Post Reply
Page 2 of 7  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Appearances / resurrections
2 years ago  ::  May 08, 2012 - 2:33PM #11
nieciedo
Posts: 5,617

I'll preface this by saying that I don't know if I believe that the resurrection was real physical event. However, Christians have traditionally assumed that it is so.


Hence the notion that Jesus's resurrection was categorically different from the other resurrections described previously: the conquest of death requires a new mode of living that is not subject to the normal laws of biology with the necessity of deterioration, decay, and death. It's supposed to human nature glorified and exalted with limitations of the former order stripped away.


If you're going to have a body that isn't ever going to die, why not have the ability to teleport and turn invisible, too?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 08, 2012 - 2:55PM #12
Kwinters
Posts: 22,137

May 8, 2012 -- 2:33PM, nieciedo wrote:


I'll preface this by saying that I don't know if I believe that the resurrection was real physical event. However, Christians have traditionally assumed that it is so.


Hence the notion that Jesus's resurrection was categorically different from the other resurrections described previously: the conquest of death requires a new mode of living that is not subject to the normal laws of biology with the necessity of deterioration, decay, and death. It's supposed to human nature glorified and exalted with limitations of the former order stripped away.


If you're going to have a body that isn't ever going to die, why not have the ability to teleport and turn invisible, too?




If it was not a genuine resurrection then it wasn't a genuine resurrection. If he was given a form that could appear and disappear, pop back and forth between locations, eat and float then that is cool.


But it is not a resurrection.  He may have made appearances, but he was not resurrected.

Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert

“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.

If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”

Dale Spender
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 08, 2012 - 3:08PM #13
nieciedo
Posts: 5,617

May 8, 2012 -- 2:55PM, Kwinters wrote:


If it was not a genuine resurrection then it wasn't a genuine resurrection. If he was given a form that could appear and disappear, pop back and forth between locations, eat and float then that is cool.


But it is not a resurrection.  He may have made appearances, but he was not resurrected.





You are assuming that the other examples of "resurrections" described in the texts set the definition for all resurrections and that Jesus's if resurrection - which is generally claimed to have been Unique and Special and New and Improved - doesn't conform to that definition then it could not have been a "genuine resurrection."


First, this assumption is just that. On what basis do you make it?


Second, you're making a dichotomy where one does not necessarily have to be. If we're already allowing for the possibility of dead people coming back to life, why can we not allow Jesus's resurrection to herald a brand new kind of resurrection that is different from what has gone before?


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 08, 2012 - 3:37PM #14
Kwinters
Posts: 22,137

May 8, 2012 -- 3:08PM, nieciedo wrote:


May 8, 2012 -- 2:55PM, Kwinters wrote:


If it was not a genuine resurrection then it wasn't a genuine resurrection. If he was given a form that could appear and disappear, pop back and forth between locations, eat and float then that is cool.


But it is not a resurrection.  He may have made appearances, but he was not resurrected.





You are assuming that the other examples of "resurrections" described in the texts set the definition for all resurrections and that Jesus's if resurrection - which is generally claimed to have been Unique and Special and New and Improved - doesn't conform to that definition then it could not have been a "genuine resurrection."


First, this assumption is just that. On what basis do you make it?


Second, you're making a dichotomy where one does not necessarily have to be. If we're already allowing for the possibility of dead people coming back to life, why can we not allow Jesus's resurrection to herald a brand new kind of resurrection that is different from what has gone before?




No, what is happening here is that there are many accounts that claim resurrection where a normal person dies and is brought back to life.


You are trying to shoehorn in the appearances of Jesus into the defintion of resurrection. It doesn't fit. There is no new definition of resurrection.  There is only one. And the descriptions of the sightings in the three gospels and Paul do not describe a resurrection.


They do fit the definition of 'appearances' though.

Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert

“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.

If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”

Dale Spender
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 08, 2012 - 3:37PM #15
Eliascomes
Posts: 994

May 8, 2012 -- 1:06PM, Kwinters wrote:

1 Cor 15:5-8 
...and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also...

Matt 17:3
Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah, talking with Jesus. Peter said to Jesus, "Lord, it is good for us to be here. If you wish, I will put up three shelters--one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah."


If Moses and Elijah appeared to the disciples, does that mean God resurrected them from the dead too?

How is it possible to differentiate between resurrection and appearance? 



 The Bible never mention Enoch, Moses, and Elijah death. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 08, 2012 - 3:44PM #16
Kwinters
Posts: 22,137

May 8, 2012 -- 2:03PM, tfvespasianus wrote:


May 8, 2012 -- 1:59PM, Kwinters wrote:


May 8, 2012 -- 1:49PM, tfvespasianus wrote:


The OP does raise several interesting questions. I'll think on them.

 

A couple of random thoughts though. First, Elijah's death is not explicitly recorded and this fact does have a tradition associated with it (i.e. he was assumed into Heaven alive). Also, I've always thought it odd, even putting aside 'suspension of disbelief', that Peter knew who these people were. It doesn't seem like it would be patently obvious ala Elvis and I doubt they were wearing 'Hello, My Name is' badges.



Who knows, perhaps the details about Moses' sideburns and flare-bottomed jumpsuits were lost to history :)




That could very well be. Or perhaps Jesus had that annoying tic that I've noticed people in sales often posses. That being saying the personal name of the individual they are addressing in conversation repeatedly. (i.e. you know Moe, I was thinking that, Moe, you should really... Don't you agree Moe? Ha! That's funny, Moe.)




Or he was name dropping with Peter, 'So I was just saying to Moses when Elijah comes over and interrupts...'

Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert

“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.

If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”

Dale Spender
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 08, 2012 - 3:44PM #17
Eliascomes
Posts: 994

May 8, 2012 -- 3:37PM, Eliascomes wrote:


May 8, 2012 -- 1:06PM, Kwinters wrote:

1 Cor 15:5-8 
...and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also...

Matt 17:3
Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah, talking with Jesus. Peter said to Jesus, "Lord, it is good for us to be here. If you wish, I will put up three shelters--one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah."


If Moses and Elijah appeared to the disciples, does that mean God resurrected them from the dead too?

How is it possible to differentiate between resurrection and appearance? 



 The Bible never mention Enoch, Moses, and Elijah death. 




 Beside Jesus can bring anything back to life. He had told a little girl that had died to wake up, and she had awaken from death. 



John 1:4
In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 08, 2012 - 4:46PM #18
Miguel_de_servet
Posts: 17,085

May 8, 2012 -- 2:22PM, Kwinters wrote:

May 8, 2012 -- 2:11PM, Miguel_de_servet wrote:

But elsewhere in the Gospels we find different words used to describe the encounter between the Resurrected Jesus and the Twelve: see Matt 28:9, Luke 24:36-43, John 20:19-29.


Of course we do - the language changes and Jesus' manifestations become curiously more corporeal as time goes by.


According to Paul he appeared, in Matthew he as touchable feet, he can vanish out of sight, In Luke he can also appear, but gets hungry too, and by John he is vanishing and reappearing, but is also able to cook breakfast!


Considering the theological need to establish a physical resurrection as the movement got bigger and more push back it is rather unsurprising that the tales grew taller and taller.


That "Of course we do ..." expresses perfectly all Kwinters' bias and prejudice ...


... and why would it be so obvious that there would be a "theological need to establish a physical resurrection" is obviously NOT explained by Kwinters ...


However, this does not address the problem of the appearances of Moses and Elijah vs the appearances of Jesus.


It most certainly does, as the same Matthew, who had spoken of "appearances" for Moses and Elijah at the Transfiguration, speaks in altogether different terms of the "meeting" between the Resurrected Jesus and the Twelve (Matt 28:9).


After all, someone who is resurrected does not vanish in and out of sight.  But appearances do.


Kwinters must have forgotten, in the meantime, that Paul speaks, for the Resurrection, of "spiritual body" (soma pneumatikon - 1 Cor 15:44) ...


... and I seriously doubt that Kwinters is so familiar with what a "spiritual body" can or cannot do ...


MdS

Revelation is above, not against Reason

“The everlasting God is a refuge, and underneath you are his eternal arms ...” (Deut 33:27)
“Do you have an arm like God, and can you thunder with a voice like his?” (Job 40:9)
“By the Lord’s word [dabar] the heavens were made; and by the breath [ruwach] of his mouth all their host.” (Psalm 33:6)
“Who would have believed what we just heard? When was the arm of the Lord revealed through him?” (Isaiah 53:1)
“Lord, who has believed our message, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?” (John 12:38)
“For not the hearers of the law are righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be declared righteous.” (Romans 2:13)

“Owe no one anything, except to love one another, for the one who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.”(Romans 13:8)
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 08, 2012 - 5:10PM #19
nieciedo
Posts: 5,617

May 8, 2012 -- 3:37PM, Kwinters wrote:

No, what is happening here is that there are many accounts that claim resurrection where a normal person dies and is brought back to life.



Right, and the point is that Jesus's resurrection is supposed to be different.


You are trying to shoehorn in the appearances of Jesus into the defintion of resurrection. It doesn't fit.



No, that is what you are doing.


There is no new definition of resurrection.  There is only one.



How do you know this?


And what do you make of these verses?


Matthew 22:30/Mark 12:25 "For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven."


Luke 20:36 "for they cannot even die anymore, because they are like angels, and are C)">sons of God, being sons of the resurrection."


Paul goes on at length about the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15:


35 But BC)">someone will say, “How are BD)">the dead raised? And with what kind of body do they come?” 36  BE)">You fool! That which you BF)">sow does not come to life unless it dies; 37 and that which you sow, you do not sow the body which is to be, but a bare grain, perhaps of wheat or of k]">[k]something else. 38 But God gives it a body just as He wished, and BG)">to each of the seeds a body of its own. 39 All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one flesh of men, and another flesh of beasts, and another flesh of birds, and another of fish. 40 There are also heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is one, and the glory of the earthly is another. 41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.


42  BH)">So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown l]">[l] BI)">a perishable body, it is raised m]">[m] BJ)">an imperishable body; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in BK)">glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a BL)">natural body, it is raised a BM)">spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 So also it is written, “The first BN)">man, Adam, became a living soul.” The BO)">last Adam became a BP)">life-giving spirit. 46 However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. 47 The first man is BQ)">from the earth, n]">[n] BR)">earthy; the second man is from heaven. 48 As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the heavenly, BS)">so also are those who are heavenly. 49 Just as we have BT)">borne the image of the earthy, o]">[o]we BU)">will also bear the image of the heavenly.


And the descriptions of the sightings in the three gospels and Paul do not describe a resurrection.


They do fit the definition of 'appearances' though.




They do not describe a resurrection but they do describe THE Resurrection: the radically new resurrection of Christ that is then supposed to be the promise in store for those who have faith in him.


The sources are clear that there is a distinction. The burden of proof is on you to show that there is not.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 08, 2012 - 5:15PM #20
Kwinters
Posts: 22,137

May 8, 2012 -- 4:46PM, Miguel_de_servet wrote:


May 8, 2012 -- 2:22PM, Kwinters wrote:

May 8, 2012 -- 2:11PM, Miguel_de_servet wrote:

But elsewhere in the Gospels we find different words used to describe the encounter between the Resurrected Jesus and the Twelve: see Matt 28:9, Luke 24:36-43, John 20:19-29.


Of course we do - the language changes and Jesus' manifestations become curiously more corporeal as time goes by.


According to Paul he appeared, in Matthew he as touchable feet, he can vanish out of sight, In Luke he can also appear, but gets hungry too, and by John he is vanishing and reappearing, but is also able to cook breakfast!


Considering the theological need to establish a physical resurrection as the movement got bigger and more push back it is rather unsurprising that the tales grew taller and taller.


That "Of course we do ..." expresses perfectly all Kwinters' bias and prejudice ...


... and why would it be so obvious that there would be a "theological need to establish a physical resurrection" is obviously NOT explained by Kwinters ...


However, this does not address the problem of the appearances of Moses and Elijah vs the appearances of Jesus.


It most certainly does, as the same Matthew, who had spoken of "appearances" for Moses and Elijah at the Transfiguration, speaks in altogether different terms of the "meeting" between the Resurrected Jesus and the Twelve (Matt 28:9).


After all, someone who is resurrected does not vanish in and out of sight.  But appearances do.


Kwinters must have forgotten, in the meantime, that Paul speaks, for the Resurrection, of "spiritual body" (soma pneumatikon - 1 Cor 15:44) ...


... and I seriously doubt that Kwinters is so familiar with what a "spiritual body" can or cannot do ...


MdS




A spiritual body is not a resurrection.


Did Laz get a spiritual body? Or the girl? Or the people the apostles are said to have raised from the dead?


No, they - according to the texts - were resurrected.


Appearances are not resurrections. 










Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert

“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.

If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”

Dale Spender
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 7  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook