Steven Carr

Some evangelical scholars are edging towards Richard Carrier's 2 body mode of resurrection, where the corpse is replaced by a body of heavenly material.

See http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...n17195599/pg_1

The author, Peter Jones, remarks upon how very, very little notice is taken of the verse which says 'the last Adam became a life-giving spirit'

He writes 'The verse as a whole, however, does not figure with any importance in the recent theologies of Paul, and to my knowledge, only rarely is the verse as a whole given serious exegetical study.'

As conservative Christians are bound by dogma to ignore claims that Jesus became a spirit, it is hardly surprising that the verse is rarely studied seriously.

Of course, the author himself is bound by dogma to reject Paul's claim that Jesus became a spirit, so is forced to write things like 'If, says Paul, the physical resurrection did not happen in the way the original apostles say it did, then instead of being preachers of good news, they become "purveyors of lies"-ωενδομαρτυρες ... (1 Cor 15:15)101-really ..., as he will say elsewhere, "servants of Satan" (1 Cor 11:14-15).'

Paul does not say that.

And Peter Jones is forced by his beliefs to say that the Jesus-worshippers in Corinth were hardly Christians at all, because they were so dismissive of the idea that God would choose to raise a corpse from the dead.

Paul though praises these Jesus-worshippers in 1 Corinthians 1 as very praiseworthy Christians, called by God.

His only problem with them is their foolishness in not realising that they too will take the nature of the second Adam and become a life-giving spirit.

They thought that their resurrection would involve a raising of a corpse, if it were to happen at all, and so they denied a resurrection.

But they were wrong. Their resurrection would be just like the resurrection of Jesus.

Peter Jones has to argue that the Corinthians believed in a spiritual resurrection, which Paul never attacks in 1 Corinthians 15, claiming instead that the Corinthians did not believe in any after life, refusing to take part in the baptism for the dead.

But it is nice to see even conservative scholars edging towards Richard Carrier's thesis.

Malachi151

Its funny that people keep referring to the Gospels are "the original story". The Gospels were written well after the writings of Paul, and in reality are much more politicized, shaky, and manipulated. If I were a Christian I'd trust Paul more than the Gospel writers.

jakejonesiv

Hi Stephen,

That is an intruging argument. I think you are absolutely correct, Jesus was not beileved to be resurrected in a body of flesh (15:50); that would have precluded his entrance to heaven.

For the sake of argument, let's assume that Jesus had a physical body before being executed. In the resurrection, would Jesus' physical body change into the spiritual body, or would the physical body be left behind?

I am thinking now of the Jehovah's Witness doctrine where Jesus is raised as a spirit creature, and God hid his human body somewhere.

Steven, I have another related question. Do you think that the author of 1 Cor. 15:40-41 believed that the resurrected Jesus had a body made of sidereal material? In other words, is there any hint of astral immortality here?

Jake Jones IV

Gamera

In context, I fail to see the distinction you're making. Paul (and the NT) says repeatedly that persons have a body and a spirit. Paul's claim about Jesus (seems to me) is simply that Jesus' spirit, dwelling in us (as he claims) is life-giving. It doesn't follow that Jesus doesn't have a bodily existence too. Rather he states Jesus has a "spiritual body" whatever that is (presumably a transformed physical body)

1 Corinthians 15:44 - It is sown a physical body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual body.

1 Corinthians 15:45 - Thus it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

1 Corinthians 15:46 - But it is not the spiritual which is first but the physical, and then the spiritual.

Note also 1 Peter

1 Peter 1:11 - they inquired what person or time was indicated by the Spirit of Christ within them when predicting the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory.

Steven Carr

So Paul was trashing the Corinthians belief in a spiritual resurrection by pointing out to them that after his death, Jesus became a spirit , living in each of us?


And if Paul was saying Jesus was body and spirit before the resurrection, and body and spirit after the resurrection, why say that at the resurrection , Jesus became a spirit?

Where is the 'it' in the Greek? Paul deliberately avoids saying that that which is sown is the thing which is raised.



The typology clearly implies that we too will become life-giving spirits, just as we became living beings.

The author of the article made a good point when he said how neglected that verse was.

Paul clearly introduces a dichotomy between the two different things.


Clearly the author believed Jesus did not become a spirit after he died :-)

Steven Carr

Clearly, the Jesus-worshippers in Corinth felt that the body of Jesus had been left behind, as they worried about bodies.

I don't know what sidereal material is.

Paul writes 'The first mad is of dirt from the earth, the second man from heaven.'

Clearly this is about what substance a resurrected being is made from. Paul does not think earthly materials are used to create resurrected beings.

Gamera

I think you're confusing two concepts in Paul's writing. One the "spiritual body" presumably the "transformed body" whatever that is, and it remains mysterious. And the spirit itself.

Paul, and all the NT authors, assume we have a body and a spirit. The issue is simply will we have a transformed body in the future.

Nothing Paul says about Jesus's spirit contradicts Jesus having a transformed body, because Paul assumes Jesus has a spirit and a body.

Steven Carr

So presumably Jesus only got his spirit at the resurrection, because at the resurrection , 'the last Adam became a life-giving spirit'

The article is very interesting.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...n17195599/pg_1

I quote 'For him the biblical order is: first the physical, then the spiritual (1 Cor 15:46)'

Although, of course, the author backs away from the implications of his own argument, preferring to say that for Paul, the biblical order is , first the physical, then the spiritual, which is also physical.

Which , of course, contradicts his own reading of Paul.

The author makes Paul out to be some sort of Gnostic by saying that for Paul 'flesh' was short-hand term for 'sin'

Why , when Paul's world had allegedly been turned upside down by the news that flesh would be made pure, and when the author himself admits that Paul is not talking about sinful flesh when he contrasts the natural body of the created Adam with the spiritual body of a resurrected Christian, but about the non-sinful flesh of the created Adam?

I think that when Paul says 'flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God', he means any flesh. The fact that for Paul , flesh was a short hand term for sin means that for Paul, flesh is just not a material you will find in Heaven.