Do you believe in the Resurrection

GaoLu

Am curious who here believes in an actual physical resurrection of the body. If not what does the word mean to you?

[Deleted User]

1Co 15 has the following to say regarding the matter:

1Cor 15,37-38 (KJV)
37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other [grain]:
38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.

This rather clearly states that the resurrection is NOT "an actual physical resurrection of the body".
"Resurrection from the dead" applies to the dead believers of the OT and those in Christ who have died prior to the resurrection on the last day, they are freed from the realm of the dead (gr. hades) and receive a spiritual body and are living in that new spiritual body forever in the presence of God.
Those believers in Christ alive and after the coming of the Lord do not go to hades when they die, but are changed in that moment and receive their new spiritual body and are received up into the presence of God.

GaoLu

What do you think is a "spiritual body?"

[Deleted User]

@GaoLu said:
What do you think is a "spiritual body?"

I do not know what a spiritual body is. however, since the context makes a distinction between the physical and the spiritual, the corruptible and the incorruptible, earthly and heavenly, etc. I would think that it is not a physical, earthly body, but something that is fit for the spiritual realm or "heaven" where God dwells ... a physical body of "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God", a change to a spiritual body is necessary for a person to forever live in the heavenly presence of God

We may perhaps automatically connect the term "body" with "a physical body", and connect "spirit" with "something without any body" ... but those are only assumptions, not necessarily true facts.

Perhaps the expression "spiritual body" linguistically connects two terms ("spiritual" and "body") in such a way as to figuratively emphasize that the raised person is an "entity", a "person", even though the resurrected / changed person who is living in the presence of God in the spiritual realm.

GaoLu

Interesting and good thoughts. We shall one day find out.

Jan

The key to this passage is the word "natural" body (psychikos). It is easier to understand than its contrast "spiritual" body. Let's look at a word study.

The other passages in which this word occurs are 1 Cor 2:14, James 3:15 and Jude 19.

So we see that psychikos does not mean "physical" body at all, but the worldly, earthly, sinful body that is not spirit-filled.

So in contrast, the "spiritual" body is a heavenly, sinless and spirit-filled body. It does not say whether this body is physical or non-physical. We need to refer to other passages to determine that.

Or right back to 1 Corinthians 15, which is clear that Christ's resurrection is the "prototype" of the resurrection of the dead. So if Christ was raised bodily, we will be raised bodily. If Christ was raised spiritually, we will be raised spiritually.

Now for the facts:

• The grave was empty.
• Thomas put his hands in Jesus' side and touched his wounds.
• The risen Lord ate some fish with the disciples.
• And finally, at one of the first appearances, the disciples were scared because they thought they saw a ghost (spirit). Jesus made it very clear that he was not a ghost. Luke 24:36-38.

Taken all evidence into account, I have to reject the theory that the resurrection of the dead will be spiritual.

GaoLu

What happened at the empty tomb, to Thomas, to the fish-eating disciples, etc. seems to be told to be real and physical.

I agree that the resurrection of the dead is not spiritual. That statement sort of seems to say two things.

1. The "spiritual" something does not die and is not resurrected.
2. Some sort of physical body is.

Can we say that?

Dave_L

I believe death is a blessing for the Christian. Because we leave all of our flesh and the sinful thoughts and imaginations it produces in the ground. And the resurrection on the last day places us into the New Heavens and Earth in bodies like unto Christ's, without sin.

[Deleted User]

@Jan said:
The key to this passage is the word "natural" body (psychikos). It is easier to understand than its contrast "spiritual" body.
The other passages in which this word occurs are 1 Cor 2:14, James 3:15 and Jude 19.

So we see that psychikos does not mean "physical" body at all, but the worldly, earthly, sinful body that is not spirit-filled.

Careful, careful ... here's a definition for the word "psychikos" from Newman, B. M., Jr. (1993). A Concise Greek-English dictionary of the New Testament. (p. 201).:
ψυχικός , ή, όν unspiritual, not possessing the Spirit of God; non-spiritual, physical, material

Instead of coming up with a theological idea for the meaning of the word "psychikos" in connection with "body", I would recommend to more carefully observe the words and their meaning. Even just from the above mentioned NT dictionary, it becomes clear that the word "psychikos" does have a connotation in meaning to "physical, material", contrary to the theological idea mentioned above.
When looking at your idea of "but the worldly, earthly, sinful body", it also should be obvious that that body to which you make reference is a physicalm a material body.

So in contrast, the "spiritual" body is a heavenly, sinless and spirit-filled body. It does not say whether this body is physical or non-physical. We need to refer to other passages to determine that.

"Heavenly" and/or "spiritual" by definition already indicate "non-physical", "non-material" which is exactly the contrast between the "spiritual" and the "natural" body spoken of in 1Co 15:44.

Or right back to 1 Corinthians 15, which is clear that Christ's resurrection is the "prototype" of the resurrection of the dead.

Christ's resurrection is emphasized as having been the first in the order of resurrections from the dead to eternal life.

So if Christ was raised bodily, we will be raised bodily. If Christ was raised spiritually, we will be raised spiritually.

Careful again ... 1Co 15 is not speaking about being resurrected "bodily", nor about being resurrected "spiritually". The resurrection is stated as involving a change from the body people have during their life on earth prior to their death to a new BODY, which is said to be a "spiritual body". There is even mention that a body of "flesh and blood" would not be fit to inherit the kingdom of God, not be fit for life in the spiritual realm (heaven) in the presence of God.

Now for the facts:

• The grave was empty.
• Thomas put his hands in Jesus' side and touched his wounds.
• The risen Lord ate some fish with the disciples.

Did Jesus permanently have a visible, physical, material body after his resurrection from the dead? What about during the by far majority of the time during the 40 days when he did not appear in his previous earthly body (cp. it had the wounds !!! )? In other words, was that body in which he appeared to his disciples after the resurrection actually that "resurrection spiritual body" (cp 1Co 15) or was his actual "resurrection spiritual body" an invisible, non-material, non-physical body (cp. the truth that he appeared in closed room, suddenly on a road, etc.) ?

Christ's resurrection was not only the first, but it was also special (unlike anyone else's resurrection) in that he was raised very shortly after his burial before his body could see corruption (cp the prophecy by David about this point), and it would seem that this was necessary in order for his resurrection from the dead to have been witnessed and confirmed "... by many convincing proofs, appearing to them over a period of forty days and speaking of the things concerning the kingdom of God." (NASB95) His appearances in his previous body were necessary as a "convincing proof" only in Jesus' case.

Others' dead bodies have seen corruption, and there is no need for any further convincing proof, because Christ's resurrection is THE proof. Upon the resurrection from the dead, believers are changed and receive a spiritual (non-visible to the natural eye, non-physical, non-material) body fit for eternal life in the presence of God in the spiritual realm.

• And finally, at one of the first appearances, the disciples were scared because they thought they saw a ghost (spirit). Jesus made it very clear that he was not a ghost. Luke 24:36-38.

Indeed, the resurrected Jesus appeared in his previous body, so his disciples were able to identify him with absolute certainty as the resurrected Jesus (cp the need for a convincing proof!) ... it was not a "ghost Jesus" that appeared, it was that resurrected human being Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah of God, with whom they had been and whom they knew and who had been murdered and buried.

Taken all evidence into account, I have to reject the theory that the resurrection of the dead will be spiritual.

The resurrection is not about being "spiritual" or "natural/physical/material" ... in the resurrection the person receives a totally new spiritual body (in contrast to the material physical body of flesh the person had before) ... cp. 1Co 15:44.

GaoLu

@Wolfgang
The resurrection is not about being "spiritual" or "natural/physical/material" ... in the resurrection the person receives a totally new spiritual body (in contrast to the material physical body of flesh the person had before) ... cp. 1Co 15:44.

Do I understand correctly that you are saying that...

1. Jesus was uniquely resurrected in his old body of flesh for a single specific purpose--to be recognized by those who knew him?
2. There will be no other physical bodies resurrected? Only spirits?
3. Maybe what I am really asking is, more precisely, what do you think this "spiritual body" is?

I may not have understood all you wrote above, although you did a good job. If I understood and didn't go off plumb from your intentions, I would have some remaining questions:

1. What about those who rose from their graves at Jesus death?
2. What about Moses and Elijah at the transfiguration?
3. What about the rich man and Lazarus?
4. What happens to our spirit/soul/being/essence while we await resurrection? What exactly gets resurrected? Body? Spirit? Super-body?
5. If a spirit only gets resurrected, was that spirit dead before it got resurrected? Sleeping?

Which of the below seems most likely--the thing that exists after "resurrection":
1. We may have "super-bodies" that look and feel and sound real, that can eat and drink, but that can also evaporate through walls and ascend up into the ether (Like Jesus seemed to do).
2. We have plain old-fashioned, but new physical bodies--albeit ones that don't catch diseases or age-out.
3. We are ethereal spirits.
4. Something else--presumably we all agree that the "spiritual body" has a spirit--but does it have a real body?

Note: Speculating is interesting, but my point of view is that we just don't/can't fully know some of these things, but soon will.

reformed

@GaoLu said:
Am curious who here believes in an actual physical resurrection of the body. If not what does the word mean to you?

Yes, just like Christ. It's not rocket science.

[Deleted User]

@GaoLu said:

@Wolfgang
The resurrection is not about being "spiritual" or "natural/physical/material" ... in the resurrection the person receives a totally new spiritual body (in contrast to the material physical body of flesh the person had before) ... cp. 1Co 15:44.

Do I understand correctly that you are saying that...

1. Jesus was uniquely resurrected in his old body of flesh for a single specific purpose--to be recognized by those who knew him?

Jesus was not resurrected in hiy old body of flesh. Cp 1Co 15 where it is clearly stated that the body sown in the ground is not that body which then grows,etc.
Jesus was resurrected with an invisible, non-material, non-physical. glorified spiritual body ... he appeared to his disciples in his former physical body during 40 days in order that there was convincing proof for his identity that it was indeed him who had been resurrected from the dead.
In this regard, the resurrection of Jesus and his appearances in his previous body was a unique situation, not necessary for anyone else.

2. There will be no other physical bodies resurrected? Only spirits?

The resurrection is not about former bodies or spirits being resurrected, it is about the person being resurrected and receiving a new spiritual body.

3. Maybe what I am really asking is, more precisely, what do you think this "spiritual body" is?

I do think the "spiritual body" is a "body" that is normally not visible to the eye, it is not physical, not material, not a body of flesh, as such would not be fit for living in the presence of God in the spiritual realm.

I may not have understood all you wrote above, although you did a good job. If I understood and didn't go off plumb from your intentions, I would have some remaining questions:
1. What about those who rose from their graves at Jesus death?

The reading in Mt 27:52 including the mention of people being resurrected from the graves at Jesus' death is rather dubious ... if there were indeed people resurrected from the dead to eternal life at Jesus' death, then Jesus would not be the first to be resurrected from the dead to eternal life ... thereby contradicting what 1Co 15 teaches.
If there were indeed people raised from the dead at the time of Jesus' death, it would have been raisings like that of Lazarus, or the son of the widow, etc who were not resurrected to eternal life but revived in their bodies of flesh and blood and they would have died again later on.

2. What about Moses and Elijah at the transfiguration?

Jesus himself mentions that this was a revelatory VISION which he and those three apostles saw (cp. Mt 17:9 ... "tell THE VISION to no man")

3. What about the rich man and Lazarus?

In the context of Lk 16, this is a parable, not a report of a real situation ... in order to refute the Jewish apostate leadership.

4. What happens to our spirit/soul/being/essence while we await resurrection? What exactly gets resurrected? Body? Spirit? Super-body?

Prior to the resurrection, the PERSON goes to hades, the realm of the dead, with his last breath, his breath-soul life has come to its end. The Body corrupts in the grave and becomes "dust". With the resurrection from the dead, a change happens in that the dead person is resurrected and given a new "spiritual body" ...

5. If a spirit only gets resurrected, was that spirit dead before it got resurrected? Sleeping?

It is NOT the spirit nor the body that gets resurrected ... the PERSON is resurrected. The former body of the person becomes dust, corrupts, etc. The breath comes to its end with the last breath and with it soul life is gone. The gift God gives to believers as a token of new life "returns" to God.
Cp 1Co 15 and the simple illustration that is given there about the how of the resurrection ... nothing of the old grain that is placed in the ground is part of the new plant that arises from it.

Which of the below seems most likely--the thing that exists after "resurrection":
1. We may have "super-bodies" that look and feel and sound real, that can eat and drink, but that can also evaporate through walls and ascend up into the ether (Like Jesus seemed to do).

See above ... the spiritual body with which we live eternally in the presence of God need no eating or drinking in a literal sense, nor will we need to "appear" in a visible physical body to anyone on earth in order to convince or prove our resurrection to anyone.

2. We have plain old-fashioned, but new physical bodies--albeit ones that don't catch diseases or age-out.

See above ... I would consider such ideas "earthly thinking" rather than having "set your thoughts on things above".

3. We are ethereal spirits.

We are not spirits or ghosts ... but resurrected persons with spiritual bodies.

4. Something else--presumably we all agree that the "spiritual body" has a spirit--but does it have a real body?

The expression "spiritual body" may well be a figure of speech by which the word "body" emphasizes that the resurrected person indeed will again be a person, an identity, etc ... even though it is not in a literal sense a physical, material body. In other words, emphasis is put by this expression that the person in his/her identity is living eternally in the presence of God.

Note: Speculating is interesting, but my point of view is that we just don't/can't fully know some of these things, but soon will.

I am trying to not speculate but rather to adhere to what is stated and recognize what is clearly indicated and is in harmony with other scripture passages dealing with the same subject matter

[Deleted User]

@reformed said:

@GaoLu said:
Am curious who here believes in an actual physical resurrection of the body. If not what does the word mean to you?

Yes, just like Christ. It's not rocket science.

Indeed ... the problem is that many seem to not adhere to what is said about the resurrection from the dead and how it happens (cp 1Co 15).

Instead, they make a grave mistake and they do not recognize the details involved only in events with hm during 40 days between his resurrection from the dead and his ascension into heaven (the presence of God) in order to provide convincing proof that he indeed had been resurrected from the dead. They then falsely make those things the norm for all others ...

GaoLu

@Wolfgang
Thanks. You offered a clear explanation.

One more part of your thoughts remains vague..which I don’t think you have yet addressed.

What is a “person” apart from body or spirit?
In your view, Is there no “spirit” in the afterlife? Only existence or identity?
How can we have a “spiritual body” without either spirit or body? Unless the term is purely symbolic.

[Deleted User]

@GaoLu said:
What is a “person” apart from body or spirit?

A little difficult to explain ... I would say that the body by itself is not the person, mind/spirit by itself is not the person, etc ....

In your view, Is there no “spirit” in the afterlife? Only existence or identity?

What do you mean with "spirit"? 1Co 15 speaks of the resurrected person having a spiritual body, eternal life in the spiritual realm obviously involves "spirit".
I think that a resurrected person would be an alive person ... similar to what an alive person in this life is. However, the resurrected person does not have a mortal corruptible flesh and blood body but a immortal incorruptible spiritual body.

How can we have a “spiritual body” without either spirit or body?

The term is rather real ... it is a spiritual body ... not a fleshly body but a spiritual body.

Unless the term is purely symbolic.

As such, this "body" in a literal sense is invisible, non-physical, etc. and not literally "a body" as we speak of and understand in a literal sense (that would be a physical, visible, with solid form, etc) ... and "body" in combination with "spiritual" would involve a figure of speech for emphasis.

Jan

@Wolfgang said:
The term is rather real ... it is a spiritual body ... not a fleshly body but a spiritual body.

What's the difference between a spirit and a spiritual body then?

It wouldn't make sense if the meaning of "spiritual body" would be "spirit without body".

5393 σῶμα (sōma), ατος (atos), τό (to): n.neu.; ≡ Str 4983; TDNT 7.1024—1. LN 8.1 body, of animal, human, even plant, that which is mere material (Lk 17:37; 1Co 12:12; 15:37);

Swanson, J. (1997). Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament) (electronic ed.). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

[Deleted User]

@Jan said:

@Wolfgang said:
The term is rather real ... it is a spiritual body ... not a fleshly body but a spiritual body.

What's the difference between a spirit and a spiritual body then?

I would say that what one understands with the word "spirit" ... believers are given holy "spirit" as a GIFT, "spirit" in this context is power [gr. dunamis], and as such "spirit" does not have a "spiritual body" (in other words, it is not "a spirit person", such as angelic beings are. An angelic being is a "spirit" with "a [spiritual] body".

It wouldn't make sense if the meaning of "spiritual body" would be "spirit without body".

See above ... there are uses of the word "spirit" which have nothing to do with "a spirit being" such as "spirit angelic beings", etc ...

5393 σῶμα (sōma), ατος (atos), τό (to): n.neu.; ≡ Str 4983; TDNT 7.1024—1. LN 8.1 body, of animal, human, even plant, that which is mere material (Lk 17:37; 1Co 12:12; 15:37);
Swanson, J. (1997). Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament) (electronic ed.). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

Yes, this is the definition as applied to physical or material bodies such as body of animal, human, plant etc.

Now, please note, there are other uses of the word "body" in different contexts where the word "body" does not have its literal meaning as given above, but as it is used as part of a figure of speech to indicate and emphasize an "entity" with certain characteristics of "body" .... cp. the use of "body" as a references to a number or group of people as in the case of the assembly of believers being referred to as "body of Christ".

Similarly with angelic beings ... yes, they are called "spirits", and it is the truth that they have a "spiritual body" which makes them "spirit persons", "spirit individuals", "spirit beings".

[Deleted User]

Anyone have further insights?

C Mc

Time has passed, knowledge has increased, and nonbiblical teachings have been exposed. Believe it or not, today, we still have promoters of Origen's view of the resurrection. His view is identical to Plato's idea of the ―immortality of the soul and who did not believe in a physical resurrection (See Segal below).

Origen:

• The Alexandrian church father Origen (ca. A.D. 185-ca. 254), an accomplished practitioner and defender of the allegorical method of interpretation.
• He was philosopher-theologian of Alexandria. He believed that only those with higher rational powers could understand obscure passages in scripture.
• A student of Clement of Alexandria.
• Origen considered Clement‘s allegorical interpretation of the Scriptures to be the correct way to interpret the Scriptures (see Rudolph below)
• Origen, as his Master Clemens, had done before, used the method known as allegorization when it came to interpreting the Scriptures.

At different times, Origen was condemned as a heretic:

• Origen read into the OT unwarranted and fanciful allegorical interpretations.
• He views the Scriptures as texts imbued with a mystical meaning, a spiritual sense, that is deeper than the words themselves or their literal, historical aspect.

This allegorical interpretation is, for Origen, a Christian exercise, for only when led by the Spirit of God, given in Christ, is one enabled to see this meaning with new, spiritual vision.
One aim of allegorists was to establish Judaism as an intellectually respectable faith in a sophisticated pagan background.

• Thus they would interpret anthropomorphic biblical references allegorically. Philo, Origen, Augustine, and Jerome freely indulged in the allegorical interpretation of Scripture, whereas Luther, Melanchthon, and Calvin maintained that this method was too subjective.
• Origen was the father of spiritualistic exposition of Scripture, and by this, and also by teaching the Platonic philosophy to his many followers, he did incalculable injury to the church.

Let's stay in the Bible. Keep studying... CM

SOURCES:

• -- Segal, Alan. 2004. Life After Death: A History of the Afterlife in Western Religion. New York: Doubleday Press., pg 574.
• -- Origen - CJohn Commentary on John. 10.26, ANF IX, 406.
• -- Rudolph, K. 1987. Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism. San Fransisco: Harper and Row Publishers. pg 17
• -- David S. Dockery, Biblical Interpretation Then and Now: Contemporary Hermeneutics in the Light of the Early Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1992), 159.

GaoLu

@Wolfgang said:
Anyone have further insights?

Just thinking about the term "spiritual body." Consider this:

We speak of a "gasoline engine." We do not think the engine is made of gasoline. The engine is powered by gasoline. Likewise, we have a very real physical body that is "spirit-powered." That, I suggest, is the meaning of "spiritual body."

[Deleted User]

@C_M_ said:
Time has passed, knowledge has increased, and nonbiblical teachings have been exposed. Believe it or not, today, we still have promoters of Origen's view of the resurrection. His view is identical to Plato's idea of the ―immortality of the soul and who did not believe in a physical resurrection (See Segal below).

Is "believing in the immortality of the soul" equal to "not believing in a physical resurrection"?

[Deleted User]

@GaoLu said:
We speak of a "gasoline engine." We do not think the engine is made of gasoline. The engine is powered by gasoline. Likewise, we have a very real physical body that is "spirit-powered." That, I suggest, is the meaning of "spiritual body."

Does the passage in 1Co 15 speak about a "physical body powered by spirit" or does it mention a "spiritual body"?
If physical body, of what physical matter would that body consist and what kind of physical body would it be (somehow related to the person's physical body while they lived their natural life on earth?

GaoLu

@Wolfgang said:

@GaoLu said:
We speak of a "gasoline engine." We do not think the engine is made of gasoline. The engine is powered by gasoline. Likewise, we have a very real physical body that is "spirit-powered." That, I suggest, is the meaning of "spiritual body."

Does the passage in 1Co 15 speak about a "physical body powered by spirit" or does it mention a "spiritual body"?

If physical body, of what physical matter would that body consist and what kind of physical body would it be (somehow related to the person's physical body while they lived their natural life on earth?

The Bible doesn't say exactly what kind of body it will be, but it will be one adapted to its environment, some new, fresh work of God. It will be an actual body, apparently related to our present physical body.

The original language is pretty simple. No surprises here.

natural body ψυχικόν σῶμα -a natural (human natured) body
spiritual body πνευματικόν σῶμα - a spiritual body

σῶμα/Soma means a material/physical composition and is the noun here.
πνευματικός / pneumatikos means spiritual and is the descriptive adjective.

The adjective describes the noun, not the other way around. Thus we clearly have a very real composite, physical body (noun) of some kind and it has a spiritual (describing adjective) nature which is in some ways different than our present body, which is somehow not entirely fit for the environment of heaven. To say "the body is a spirit" would be a direct, fundamental (more than an oxymoron) contradiction and is not the meaning or usage of the Greek.

Clues about it might come from what we know of Jesus resurrected body. Maybe from Adam and Eve? Some things we know are that it will not decay, die or get disease. It will be healed of all such things.

If Jesus' resurrected body is a clue, then some things will be different. Some of Jesus disciples did not recognize Him right away. Yet they did eventually. None of this is especially dramatized by the Gospel writers. People could see him (hands, feet, scars and all), apparently touch him, and He he had a body that could eat food. He could hear, speak, and see.

"Raised in Glory" - what does that mean? some kind of brightness or beauty?

"Raised in power" - what does that mean? I can't wait to found out, but our bodies must have some sort of energy of faculties greater than now.

Adam was given a body designed for the earth-environment. Whatever our new body will be, it will apparently have capabilities for a broader environment and be imperishable. I like to think it will capable of far more than anyone ever dreamed up for a super-hero!

Our future soma pneumatikon will somehow be a continuation of our present body, but will not inherit any corruption. Somehow it will be glorified and must somehow express glory. Mt 13:43 makes it sound like we (our righteousness) might actually shine, brightly, like the sun. Cool!

In the end, we don't really know much about the meaning of "spiritual body," but thinking about it is interesting enough.

[Deleted User]

@GaoLu said:

@Wolfgang said:
If physical body, of what physical matter would that body consist and what kind of physical body would it be (somehow related to the person's physical body while they lived their natural life on earth?

The Bible doesn't say exactly what kind of body it will be, but it will be one adapted to its environment, some new, fresh work of God.

Since the kingdom of God is spiritual (cp. Jesus' words "not of this world") and the equivalent term "heaven" describes the spiritual realm (the realm where God dwells), I would think that this body will be adapted to "the spiritual environment".

It will be an actual body, apparently related to our present physical body.

Seems more like this is an assumption which is based on an idea of earthly realm, since there is nothing physical in the spiritual realm?

The original language is pretty simple. No surprises here.

natural body ψυχικόν σῶμα -a natural (human natured) body
spiritual body πνευματικόν σῶμα - a spiritual body

σῶμα/Soma means a material/physical composition and is the noun here.
πνευματικός / pneumatikos means spiritual and is the descriptive adjective.

The adjective describes the noun, not the other way around.

Indeed ... the adjective describes further and specifies the meaning of the noun.

Thus we clearly have a very real composite, physical body (noun) of some kind and it has a spiritual (describing adjective) nature which is in some ways different than our present body, which is somehow not entirely fit for the environment of heaven. To say "the body is a spirit" would be a direct, fundamental (more than an oxymoron) contradiction and is not the meaning or usage of the Greek.

When I state that someone sounds like "a broken record" ... do we have a real physical broken record in view? Just because "body" in its basic normal meaning refers in most contexts to a "composite, physical body", the use of the adjective "spiritual" defines the noun in this context as obviously not having that literal normal meaning. The adjective "spiritual" is plainly and clearly in contrast to "physical, material" ... therefore, the expression cannot be talking about a physical body with some sort of spiritual aspect to it. Nothing physical, even only partly physical, would be fit for the spiritual environment of heaven.

Clues about it might come from what we know of Jesus resurrected body. Maybe from Adam and Eve? Some things we know are that it will not decay, die or get disease. It will be healed of all such things.

Hmn ... you think the spiritual body will be healed of disease, etc?

If Jesus' resurrected body is a clue, then some things will be different. Some of Jesus disciples did not recognize Him right away. Yet they did eventually. None of this is especially dramatized by the Gospel writers. People could see him (hands, feet, scars and all), apparently touch him, and He he had a body that could eat food. He could hear, speak, and see.

I would refer to my earlier post in which I wrote in more detail concerning the special case of Jesus and him appearing in his body for the purpose of others being able to identify him as indeed being the one who had been resurrected from the dead. Also note, these appearances only happened during the 40 day period between resurrection and ascension ... a period of time during which the resurrected Jesus was NOT walking around in a physical body.

"Raised in Glory" - what does that mean? some kind of brightness or beauty?
"Raised in power" - what does that mean? I can't wait to found out, but our bodies must have some sort of energy of faculties greater than now.

Since Jesus himself in a discussion about the resurrection with some of the Jewish leadership mentioned "like as the angels", I would think that these terms are indicators of glory and power available to beings in the spiritual realm.

Adam was given a body designed for the earth-environment. Whatever our new body will be, it will apparently have capabilities for a broader environment and be imperishable. I like to think it will capable of far more than anyone ever dreamed up for a super-hero!

See above ... I think so as well.

Our future soma pneumatikon will somehow be a continuation of our present body, but will not inherit any corruption.

I do not necessarily see any "continuation of our present body" ... if people try and go by the records about Jesus and the body in which he appeared at a few times after his resurrection, they usually have a contradiction they do not even recognize .... saying that this new body is all perfect, healed, etc and yet the resurrected Jesus would have had the same wounds as he had in the moments just prior to his death ... what kind of resurrected body will those believers have who were beheaded as martyrs? one without a head?

In the end, we don't really know much about the meaning of "spiritual body," but thinking about it is interesting enough.

Indeed ....

C Mc

Keep the main focus: There is a bodily resurrection. The Spirit instills in the believer faith and hope in Christ:

1. "May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit you may abound in hope" (Rom 15:13; cf. Gal 3:14; 5:5).
2. The new life of the Spirit is manifested especially in the spirit of brotherly love that flows from Christ into the life of the believer. "God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us" (Rom 5:5; cf. 15:30; Col 1:8; 2 Cor 6:6).
3. The Spirit imparts strength to suffer for Christ's sake. "If you are reproached for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the spirit of glory and of God rests upon you" (1 Pet 4:14).
4. Finally, the Spirit is the miraculous life-giving force of the third Person of the Godhead which will bring about the resurrection of the body. "If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies through the Spirit which dwells in you" (Rom 8:11; cf. 1 Cor 6:14; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 6:8). As the Spirit was at work in the first creation (Gen 2:7), so He will be at work in the final resurrection.

The Bible nowhere said the resurrected body will be reattached to a disembodied soul. On the other hand, the Bible teaches that this earthly body will be raised into a "spiritual-pneumatikos body" (1 Cor 15:44), that is, a person wholly dominated by the life-force of the divine spirit.

The "spirit of antichrist" has been manifested in different ways:

1. In the rationalistic, progressive movements in the reality of the incarnation.
2. Also, it can be seen in other basic historical Christian beliefs:
   • The infallible authority of the Bible
   • A fiat creation
   • The atonement and resurrection of Christ
   • The occurrence of miracles
   • The Second Advent
   • Original sin, etc.

These and other cardinal Biblical beliefs have been "demythologized" by European and American liberal theologians, in order to reconcile them with a humanistic view of history which excludes supernatural, miraculous activity.

Denial of Christ's Resurrection:

1. Rudolf Bultmann, for example, excludes the credibility of the accounts of Christ's resurrection because, as he plainly states, "a historical fact which involves a resurrection from the dead is utterly inconceivable."
2. Harvard theologian Gordon D. Kaufman explains the belief of the earliest Christians in the bodily resurrection of Christ as caused by hallucinatory visions of the risen Christ. Like other liberal theologians, he sees the meaning of the resurrection not in the fate of Jesus' body but in the ongoing divine activity on behalf of believers.

This subtle attempt to divorce faith from its historical foundation empties faith in the basis of its assurance. As Paul put it:

• "If Christ has not been raised . . . your faith is in vain" (1 Cor 15:14).

To dematerialize the belief in the bodily resurrection of Christ, reducing it to a symbol of divine activity, means to rob believers of a concrete assurance of their final resurrection and of the renewal of creation (1 Cor 15:12-24).

John 5:28, 29, the writer mentions a resurrection for life and a resurrection for condemnation, and Revelation 20:4-6. Most biblical exegetes agree that Revelation 20 teaches two literal resurrections of the dead, separated by one thousand years. Inasmuch as only the "blessed and holy" come up in the first resurrection, a prior judgment must have taken place to determine who will take part in the first resurrection.

The Lutheran theologian Joseph A. Seiss recognized this and wrote,

• "The resurrection, and the changes which pass in the twinkling of an eye upon the living, are themselves the fruits and embodiments of antecedent judgment. They are the consequences of adjudications then already made. Strictly speaking, men are neither raised nor translated, in order to come to judgment. Resurrections and translations are products of judgment previously passed upon the dead as dead, and upon the quick as quick. The dead in Christ shall rise first, because they are already adjudged to be in Christ, and the living saints are caught up together with them to the clouds, because they are already adjudged to be saints, and worthy to attain that world".

Now, there is no question that there will be a resurrection, as in the case of Jairus’ daughter, Lazarus, and several others, besides Christ Himself. Some will resurrect “to everlasting life” and some “to shame and everlasting contempt” (Dan 12:2; cf. John 5:28, 29). And the resurrection to everlasting life will be possible precisely because of the resurrection of Christ (1 Cor 15:17,18; 1 Thess 4:14). This is also how the expression “the firstborn from the dead” (Col 1:18; Rev 1:5) or “the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1 Cor 15:20; cf. vs. 23) has traditionally been understood.

To use a classical statement, “the resurrection of Christ is a pledge and proof of the resurrection of His people.” So the biblical teaching is that, though death means complete termination or annihilation, it is not final or definitive, except for what the Bible calls “the second death,” which refers to the final extermination of the wicked (Rev. 20:11–15; 21:8). For believers, death does not have the last word (1 Cor 15:26, 54, 55; cf. Rev 2:11; 20:4, 6).

All aspects of the present life reach their end at death. The memory of the personality and character of the deceased is preserved by God. Sometimes not even the bones are extant. Yet, they will live again (John 5:25, 28; 11:25; Rev 20:6). So in order to be resurrected there has to be a new creation, this time not from dust, but from heaven (cf. 1 Cor 15:47–50).

Daniel 12:2- 3 alludes to earlier passages in the Old Testament (such as Isa 26:19;37 53:10-12; 65:20-22; and 66:24), putting an inner-biblical, bodily resurrection. The clearest expression of bodily resurrection in the Old Testament can be found in Isaiah 26:19. Greenberg notes that while Daniel 12 could be read as a very limited resurrection, Isaiah 26 is clearly in the context of world judgment.

He makes clear that Resurrection is the belief that the present state of those who have died will be replaced by a future state in which they are alive bodily once more. It's not a general term for life after death in all its forms (Resurrection, reincarnation, the immortality of the soul, etc.). “Ultimately the dead will be revived in their bodies and live again on earth.” This, I concur. CM

SOURCES:

-- J. A Seiss, The Apocalypse (reprint, Grand Rapids, Mich.. Zondervan, 1973), 136
-- Gordon D. Kaufman, God-Mystery-Diversity: Christian Theology in a Pluralistic World (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 94.
-- Bruce Reichenbach, Is Man the Phoenix? A Study of Immortality (Grand Rapids, MI: Christian University Press, 1978), 185.
-- James D. G. Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 97, 98.
-- Leon Morris, The Cross in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 258 n. 134.
--- Alan F. Segal, “Resurrection, Early Jewish,” in The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, edited by Katherine Doob Sakenfeld, volume 4 (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2006), 4:770.
-- Moshe Greenberg, “Resurrection in the Bible,” in Encyclopedia Judaica, edited by Fred Skolnik and Michael Berenbaum, volume 17 (Detroit: Thomson- Gale, 2007), 17:241.
--Philip Schmitz, “ The Grammar of Resurrection in Isaiah 26:19a-c,” Journal of Biblical Literature 122/1 (2003): 145-149

[Deleted User]

@C_M_ said:

Keep the main focus: There is a bodily resurrection.

yes ... just not with a physical body but rather a spiritual body (cp. 1Co 15)

The Bible nowhere said the resurrected body will be reattached to a disembodied soul.

the Bible nowhere says that the earthly body will be resurrected in the first place

On the other hand, the Bible teaches that this earthly body will be raised into a "spiritual-pneumatikos body" (1 Cor 15:44), that is, a person wholly dominated by the life-force of the divine spirit.

1Co 15:44 does not say anything about spirit dominating a physical body, does it? This is pure fantasy of those who mistakenly think that the earthly physical body will be resurrected in some "perfected" shape.
1Co 15 contrasts the earthly natural body with the heavenly spiritual body.

This subtle attempt to divorce faith from its historical foundation empties faith in the basis of its assurance. As Paul put it:

• "If Christ has not been raised . . . your faith is in vain" (1 Cor 15:14).

We have a different matter here, as I do not think that anyone here questions that Christ was resurrected from the dead. The matter in question here is about with what body was he raised ... another physical body or a spiritual body? A physical body consists of some visible and usually solid material, but the records about the post-resurrection appearances of Christ make it clear that Jesus did not have a visible, solid body ... but rather a normally invisible body (otherwise the texts would not speak about him "appearing" to his disciples only at various times.

To dematerialize the belief in the bodily resurrection of Christ, reducing it to a symbol of divine activity, means to rob believers of a concrete assurance of their final resurrection and of the renewal of creation (1 Cor 15:12-24).

??? I am not robbed of any concrete assurance of living in the presence of God in the spiritual realm having been clothed with a spiritual body ... where is the problem? Is the problem in earthly minded imagination rather than heavenly minded faith in what Scripture plainly says with the expression "spiritual body"?

John 5:28, 29, the writer mentions a resurrection for life and a resurrection for condemnation, and Revelation 20:4-6. Most biblical exegetes agree that Revelation 20 teaches two literal resurrections of the dead, separated by one thousand years. Inasmuch as only the "blessed and holy" come up in the first resurrection, a prior judgment must have taken place to determine who will take part in the first resurrection.

It really doesn't matter what people teach and think ... IF you carefully consider the words of Jesus in Joh 5 concerning the resurrection, you will notice that he is NOT speaking about 2 different separate "resurrection events", but - in harmony with Dan 12 - about THE resurrection on the last day, which for believers will be a resurrection to life, for the rest a resurrection to condemnation.

Now, there is no question that there will be a resurrection, as in the case of Jairus’ daughter, Lazarus, and several others, besides Christ Himself.

Careful, careful .... Jairus' daughter, Lazarus and others were NOT resurrected from the dead to life eternal but were rather brought back to this earthly life and later on would have died again. Jesus was resurrected from the dead to life eternal ... a total different matter altogether

He makes clear that Resurrection is the belief that the present state of those who have died will be replaced by a future state in which they are alive bodily once more.

Indeed ... alive with a spiritual body, fit for living in the spirit realm in the presence of God. No physical material body is fit for such.

“Ultimately the dead will be revived in their bodies and live again on earth.” This, I concur.

According to 1Co 15, people are not "revived in their bodies", just as a corn that is planted in the earth is NOT revived in its body ....a totally new body altogether rises (and does not even look like the seed that was planted.

In addition, there is no statement in Scripture which speaks of "live again on earth" ...

C Mc

Wolfgang,
See above C_M_ Posts: 1,765 September 20, is this what you are promoting? If not, how is this different from what you are currently saying?

God can create and re-create with or without material substances ("ex-nihilo"). There are two major acts that cannot be imitated by the other gods:

• The act of creation ex-nihilo
• The act of deliverance (Resurrection from sin/decay). Yahweh is the creator of the heavens and the earth (Ps 33:6).

He's not limited like "Baal" whose "powers of the manipulation of what already existed. With Yahweh, all forces are subject to Him for He set them in motion. He created without the aid of primordial forces.

Benjamin Warfield once put it, “You cannot ‘originate’ by ‘modifying;’ you cannot ‘modify’ by ‘originating.’” Therefore, whatever comes by “evolution” cannot arise from “creation,” and whatever is “created” is ultimately not “evolved.” He further stated, “evolution can never, under any circumstances, the issue in a product which is specifically new: ‘modification’ is the utmost that it can achieve, – ‘origination’ is beyond its tether” (see Moore). This dictum is particularly true as it applies to the origin of life on our planet (see Ryrie).

I accept the Scriptural proclamation that it is “by faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible” (Heb 11:3). So it was with creation, so it is with the resurrection. God spoke some things into existence and yet He used the dust of the earth to form man. As for Eve, God used a rib from man and dust of the earth for the woman.

I like the way Systematic theologian Carl Kuhn described the Christian affirmation of Creation:

• "The basic elements of the Christian teaching concerning creation are the following: that the universe has its beginning and end in God’s spontaneous will; that the universe is in no sense independent ofHim, but that its maintenance represents a continuing exertion of His creative power and ability; and that God made the universe not out of some type of pre-existent “stuff’ but out of nothing. This assumes that prior to the "moment" of creation, God existed in self-sufficient and majestic aloneness... This projection represents an absolute origination, that is, it implies a beginning and bringing out of nothing (ex-nihilo) and not any mere fashioning of some pre-existing matter or pre-matter... That is, in creation, God set over against Himself in the realm of being that which was not Himself".

So, brother, Wolfgang, don't allow your human reasoning, box-God-in, when delivering man, at His return, from death and decay. He is Almighty! What He does may be beyond your knowledge and/or comprehension. “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is” (1 John 3:2). Let's keep studying. CM

SOURCES:
-- Habel Habel, Norman C 1964. Yahweh versus Baal: A CONFLICT OF RELIGIOUS CULTURES. New York: Bookman Associates, pg 57.
-- Benjamin Warfield, “Review of God’s Image in Man,” by James Orr, The Princeton Theological Review 4 (1906): p. 557.
-- John N. Moore, “Was Evolution Involved in the Process of Creation? `No,’” in Ronald Youngblood, ed. The Genesis Debate: Persistent Questions About Creation and the Flood (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1990), p. 96.
-- Charles C. Ryrie, “The Bible and Evolution,” Bibliotheca Sacra 124 (January-March 1967): p. 68 passim.
-- Carl Kuhn, “God Makes, " The Living God: Readings in Christian Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983), 479-480. Millard J. Erickson, ed.

[Deleted User]

@C_M_ said:
Wolfgang,
See above C_M_ Posts: 1,765 September 20, is this what you are promoting? If not, how is this different from what you are currently saying?

Since I am not sure to what point in your longer post(s) you are referring, I can't really comment and answer your question. On the other hand, it should have been very evident from my various posts on this subject that I am not talking about "immortality of the soul" ideas, if that was the point of your concern.

I find it rather difficult to follow your posts at times, since you elaborate with points that are - as far as I am concerned - not really relevant to what is being discussed (see your below long comment on "creation, Adam and Eve, etc", because there is no direct link to the subject at hand because Scripture does nowhere speak about a "new body creation at the resurrection" anyways.

God can create and re-create with or without material substances ("ex-nihilo"). There are two major acts that cannot be imitated by the other gods:

• The act of creation ex-nihilo
• The act of deliverance (Resurrection from sin/decay). Yahweh is the creator of the heavens and the earth (Ps 33:6).

He's not limited like "Baal" whose "powers of the manipulation of what already existed. With Yahweh, all forces are subject to Him for He set them in motion. He created without the aid of primordial forces.

Benjamin Warfield once put it, “You cannot ‘originate’ by ‘modifying;’ you cannot ‘modify’ by ‘originating.’” Therefore, whatever comes by “evolution” cannot arise from “creation,” and whatever is “created” is ultimately not “evolved.” He further stated, “evolution can never, under any circumstances, the issue in a product which is specifically new: ‘modification’ is the utmost that it can achieve, – ‘origination’ is beyond its tether” (see Moore). This dictum is particularly true as it applies to the origin of life on our planet (see Ryrie).

See above .... a lot of words that do NOT help or answer to anything regarding the topic at hand (resurrection, and being clothed with a spiritual body)

I accept the Scriptural proclamation that it is “by faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible” (Heb 11:3). So it was with creation, so it is with the resurrection. God spoke some things into existence and yet He used the dust of the earth to form man. As for Eve, God used a rib from man and dust of the earth for the woman.
I like the way Systematic theologian Carl Kuhn described the Christian affirmation of Creation:

• "The basic elements of the Christian teaching concerning creation are the following: that the universe has its beginning and end in God’s spontaneous will; that the universe is in no sense independent ofHim, but that its maintenance represents a continuing exertion of His creative power and ability; and that God made the universe not out of some type of pre-existent “stuff’ but out of nothing. This assumes that prior to the "moment" of creation, God existed in self-sufficient and majestic aloneness... This projection represents an absolute origination, that is, it implies a beginning and bringing out of nothing (ex-nihilo) and not any mere fashioning of some pre-existing matter or pre-matter... That is, in creation, God set over against Himself in the realm of being that which was not Himself".

See above ... what does that have to do with the topic? Seems to me only a further elaboration on a different topic one might want to discuss some other time.

So, brother, Wolfgang, don't allow your human reasoning, box-God-in, when delivering man, at His return, from death and decay.

Did I say anything that would "box-God-in"? Why do you seem to portray "human reasoning" as something one should not use? Isn't "human" reasoning the only reasoning ability God has given man as an instrument to be able to distinguish between truth and error (in correlation with the ability of logic) ?

See, I rather use my God-given human reasoning to understand correctly what God's revelation in Scripture states than put human reasoning on the sideline and let human fantasy run rampant and excuse any non-sense such fantasy comes up with as "well, that's God and I don't want to put Him in a box, so I rather accept non-sense as truth".

He is Almighty! What He does may be beyond your knowledge and/or comprehension. “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is” (1 John 3:2). Let's keep studying.

Yes ... and now what? Do you take this as permission to let imagination that is contrary to what Scripture reveals reign above that which Scripture reveals and which man should understand ??

C Mc

@Wolfgang said: I find it rather difficult to follow your posts at times, since you elaborate with points that are - as far as I am concerned - not really relevant to what is being discussed (see your below long comment on "creation, Adam and Eve, etc", because there is no direct link to the subject at hand because Scripture does nowhere speak about a "new body creation at the resurrection" anyways.

I'm sorry, I was referring to the post of Origen (the Alexandrian church father Origen (ca. A.D. 185-ca. 254), an accomplished practitioner and defender of the allegorical method of interpretation. His view and/or approach to Scripture. Are you using the same method--warmed-over Origenism?

As for Adam and Eve, it is God who creates and re-creates. When it comes to the resurrection (undoing of death) God is free to do as he pleases. He can use whatever bodily remains, minus decay or disease. This is my simple point. The death in Christ shall rise first 1 Thess 4: 16-18.

He's not limited like "Baal" whose "powers of the manipulation of what already existed. With Yahweh, all forces are subject to Him for He set them in motion. He created without the aid of primordial forces.

Just a given.

Benjamin Warfield once put it, “You cannot ‘originate’ by ‘modifying;’ you cannot ‘modify’ by ‘originating.’” Therefore, whatever comes by “evolution” cannot arise from “creation,” and whatever is “created” is ultimately not “evolved.” He further stated, “evolution can never, under any circumstances, the issue in a product which is specifically new: ‘modification’ is the utmost that it can achieve, – ‘origination’ is beyond its tether” (see Moore). This dictum is particularly true as it applies to the origin of life on our planet (see Ryrie).
See above .... a lot of words that do NOT help or answer to anything regarding the topic at hand (resurrection, and being clothed with a spiritual body)

I accept the Scriptural proclamation that it is “by faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible” (Heb 11:3). So it was with creation, so it is with the resurrection. God spoke some things into existence and yet He used the dust of the earth to form man. As for Eve, God used a rib from man and dust of the earth for the woman.

God will not resurrect man to an unembodied "something". The resurrected will be able to recognize one another.

I like the way Systematic theologian Carl Kuhn described the Christian affirmation of Creation:

• "The basic elements of the Christian teaching concerning creation are the following: that the universe has its beginning and end in God’s spontaneous will; that the universe is in no sense independent of Him, but that its maintenance represents a continuing exertion of His creative power and ability; and that God made the universe not out of some type of pre-existent “stuff’ but out of nothing. This assumes that prior to the "moment" of creation, God existed in self-sufficient and majestic aloneness... This projection represents an absolute origination, that is, it implies a beginning and bringing out of nothing (ex-nihilo) and not any mere fashioning of some pre-existing matter or pre-matter... That is, in creation, God set over against Himself in the realm of being that which was not Himself".

See above ... what does that have to do with the topic? Seems to me only a further elaboration on a different topic one might want to discuss some other time.

It's just a reminder to whom we are referring. God is sovereign. He creates and re-creates with and without substance.

So, brother, Wolfgang, don't allow your human reasoning, box-God-in, when delivering man, at His return, from death and decay.
Did I say anything that would "box-God-in"?

No, you didn't, but I got that impression.

Why do you seem to portray "human reasoning" as something one should not use?

It's not that you can't use "human reasoning", but God is so much bigger and more than what you perceive Him to be and to do.

Isn't "human" reasoning the only reasoning ability God has given man as an instrument to be able to distinguish between truth and error (in correlation with the ability of logic)?

No, human reasoning has its place and its limitations. It must readily yield to the Word and the wisdom of God. We have the Bible (Inspired "God-breathed" Word) and the Holy Spirit (to convict, to lead, and guide into all truth). Needless to say, The Holy Spirit also plays a pivotal role in our knowing God. The apostle Paul states that the Holy Spirit searches even the depths of God (1 Cor. 2:10, 11). He knows God as no other being does. He not only has unique access to God, He is God Himself, a Member of the Triune God. On the divinity and personality of the Holy Spirit, see sources.

1. The Holy Spirit illuminates the revelation:

• Illumination. This is the name given to the concept that God has spoken to mankind. The full concept is usually expressed by three terms:

  • (1) revelation—God has acted in human history
  • (2) inspiration—He has given the proper interpretation of His acts and their meaning to certain chosen men to record for mankind
  • (3) illumination—He has given His Spirit to help mankind understand His self-disclosure.

Wolfgang, to your chagrin:

1. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth (John 14:16, 17; 15:26), who brings God’s words to reliable remembrance.
2. The Holy Spirit moved biblical writers in such a way that what they wrote in their own words was nevertheless God’s Word and carried divine authority (1 Thess. 2:13).
3. But even though the Holy Spirit inspired biblical writers to record faithfully what God had revealed, the result is not a book primarily about the Holy Spirit but about Jesus Christ, the Son of God (cf. Luke 24:25–27, 44–45; John 16:14; 15:26; Acts 5:32; 1 John 4:2).

According to Luther, although Christ “has ascended to heaven and no longer preaches on earth in person, He has not stopped speaking through the apostles and their successors; nor will He stop extending His Gospel farther and farther and powerfully working in it by means of the Holy Spirit. . . . If He did not stir up our hearts and preserve them through the Holy Spirit, no man would believe the Gospel or remain faithful to it” (LW, 13:324 (Commentary on Psalm 110, 1535).

See, I rather use my God-given human reasoning to understand correctly what God's revelation in Scripture states than put human reasoning on the sideline and let human fantasy run rampant and excuse any non-sense such fantasy comes up with as "well, that's God and I don't want to put Him in a box, so I rather accept non-sense as truth".

Interpretation is frequently needed when revelation content is given. And it is also often needed at later times when changing circumstances call for new and different applications of spiritual principles presented in the previous revelation.

Because of the need for an accurate understanding of the content of revelation, and because fallen human nature is unable to fully grasp spiritual realities (1 Cor 2:12-14), the guidance of the Holy Spirit is necessary to ensure correct interpretation. For the purposes of these reflections on revelation, this guidance or "illumination" may be defined as God, through the Holy Spirit, enlightening the minds of human beings so they might correctly interpret, understand, and apply the spiritual message of revelation. Without this illumination, revelation is incomplete.

"Spiritual things are spiritually discerned". Something God says may appear to "nonsense" and foolishness. No human can out reasoned God. Take God at His Word. Sometimes, we have to "trust God where we can't trace Him".

He is Almighty! What He does may be beyond your knowledge and/or comprehension. “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is” (1 John 3:2). Let's keep studying.

Yes ... and now what? Do you take this as permission to let imagination that is contrary to what Scripture reveals reign above that which Scripture reveals and which man should understand ??

I assume this is rhetorical. If not, short answer, no. Sanctified "imagination" is tempered with revelation, inspiration, and illumination.

“Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come” (John 16:13).

God hasn’t left it up to us to try to figure it out on our own. Instead, we have been given the promise of the Holy Spirit, which will guide us in our understanding of this truth. Be blessed! CM

PS. I may have gone from the topic, but not from God's Word.

Sources:

-- Bruce A. Ware, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: Relationships, Roles, and Relevance (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2005), 104.
-- Edward Henry Bickersteth, The Trinity (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1993).
-- Max Hatton, Understanding the Trinity (Alma Park Grantham, England: Autumn House, 2001).
-- Martin Luther, Luther’s Works. 55 vols. American ed., Edited by J. Pelikan, H. Lehmann, and Hilton C. Oswald. Saint Louis, MO; Philadelphia: Concordia; Fortress, 1955– 1986.

[Deleted User]

@C_M_ said:
I'm sorry, I was referring to the post of Origen (the Alexandrian church father Origen (ca. A.D. 185-ca. 254), an accomplished practitioner and defender of the allegorical method of interpretation. His view and/or approach to Scripture. Are you using the same method--warmed-over Origenism?

No ...

As for Adam and Eve, it is God who creates and re-creates. When it comes to the resurrection (undoing of death) God is free to do as he pleases. He can use whatever bodily remains, minus decay or disease. This is my simple point. The death in Christ shall rise first 1 Thess 4: 16-18.

Scripture just does not speak about "using whatever bodily remains" ...

God will not resurrect man to an unembodied "something". The resurrected will be able to recognize one another.

Scripture plainly speaks about being given a spiritual body ...

Since you claim it, where does Scripture speak about "the resurrected will be able to recognize one another"??

It's just a reminder to whom we are referring. God is sovereign. He creates and re-creates with and without substance

Creation is not the topic at hand in this exchange

It's not that you can't use "human reasoning", but God is so much bigger and more than what you perceive Him to be and to do.

The point is not about how much bigger God is ... the point is that God has given man the ability of reason and logic by which man can - for example - recognize and distinguish what is truth, what is error, etc

No, human reasoning has its place and its limitations. It must readily yield to the Word and the wisdom of God.

I even say it is needed to recognize the truth of God's Word and wisdom.

We have the Bible (Inspired "God-breathed" Word) and the Holy Spirit (to convict, to lead, and guide into all truth). Needless to say, The Holy Spirit also plays a pivotal role in our knowing God.

Unfortunately, I have seen a lot of people who have used what you stated here in order "to legitimize" their fantasies about what the Bible supposedly says and "explain" their unreasonable and illogical ideas and interpretations. Instead of really using Scripture to determine truth by comparing and checking their supposed "revelation" and "vision" etc etc with Scripture, they just claim "I am led by the spirit of God, and you are only using your human reasoning".

The apostle Paul states that the Holy Spirit searches even the depths of God (1 Cor. 2:10, 11). He knows God as no other being does. He not only has unique access to God, He is God Himself, a Member of the Triune God. On the divinity and personality of the Holy Spirit, see sources.

Paul never even spoke of nor did he mention any "Triune God" or "Holy Spirit" as "a member" of such a fantasy God.

1. The Holy Spirit illuminates the revelation:

• Illumination. This is the name given to the concept that God has spoken to mankind. The full concept is usually expressed by three terms:
  
  • (1) revelation—God has acted in human history
  • (2) inspiration—He has given the proper interpretation of His acts and their meaning to certain chosen men to record for mankind
  • (3) illumination—He has given His Spirit to help mankind understand His self-disclosure.

As far as I am concerned, these terms do indeed describe ways in which God works and makes information and Himself known to mankind ... There are various ways in which God has REVEALED truth and otherwise unknown information, one way has been in that He INSPIRED people to know and make known this information, and at times God has ILLUMINATED already existing information and provided understanding, etc ...

See, I rather use my God-given human reasoning to understand correctly what God's revelation in Scripture states than put human reasoning on the sideline and let human fantasy run rampant and excuse any non-sense such fantasy comes up with as "well, that's God and I don't want to put Him in a box, so I rather accept non-sense as truth".

Because of the need for an accurate understanding of the content of revelation, and because fallen human nature is unable to fully grasp spiritual realities (1 Cor 2:12-14), the guidance of the Holy Spirit is necessary to ensure correct interpretation.

If you read 1Co 2 in its proper context, you would notice that it is not even speaking about all believers but about those - in particular Paul himself there - to whom God revealed things hitherto unknown. Once the revelation was known by the preaching and writings of Paul, others are to understand it by properly READING and not by God revealing it over and over again to each one by His spirit.

For the purposes of these reflections on revelation, this guidance or "illumination" may be defined as God, through the Holy Spirit, enlightening the minds of human beings so they might correctly interpret, understand, and apply the spiritual message of revelation. Without this illumination, revelation is incomplete.

See above ... I would encourage READING accurately rather than interpreting into what is written instead of letting one's mind wonder and arrive at private interpretation and then claim these ideas are "God inspired interpretation"

"Spiritual things are spiritually discerned". Something God says may appear to "nonsense" and foolishness. No human can out reasoned God. Take God at His Word. Sometimes, we have to "trust God where we can't trace Him".

The sad part is that far too many actually are trusting what some men claim to be "God" and these folks are so bold that their followers in the millions believe that "the more far out and illogical or unreasonable something is, then it must be from God"

Yes ... and now what? Do you take this as permission to let imagination that is contrary to what Scripture reveals reign above that which Scripture reveals and which man should understand ??

I assume this is rhetorical. If not, short answer, no. Sanctified "imagination" is tempered with revelation, inspiration, and illumination.

“Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come” (John 16:13).

Again, I would encourage to carefully observe the context and to whom those words were spoken ... instead of making claims to things which only pertain to someone else.

C Mc

@Wolfgang said:

Thanks for taking the time to respond to my responses, to your previous posts.

Scripture plainly speaks about being given a spiritual body ... Since you claim it, where does Scripture speak about "the resurrected will be able to recognize one another"??

There is no "Immortal soul". The word "immoral" is used only once in the Bible and it refers to God (1 Tim. 1:17). God alone is immortal (1 Tim 6:15-16 NIV & NASB). Man is mortal and subject to death (Gen. 2:16-17-NASB; Gen. 3:3 NASB).

In the Roman Catholic lay-edited magazine Commonweal (Jan. 15, 1971) on the subject of hell. The author was Father Joseph E. Kokjohn, of St. Ambrose College, Iowa, stated:

• "There is no such phrase in Scripture as 'immortal soul' or 'immortality of the soul' or its equivalent; there is only the PROMISE of immortality."

The Bible speaks of man becoming immortal (Rom. 2:7). Dr. William Temple said,

• "Man is not immortal by nature or of right, but he is capable of immortality and there is offered to him resurrection from the dead and life eternal if he will receive it from God and on God’s terms... and if "eternal life is always the gift of God" and "neither a natural property of human nature..."

1 Tim. 6:12

I'm compelled to ask, what is death? Does a part of man continue to live after he dies? If so, there's no need for a resurrection. What is resurrected? What is changed in a "moment" ... at the resurrection? Is not, a resurrected body and an immediate change into what you called "spiritual body"? Come, now, let's reason together. CM

SOURCE:

-- William Temple. Nature, man, and God: Being The Gifford Lectures Delivered In The University of Glasgow in The Academical Years 1932-1933 AND 1933-1934, MacMillan And Co., Limited St. Martin’s Street, London 1949, pg 466-472