GakuseiDon

Sure, why not? Are you saying that people who are water vapor shouldn't be allowed in heaven? If so, why not? Do water vapor people have less rights than gaping wound people? (Bet you never thought you'd see this question in a Biblical Criticism forum!)

jakejonesiv

I must say that it is refreshing to have a discussion with GakuseiDon that doesn't follow the well worn ruts of the Christ Myth argument. I hope to see more of this in the future.

There is a greater point to be made here. This is not a trick question or a new debate. Some of the Pharisees apparently held that the bodies must be resurrected wearing exactly the same clothes they were buried in, even if in the intervening time the clothes had molderd away. Any difference would negate the continuity of the resurrected body.

If Jesus' resurrection is some kind of special case, his body retains wounds, but the future Christians will not, then the continuity as first fruits is destroyed. Jesus is reduced to an abberation and the hope of the resurrection is compromised.

If, on the other hand, Christ's wounds are apparent rather than real, then the alleged eye witness testimony to his resurrection (i.e. John 20:27) is not trustworthy. Jesus is reduced to nothing but a trickster or a liar, exhibiting false evidence and bearing a false testimony.

Have you ever noticed how much the apologists need a mutilated Jesus? A hale and hearty Jesus will not do; the empty tomb would become an irrevalent product of the imagination.

ElectEngr

:notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy:

Later,
ElectEngr

GakuseiDon

For myself, I see Paul's resurrected Jesus as being different to the Gospel's resurrected Jesus. I believe that Paul had similar ideas to Philo's Moses: that Jesus's body and soul became one body (which he hints in his "we will all change and meet the Lord in the air" speech), while the Gospel Jesus was the body glorified (thus transmutted into a purified flesh) and so retaining the marks from before. The later emphasis on marks may have been to combat early gnosticism. In both cases, the idea was to get the flesh of Jesus into an acceptable state that would allow tranportation beyond the firmament.

jakejonesiv

Agreed.

Yes, that is quite a good point. The resurrection accounts do seem to put more emphasis on the carnal over time.

PhilosopherJay

No, I am quite liberal/communistic and would allow everybody into heaven if I could, but I do worry about the disadvantages these water vapor people will have. I mean water vapor doesn't have any of the human senses: sight, hearing, smell, touch and taste. Wouldn't they be at a disadvantage against people with eyes, ears, noses, mouths or bodys? Or would you propose that we do not use our organs in heaven? Doesn't the lead character in the gospels say somewhere that he's going to get drunk with his lads when they
get to heaven. It seems to me that this is very unfair to the water vapor people in heaven. I mean how are they going to get drunk without mouths to drink or hands to hold the kylix. Worse, I imagine a water vapor person would literally be changed into wine by drinking wine. This is quite different than a little pleasant drinking that we human bodied people tend to engage in. So, I'm afraid that I cannot see how there is not structural discrimination against water vapor people in heaven.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Jedi Mind Trick

From what I understand, and I could be wrong, the wounds in Jesus hands, feet and side was an editing by the proto orthodox to prove that the resurected Jesus was a flesh and blood person and not a ghost. It was placed into the gospels as a polemic against... I think it was Docetism.

exile

This whole idea of being resurrected in the flesh seems remarkably unsophisticated for what is otherwise a very sophisticated religion. It wouldn't take much of a miracle to either restore your body (and mind, which is probably more important) at a time before death, preferably to when you were in your prime, or to give you a spiritual/ghostly one able to move at will, etc. The idea of, say, living for ever in a disabled or mutilated body does not appeal.

"editing by the proto orthodox to prove that the resurected Jesus was a flesh and blood person and not a ghost."

Wasn't the resurrected Jesus able to walk through walls, appear and disappear etc?

Steven Carr

What foolish questions! Jesus became a life-giving spirit.

Steven Carr

And walk on water, don't forget.