Chris Weimer

I've only heard it used that way. Carnis means flesh in Latin, thus reincarnation is the making again of the flesh. If you die and are reincarnated as a fish, then you're physically a fish, not spiritually. If you're resurrected, you're brought back, but it doesn't specify in the flesh or the spirit.

premjan

The you that is now physically a fish is evidently the spiritual you and not the physical you. And resurrection is related to the Egyptian belief where the body rises again after death.

Timetospend

It was interesting to read through all the attached speculative notes. Of course, any answer would have to be speculative since this is simply a speculative asserton, an assertion is impossible to prove.

Having stated that, the timing seems perfect to me. Jesus has been interacting for three years (or so) with these men. Now they were going to be separately. Jesus would be suffering for them and all men. Their personal fellowship would be altered as a result.

Matt 26:26-29
While they were eating, Jesus took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it, gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is my body." 27 Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, I will never again drink of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom."
NRSV

The statement emphasizes Jesus' death before it happened and to act as a prompt to commemorate his action into the future. It appears to me that the timing of the action and statement is perfect.

Just my speculative opinion.

Thanks,

Chris Weimer

But I'm physically the fish. I may have the same spirit, but it's a different body altogether. And do you have evidence that 1st century Palestinian theology concerning the resurrection is related to the Egyptian belief that the body rises again after death?

premjan

The different body but same spirit shows that the spirit is the common factor in reincarnation. Whereas in resurrection it ought to be the same body.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection

Chris Weimer

You're giving resurrection a meaning which it doesn't have to have - it literally means to be raised again, just like how Hercules was raised into his godly form after he was poisoned to death. Likewise, in Paul, Jesus arose in a spiritual form, conquering the flesh.

The Graeco-Romans didn't have a concept of Indian reincarnation.

Are you serious? You quote wikipedia?

premjan

Never mind.

Cege

According to the gospels, Jesus' body was gone from the tomb and then he appeared to people in a new-type of human body that was also endowed with mystical powers (appearing then disappearing, walking through walls, able to be touched, death injuries remaining on the body, able to eat, etc)

The gospels give examples of people rising from the dead during Jesus' ministry, resurrections that the apostles witnessed. It doesn't seem that the apostles should have thought that resurrection was either rare or unexpected.

The difference, it seems to me, is that Jesus' resurrection body had qualities that the other resurrected bodies the apostles (were supposed to have seen) didn't have.

Spanky

You guys are arguing over something that never happened! WTF?

Chili

Yes but to say that you are the incarnate son of your father makes reference to your psyche (soul nature) and not your appearance. It certainly is not learned behavior and therefore spirituality is better than just flesh.