a Lord God or it’s moral teachings. Many religions share a claim of the existence of a God and similar moral teachings to Christianity. However, the circumstance of a man who was dead, instilling life back into his body, never again to suffer separation of his spirit from a body (death) which is a physical reality does set Christianity apart from other religions and this sets Jesus apart from other religious “Messiahs” throughout history.
Though many religions and philosophies teach a continuation of the life principle or spirit after death, few religions, mirror the specific Christian doctrine of resurrection of the dead. Jesus’ physical resurrection serves as a degree of proof that he can do the same for all mankind.
The comfort of Israel was the promise of immortality, of resurrection unto immortality: “Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead." (Isaiah 26:19)
If Athenagoras was correct in saying, "Life would be an utter waste without the resurrection. It's the resurrection which gives everything in life its meaning", Then this principle also gives Christianity important context.
Just as one cannot clearly understand the nature of the Atonement without clearly understanding the nature of the Fall of Mankind, one cannot understand the nature of heaven without an understanding of the nature of the Resurrection (which is a critical step to getting there - to heaven)
2) THE TENDENCY FOR LATER CHRISTIAN THEORISTS TO METAPHORIZE WHAT HAD BEEN REAL PHYSICAL RESURRECTION IN EARLY JUDEO-CHRISTIANITY.
It becomes difficult for some christians to still believe in a material (physical) body of Jesus in a physical place ("heaven"). The "watering down" of doctrines may simply be a tendency to allegorize the resurrection, or allegorize it’s eternal nature (perhaps consider it a "temporary" promise); or allegorize the heavenly abode in order not to believe in the implication of the ancient belief in an eternal but material "heaven".
The modern tendency has always been for the "material" to be made "immaterial" and the literal to be made metaphor.
To believe Jesus had a physical body upon returning to the apostles and eating fish with them is one faith. To believe that Jesus still has his resurrected physical body and that his body currently EXISTS in a PLACE is a different faith.
Also, if all individuals who resurrect will have physical, but glorified bodies forever, then heaven will be populated with physical (though glorified) beings who, presumably, will be in a physical (though glorified) place. The modern tendency may be to allegorize the physical nature of resurrection and heaven away.
3) THE EARLY JUDEO-CHRISTIAN CONCEPT OF A PHYSICAL RESURRECTION
Mortality, was viewed anciently as a temporary bridge we all pass over from one type of existence to the next : “...a bridge
is laid across a river and everyone crosses over it, so a bridge is laid from the beginning of the entrance to it’s end...” (3rd Enoch 22:2)
As other posters have pointed out, following Christs death and resurrection, the resurrected Christ appears to the disciples; tells them not to fear and, seems to take care to indicate his resurrection was physical, including actual flesh and actual bones he claims to have.
For example, In Luke 24 (kjv) the resurrected Jesus appears to the disciples and says: "Peace be unto you. But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have."
During Jesus's post resurrection appearances he touches them, eats with them, breaks bread, has Thomas feel the nail marks, thrush his hand into his side, etc. The early Judeo-Christians describe their belief that these descriptions indicated a material/physical resurrection, (unless one believes Jesus merely "appeared" to have done these things in a belief like Doecism)
It’s not merely Jesus that resurrected, but others. For example, Matthew reports that at the resurrection of Jesus : “… the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.” (Matt 27:52–53 kjv)
The resurrection of other individuals is represented by decensus literature such as the Gospel of Nicodemus Narrative of the Sons of Simeon who had died and were buried and were part of those Matthew 27:52-53 described as having been resurrected.
The narrative describes a story of the Christian leadership that went to Arimathea to interview the two resurrected siblings who relate what happened to them in the world of spirits after they had died and what their purpose was now that they were resurrected.
Such texts were interpreted by early Christianity as indicating that Jesus was resurrected with a physical body made of matter as were those resurrected with him at that time.
However, if the physical resurrection of the body is an eternal promise, then the resurrection meant to them that Jesus and all others who have resurrected, still have physical, but glorified bodies which they will possess forever.
4) IN EARLY CHRISTIAN LITERATURE, RESURRECTED BODIES DIFFER IN TYPE AND ARE GLORIFIED
The early Judeo-Christian texts describe that the resurrected bodies are, at some point, changed and glorified and the righteous in heaven are given bodies that are glorious and appropriate to their level of reward.
For example, The prophet Ezra, in describing the blessing of glorified bodies saying : , “...their face is to shine like the sun, and how they are to be made like the light of the stars, being incorruptible from then on . The seventh order, which is greater than all that have been mentioned, because they shall rejoice with boldness, and shall be confident without confusion, and shall be glad without fear, for they hasten to behold the face of him whom they served in life and from whom they are to receive their reward when glorified.. (Fourth Book of Ezra 7:88-99)
The above narrative of the prophet Ezra is simply a different version of Pauls description of differing bodies in the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15 :
"1 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, ... 3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, ....4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,.." [...]
The ancient Judeo-Christians described pre-mortal spirits entering this bridge of mortality through birth and exiting it by and death and resurrection, “returning” to the eternal world. However, the fact that mortal individuals will have different bodies AFTER resurrection than before is a central theme to Paul’s discussion in 1 Corinthians chapter 15. After making some personal observations, Paul taught concerning the resurrection :
vs 12... how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? [...]16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. [...] 20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. [...]
The NIV heading of verses that follow is : “The Resurrection Body” and Paul continues with a discussion of the types of Bodies involved in the resurrection :
vs 35 But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?” 36 How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. 38 But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body. 39 Not all flesh is the same: People have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. 40 There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another. 41 The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor..."
Paul’s allusion to types of resurrected bodies corresponded to varying levels of reward based on varying levels of faithfulness and obedience to God. This was a simple and fair principle. The abandonment of this principle has caused endless debate about the unjustness of a God who, in some modern Christian Theories, both rewards and punishes on a more arbitrary and unfair basis.
The apostolic father Irenaeus expounded on the earlier (and more just) differing rewards underlying Paul's description of differing bodies (some with greater glory than others) in the resurrection of individuals having varying levels of faithfulness and obedience to moral principles of the Gospel :
“As the elders say, then will those who have been deemed worthy of an abode in heaven go there, while others will enjoy the delight of Paradise, and still others will possess the brightness of the city; for in every place the Savior will be seen, to the degree that those who see him are worthy.
They say, moreover, that this is the distinction between the dwelling of those who bring forth an hundredfold, and those who bring forth sixtyfold, and those who bring forth thirtyfold : the first will be taken up into the heavens, and second will dwell in Paradise, and the third will inhabit the city.
For this reason, therefore, our Lord has said, “In my Father’s house there are many rooms”; for all things are of God, who gives to all their appropriate dwelling...The elders, the disciples of the apostles, say that this is the order and arrangement of those who are being saved, and that they advance by such steps, and ascend through the Spirit to the Son, and through the Son to the Father, the Son finally yielding his work to the Father, ...” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies #5)
Paul Continues : vs 42 “So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit… ”
It is in THIS context relating to bodies that the narrative continues:
48As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the heavenly man, so also are those who are of heaven. 49And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly man.
While there are multiple modern and conflicting opinions and theories regarding resurrection and bodies of the resurrected, I do not think any of the later religious theories regarding resurrection are any more rational or logical or intuitive than the earliest Judeo-Christian descriptions. I wish everyone a good journey in determining what they will believe concerning resurrection.
This (Post 62) is one of your best yet, Clear lens. I am glad to hear that the early Christians believed in a literal physical resurrection. That strengthens my own belief.
I would like to see Mystic's comments to the following, as I know he does not believe the physical (though glorified) body goes to Heaven and thinks Jesus just appeared to have a resurrected physical body so as not to scare His followers, whom he says were deathly afraid of spirits.
Quote:
During Jesus's post resurrection appearances he touches them, eats with them, breaks bread, has Thomas feel the nail marks, thrush his hand into his side, etc. The early Judeo-Christians describe their belief that these descriptions indicated a material/physical resurrection, (unless one believes Jesus merely "appeared" to have done these things in a belief like Doecism)
Also, could you possibly explain how Doecism came to be.
This (Post 62) is one of your best yet, Clear lens. I am glad to hear that the early Christians believed in a literal physical resurrection. That strengthens my own belief.
I would like to see Mystic's comments to the following, as I know he does not believe the physical (though glorified) body goes to Heaven and thinks Jesus just appeared to have a resurrected physical body so as not to scare His followers, whom he says were deathly afraid of spirits.
Also, could you possibly explain how Doecism came to be.
The problem with Docetism is that it applied to both pre- and post-crucifixion. Before His crucifixion, Jesus had a 100 % human physical body, as we all do. After His human death and rebirth as Spirit, He had a Spiritual Body, as we all will have. Our ancestors and most still today completely identify their "Selves" with their bodies. They did not identify with Spirit. That was something to be feared. It would have been impossible to convey what Clear called "the most profound and important claim of early Judeo-Christianity." That is why it had to be a "glorified" physical body.
Without a physical resurrection, there would have been no "resurrection" that anyone could identify with. Even the learned Nicodemus did not understand the birth of Spirit. Spirit was not them. It was "something other." It would not have had the impact it has had for over two millennia and counting. Docetism was heresy. After all, it denied Christ suffered during the crucifixion because it was not a physical body thereby completely negating its import and impact.
The problem with Docetism is that it applied to both pre- and post-crucifixion. Before His crucifixion, Jesus had a 100 % human physical body, as we all do. After His human death and rebirth as Spirit, He had a Spiritual Body, as we all will have. Our ancestors and most still today completely identify their "Selves" with their bodies. They did not identify with Spirit. That was something to be feared. It would have been impossible to convey what Clear called "the most profound and important claim of early Judeo-Christianity." That is why it had to be a "glorified" physical body.
Without a physical resurrection, there would have been no "resurrection" that anyone could identify with. Even the learned Nicodemus did not understand the birth of Spirit. Spirit was not them. It was "something other." It would not have had the impact it has had for over two millennia and counting. Docetism was heresy. After all, it denied Christ suffered during the crucifixion because it was not a physical body thereby completely negating its import and impact.
A problem with your view is that twice in the NT, the concept presented is that man is trichotomous, that is, that man consists of three parts - body, soul, and spirit. In both 1 Thessalonians 5:23 and Hebrews 4:12 the human spirit, the human soul, and the human body are separate parts of man. Therefore it is not accurate to say that 'they' did not identify with spirit (which with reference to the human spirit is with a lower case 's' in the English language).
A problem with your view is that twice in the NT, the concept presented is that man is trichotomous, that is, that man consists of three parts - body, soul, and spirit. In both 1 Thessalonians 5:23 and Hebrews 4:12 the human spirit, the human soul, and the human body are separate parts of man. Therefore it is not accurate to say that 'they' did not identify with spirit (which with reference to the human spirit is with a lower case 's' in the English language).
Even God's spirit is lower-case - Psalm 104:30
* Body: physical person what our eyes see.
* Soul: the whole person as to what we are inside. Adam was a living soul until Adam died - Gen. 2:7; Ezekiel 18:4,20
* Spirit : or life's spirit "it" returns to God - Ecclesiastes 12:7 B. One's spirit is a neuter "it" - Ecc. 12:7 B
Jesus be with the spirit you show - Galatians 6:18; Romans 2:29; 7:6 B
- Hebrews 4:12-13
Besides man (body/soul/spirit) in scripture so is the ' Christian congregation as a whole '
- 1st Thess. 5:23; 1st Corinthians 12:12-13; Colossians 1:18 A
This (Post 62) is one of your best yet, Clear lens. I am glad to hear that the early Christians believed in a literal physical resurrection. That strengthens my own belief. ...........................................
Since the early Christians did Not recognize the resurrected Jesus, then Jesus was using materialized bodies after his God resurrected dead Jesus out of the grave - Acts 2:27,32
Resurrected Jesus was mistaken to be a garden caretaker at John 20:14-16
Plus, walking on the road resurrected Jesus was Not recognized until he revealed himself - Luke 24:13- 27
If Jesus was in his physical body he would have been recognized.
Also, a physical body does Not appear in a closed room as resurrected Jesus did - John 20:19, 26
Jesus resurrected body was a glorious body - Hebrews 2:9 - Made alive in the spirit ( spirit body ) 1st Peter 3:18 B
Furthermore, a physical body could Not appear to those fallen angelic spirits of Noah's day - 1st Peter 3:18 B-20; 2nd Peter 2:4; Jude 6
Since the early Christians did Not recognize the resurrected Jesus, then Jesus was using materialized bodies after his God resurrected dead Jesus out of the grave - Acts 2:27,32
Resurrected Jesus was mistaken to be a garden caretaker at John 20:14-16
Plus, walking on the road resurrected Jesus was Not recognized until he revealed himself - Luke 24:13- 27
If Jesus was in his physical body he would have been recognized.
Also, a physical body does Not appear in a closed room as resurrected Jesus did - John 20:19, 26
Jesus resurrected body was a glorious body - Hebrews 2:9 - Made alive in the spirit ( spirit body ) 1st Peter 3:18 B
Furthermore, a physical body could Not appear to those fallen angelic spirits of Noah's day - 1st Peter 3:18 B-20; 2nd Peter 2:4; Jude 6
Thanks for your insights, Matthew. Unfortunately, I do not accept the Jehovah's Witnesses doctrine on this subject. I think Clear lens once again has it right.
Thanks for your insights, Matthew. Unfortunately, I do not accept the Jehovah's Witnesses doctrine on this subject. I think Clear lens once again has it right.
I doubt that anyone else shares the view of Jesus' resurrection that the JW's hold. The NT is pretty clear that it was the body that went into the tomb that arose from the tomb, although in a glorified state.
I doubt that anyone else shares the view of Jesus' resurrection that the JW's hold. The NT is pretty clear that it was the body that went into the tomb that arose from the tomb, although in a glorified state.
Disclaimer here… I’m just free-thinking and working between the religious types of identity/identification
I don’t think that any Jehovah Witness is an enemy though, Paul does tell us that we (religiously) are all in relative darkness about the different types of ‘spiritual’ workings in Corinthians
My personal religious beginning was Presbyterian and then my mother decided to move me to a Pentecostal ‘movement’ that goes back to a USA origin and radiates out from there
but none of my ancestors went to USA - both my own genealogical ‘lines’ go back to either Ireland and Berkshire (mother) and Kent (father)
And the Kent types were strict Baptist and the Berkshire types were Anglican (not sure what the Irish affiliation was)
We all believe by faith our own types of doctrinal areas that have been revealed to us by ‘people’ like Joseph smith or Calvin or Ellen White or Stone/Campbell or Taze Russell interpreting the writings and documents in their own type of region and denomination and then the ‘distribution’ happens from there down in time to ‘us’ who ‘inherit’
The individual Taze Russell just started a magazine to do with the American Religious Restoration Movement happening at that time
Others ran with it, just like all of the other types of ‘movements’
Last edited by Meerkat2; 05-10-2024 at 08:43 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(post #31)
There are a great many Christians who believe in a literal physical resurrection. I'd like to know whether Shana is one of them or not, and only she can tell me. (post #32)