Bernard Muller

Vinnie, Josephus may or may not have been a Pharisee when he was writing 'Wars' (74-78). That does not matter much. It is what he said about Pharisees which does:
Wars of the Jews, Book II, Chapter VIII, 14:

14. But then as to the two other orders at first mentioned, the Pharisees are those who are esteemed most skillful in the exact explication of their laws, and introduce the first sect. These ascribe all to fate [or providence], and to God, and yet allow, that to act what is right, or the contrary, is principally in the power of men, although fate does co-operate in every action. They say that all souls are incorruptible, but that the souls of good men only are removed into other bodies [reincarnation?], - but that the souls of bad men are subject to eternal punishment. But the Sadducees are those that compose the second
order, and take away fate entirely, and suppose that God is not concerned in our doing or not doing what is evil; and they say, that to act what is good, or what is evil, is at men's own choice, and that the one or the other belongs so to every one, that they may act as they please. They also take away the belief of the immortal duration of the soul, and the punishments and rewards in Hades [relative to Pharisees' beliefs, I assume]."

Josephus does not state his own belief here, but the one of the Pharisees, as he knew it. And, as I said, Josephus was then a great admirer of the urban Essenes (see from same chapter, section 2 to 13), so much that he can easily be argued he could not have been a Pharisee at that time.

Later (around 90-93), in 'Antiquities', Josephus (definitively a Pharisee then) greatly reduced the corresponding part about the Essenes, and increased the one about the Pharisees.
See Ant., XVIII, I, 3-5. He stated about Pharisees:

"3. Now, for the Pharisees, they live meanly, and despise delicacies in diet; and they follow the conduct of reason; and what that prescribes to them as good for them they do; and they think they ought earnestly to strive to observe reason's dictates for practice. They also pay a respect to such as are in years; nor are they so bold as to contradict them in any thing which they have introduced; and when they determine that all things are done by fate, they do not take away the freedom from men of acting as they think fit; since their notion is, that it hath pleased God to make a temperament, whereby what he wills is done, but so that the will of man can act virtuously or viciously. They also believe that souls have an immortal rigor in them, and that under the earth there will be rewards or punishments, according as they have lived virtuously or viciously in this life; and the latter are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but that the former shall have power to revive and live again ; on account of which doctrines they are able greatly to persuade the body of the people; and whatsoever they do about Divine worship, prayers, and sacrifices, they perform them according to their direction; insomuch that the cities give great attestations to them on account of their entire virtuous conduct, both in the actions of their lives and their discourses also."

In this passage from Philippians 1, Paul is not concerned about any new body after death, but talks more like about his soul joining Christ in heaven, leaving his fleshy body behind to waste:
"For for me to live [is] Christ, and to die gain;
22 but if to live in flesh [is my lot], this is for me worth the while: and what I shall choose I cannot tell.
23 But I am pressed by both, having the desire for departure and being with Christ, [for] [it is] very much better,
24 but remaining in the flesh [is] more necessary for your sakes"

Paul claimed to have been a Pharisee, but I am quite sure, by the time of the third journey, or even before, he was considered a renegade by orthodox Jews and Pharisees alike. 'Acts' and even Paul's letters shows that (as being slashed (5 times) by Jews --2Cor11:24). Paul was a loose cannon, breaking away from Judaism (even the most liberal kind) in order to convert Gentiles (and keep them).
And then I do not think Pharisees were very regimented in their belief. Prior to Paul, the two leading Pharisees, Hillel and Shammai had different ideas. And Josephus presented the Pharisees as one of four Jewish sects of philosophy. Even in the same "school", philosophic beliefs can vary and be acceptable by the others. But within a same religious sect, variations would not be easily tolerated.

Best regards, Bernard

Infidelettante

I think our nested quotes have out done us Judge. This is your post, not mine.

As to what Paul might have done with translations, I yield to you.

JT

Brother Daniel

Correct me if I'm on the wrong track here... but it appears to me that the phrase "as to [the] law" may be an important qualifier. Paul is claiming to be Pharisaic in his interpretation of the law, but I don't think it follows (even if he is telling the truth) that he must be Pharisaic in his beliefs about the resurrection.

Layman

I have been meaning to add this section to my article. It would fit in at the end of section II.B.3:

>>>>Later in Romans 8, Paul provides even more evidence that he is speaking of a bodily resurrection.

Rom. 8:18-23: "For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body."

Above we discussed how Paul envisioned the redemption of the material world. Paul reinforces that notion here by noting that creation "groans and suffers" for reconciliation with God. To be "set free from its slavery." Paul goes on to explicitly include our material bodies in that reconciliation by noting that "not only this but also we ourselves" will have our "soma" redeemed. Not our spirits. Nor our souls. But our material bodies.

Speaking of the connection between the reconciliation of the material world and the redemption of our bodies, Professor Scotts comments: "In this ultimate purpose we have solidarity with the rest of the material world. The fallen creation retains within it a redemptive purpose. It will be set free from corruption at the time when believers' mortal bodies are redeemed from their temporality and weakness (Rom. 8:18-23)." Stephen C. Mott, Ethics, in The Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, at 272. William L. Craig describes this connection, thus: "Paul's doctrine of the world to come is that our resurrection bodies will be part of, so to speak, a resurrected creation (Rom 8.18-23). The universe will be delivered from sin and decay, not materiality, and our bodies wil1 be part of that universe." William L. Craig,"The Bodily Resurrection of Jesus," in Gospel Perspectives I, pp. 47-74. Edited by R.T. France and D. Wenham. Sheffield, England: JSOT Press, 1980.

Once again, therefore, Paul speaks explicitly of the transformation--not cessation--of our bodies as fulfilling Christ' redemptive work. <<<<

I am glad to see that Carrier has recognized that a material body can still be a spiritual body, even if not made of the exact same stuff as the original body. I think this new section adds further evidence of continuity between the old and new. Of course, Paul's use of a Rabbinic analogy to describe such continuity already establishes it on firm ground (Compare 1 Cor. 15:37 with b. Sanh. 90b ("If a kernel fo wheat is buried naked and will sprout forth in many robes, how much more so the righteous.")).

Bernard Muller

Brother Daniel wrote:
I would not want to extract too much from that quote. Paul was not orthodox in his beliefs. He was a Diaspora Jew, possibly descendant of a proselyte through his parents. It is obvious Paul was not observing the law with Gentiles. However Paul's statements about the resurrected body do not conflict about what Josephus said about Pharisees' belief (except Hades), nor what Philo said about his own beliefs, except that Paul never closed the door to some physicality for his heavenly/spiritual body.
If you take in account the OT has references to "flesh and blood" resurrections during the "Day of the Lord", with the Kingdom being on earth, Paul was clearly departing from conventional Jewish traditions and getting very close of new beliefs (Cicero, Philo, Pharisaic) which had the resting place of good souls (right after death) in heaven (but for Pharisees (& most Gentiles): more like in Hades, according to Josephus). He was probably combining the two (and a half!): that is soul-like bodies going to abodes in heaven at the future Day of the Lord to come.
I also think Paul inherited the Kindom to come soon and was not confortable with it. That's the way it looks in Philippians 1:21-24, which I quoted in my previous post. Here Paul alludes about going to heaven to join Christ, right after death, apparently as a soul (no new body mentioned here), and leaving his old fleshy body behind.

Next I give some OT quotes about the Kingdom to come on earth (in the future):

Isa13:1-22 "Behold, the day of the LORD comes, Cruel, with both wrath and fierce anger, To lay the land desolate; And He will destroy its sinners from it ... I will punish the world for its evil, And the wicked for their iniquity; ...Therefore I will shake the heavens, And the earth will move out of her place, In the wrath of the LORD of hosts And in the day of His fierce anger ..."

Isa24:23b "... the Lord Almighty will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem and before its elders, gloriously."

Isa26:20-21a "Go, my people, enter your rooms and shut the doors behind you; hide yourselves for a little while until his wrath has passed by. See, the LORD is coming out of his dwelling to punish the people of the earth for their sins."

Isa65:17-25 "... Never again will there be in it [the "New Jerusalem"] an infant who lives but a few days or an old man who does not live out his years;
[in all prophetic passages about the Kingdom to come, there is only one clear mention about his beneficiaries becoming immortal: Da12:2]"
Isa66:1-24

Jer10:10 "But the LORD is the true God; He is the living God and the everlasting King. At His wrath the earth will tremble, And the nations will not be able to endure His indignation."

Joel3:1-21 "... Then you will know that the Lord your God dwell in Zion, my holy hill. Jerusalem will be holy; never again will foreigners invade her"
Am9:11-15

Ob15-21 "... The day of the Lord is near for all nations ..."; "... and the kingdom will be the Lord's ..."

Mic4:1-8 "... The law will go out from Zion, the word of the Lord [God] from Jerusalem ..."; "... The Lord will rule over them [the Jewish exiles] in Mount Zion from that day and forever ..."
Mic7:7-17

Zep1:14-15 "The great day of the LORD is near; It is near and hastens quickly ... There the mighty men shall cry out. That day is a day of wrath, A day of trouble and distress, A day of devastation and desolation ..."

Zep3:14-15 "Sing, O daughter of Zion! Shout, O Israel! Be glad and rejoice with all your heart, O daughter of Jerusalem! The LORD has taken away your judgments, He has cast out your enemy. The King of Israel, the LORD, is in your midst; You shall see disaster no more."

Zec14:1-21 "... The Lord will be king over the whole earth ..."; "... Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord Almighty ..."

Next about OT bodily resurrection to come, at the Day:

Isa26:19 "But your dead will live; their bodies will rise. You who dwell in the dust, wake up and shout for joy. Your dew is like the dew of the morning; the earth will give birth to her dead."
Eze37:1-10 "... I [God] will attach tendons to you ["dry bones"] and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath into you, and you will come to life ..."
Job19:25-27 "... in the end, he [God] will stand upon the earth. And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God ..."
Da12:2a "Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life ..."
Da12:13 "As for you [Daniel], go your way till the end [of your life]. You will rest, and then at the end of the days you will rise to receive your allotted inheritance."

Best regards, Bernard

NOGO

I agree with Layman on this.

Paul believe in a bodily resurrection but not with flesh and blood.
Luke has Jesus resurrecting with his flesh and bones.

A bodily resurrection is essential for a Kingdom of God on Earth.

Paul, for example, has the dead in Jesus waiting till the end of the world before coming to life again. This is also reflected in GJohn and Daniel in the OT where the angels tells Daniel that he will die and waite for the end of the world to get his lot.

So the is no such thing as a soul which separates from the body and climbs into heaven. In the Gospels Jesus is seen rising in heaven with his body and Paul also has Jesus returning with a body since he talks about it as having a specific location in the clouds.

But why a kindom in earth?
One must understand that the concept of the end of the world and the earthly kingdom are related.

If the Kingdom of God was not on earth then there would be no need to bring on the end of the world before the Kingdom of God can begin. Life on earth can continue forever and the Kingdom of God would be in heaven. In such a scenario souls can go to heaven right after the death of the body.

But if the Kingdom of God is on earth then the world must end before it can start. As a consequence the dead must wait in their tomb until the end comes. Consider Paul's secret that the dead in Jesus will rise first and then they who are still alive will be changed.

I would say that the idea of the resurrection of the body is closely tied to the world view reflected in the NT. People believed that the earth was flat with a dome of heaven over it. God and his angels were above the dome. The stars were little light within the dome. The second epistle of Peter says that heaven (the dome) and earth are going to be destroyed and replaced by a new heaven and earth. The earth was to be destroyed because of the "ungodly men" and the new earth would be a place for "saved". But why was heaven to destroyed and replaced by a new heaven? It does not give a reason. At any rate a new earth was needed because the author sees no other place to put all those humans. Their world view being limited in space left them no choice. Only the elite would be in heaven with God.
They, therefore, believed that their world view would continue after Jesus' return but somwhat modified.

If Christians had a different world view where heaven had no limits and the earth was part of an infinite universe with many planet where humans can live, then the concept of the end of the world would never have created.

Another part of that world view is that there is no such thing as a soul and that the body is all we have. The body is all that can be redeemed. Death entered the world through Adam's sin and will leave the world with Jesus' return. If the sould is already immortal then there would have been no need for Jesus. Bodies die and souls go to heaven for judgement. The OT clearly supports the former. An immortal souls make the resurrection of the body unnecessary.

I see the greeat divide here.

The immortal soul going to heaven on one hand.
This view is incompatible with the end of the world,
the resurrection of the body and Jesus dying to save us from death.

On the other hand we have
The end of the world.
The resurrection of the body.
Jesus' saving our bodies from sure death.
No soul.