Christendom inconsistent beliefs #4: Christ, flesh and bones in heaven?

[Eloi]

[historia]

But that's not what they believe. They believe Jesus' frail, mortal body was transformed into an extraordinary, supernatural body that now has new properties that allow it to do things an ordinary body cannot

But not closing some holes in the hands?

I'm not familiar with any Christian doctrine that says Jesus cannot do that.

It does seem clear to me, though, that the gospel authors wanted to show that there is continuity between Christ's pre-Resurrection and post-Resurrection body. And so they relate that the resurrected body still bears the marks of his crucifixion.

If Thomas had seen Jesus with his old body (and he knew him very well), it would not have even been necessary to show him any holes in the hands.

That's not exactly how John relates the story.

In John 20:24-29, before Thomas has seen anything -- since he was not with the other disciples when they first saw Jesus -- he says he will only believe that Jesus has been resurrected if he can see and touch his wounds.

The implication here seems to be that Thomas thinks the other disciplines have been deceived in some way -- today we might call it a hallucination. And so Thomas insists he will only believe Jesus has been resurrected if he can see and touch the actual body.

There is no suggestion in the text that Thomas did not recognize Jesus when he later sees him.

[historia]

No, Paul was talking about a spirit body.

Paul does not use the word "spirit body" but rather "spiritual body."

As I've noted several times above, the Greek word for "spiritual" here is pneumatikos. It simply cannot mean 'made out of spirit', and so cannot mean 'spirit body', as you would have it.

He is comparing physical with spirit bodies . . . Physical = "natural." Spirit = "spiritual."

No, the word Paul uses here for "natural" is psychikos. It does not mean "physical."

This is clear from how Paul contrasts these same terms earlier in the same letter:

The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one.

Paul is talking here about how people respond to the "proclamations" and "wisdom" that he previously imparted to the Corinthians. He says that some of them cannot accept this wisdom because they are a "natural" person, while the "spiritual" person understands what Paul taught.

Obviously, it is absurd to say that Paul thinks some of the people in Corinth are 'physical' while others are spirits.

The adjectives "natural" and "spiritual" here simply don't refer to what a person (or a body) is made of.

Flesh and bones cannot go to heaven, just as flesh and blood cannot.

As has already been pointed out earlier in the thread, Paul does not say that flesh and blood cannot go to heaven.

Why do you complicate a very simple teaching?

It's not me who is complicating this for you, it's Paul.

Notice, you're literally changing what Paul wrote -- substituting your own words like "spirit body" and "heaven" -- in order to make this passage conform to your view.

I'm simply undoing those changes -- and pointing out where you are making false assumptions about what various words mean -- in order to show that Paul is not saying what you want him to say.

[Eloi]

(...) It does seem clear to me, though, that the gospel authors wanted to show that there is continuity between Christ's pre-Resurrection and post-Resurrection body. And so they relate that the resurrected body still bears the marks of his crucifixion. (...)

A different thing is clear to me: Jesus appeared as he had appeared in ancient times: with a temporary body.

His human body had been offered, and now the "continuity between Christ's pre-Resurrection and post-Resurrection body" reached the body that he had before he was born, because the human was one inferior to the other.

John 17:5?So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.

1 Tim. 6:14 (...) until the manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15?This [manifestation] the happy and only Potentate will show in its own appointed times, [he] the King of those who rule as kings and Lord of those who rule as lords, 16?the one alone having immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom not one of men has seen or can see. To him be honor and might everlasting. Amen.

[historia]

Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

Was Jesus lying?

He was simply trying to assure them that it was he and not an apparition.

Or, more precisely, that he is assuring them that he is not a "spirit."

But that's precisely the problem, you're arguing Jesus is a spirit:

a powerful spirit person. Jesus Christ

Kinda awkward, that.

If his body had been flesh and bones he would not have been able to get through the door which had been locked! (John 20:19,26)

See post #52.

[Eloi]

John had written these clear words of Jesus:

John 17:24?Father, I want those whom you have given me to be with me where I am, in order that they may look upon my glory that you have given me, because you loved me before the founding of the world.

... and again:

1 John 3:2?Beloved ones, we are now children of God, but it has not yet been made manifest what we will be. We do know that when he is made manifest we will be like him, because we will see him just as he is. 3?And everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, just as that one is pure.

Jesus' disciples knew that the figure of Jesus in heaven was not like what today would be a simple astronaut in outer space.

[historia]

It does seem clear to me, though, that the gospel authors wanted to show that there is continuity between Christ's pre-Resurrection and post-Resurrection body. And so they relate that the resurrected body still bears the marks of his crucifixion.

A different thing is clear to me: Jesus appeared as he had appeared in ancient times: with a temporary body.

Sure, you're reading the text through the lens of Watchtower theology. We all read the Bible according to our respective traditions.

His human body had been offered, and now the "continuity between Christ's pre-Resurrection and post-Resurrection body" reached the body that he had before he was born, because the human was one inferior to the other.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what "the 'continuity between Christ's pre-Resurrection and post-Resurrection body' reached the body that he had before he was born" means.

I was under the impression that Jehovah's Witnesses believed that Jesus' body was dissolved after the crucifixion and that he was re-created as a spirit. That seems altogether foreign to what Luke and John are saying in their gospels, as they are quite keen to show that Jesus' resurrected body bears the marks of his crucifixion, and so is directly continuous with his pre-resurrection body.

Jesus' disciples knew that the figure of Jesus in heaven was not like what today would be a simple astronaut in outer space.

That's also not what Christians today think. See post #27.

[Eloi]

[onewithhim]

But that's not what they believe. They believe Jesus' frail, mortal body was transformed into an extraordinary, supernatural body that now has new properties that allow it to do things an ordinary body cannot

But not closing some holes in the hands?

I'm not familiar with any Christian doctrine that says Jesus cannot do that.

It does seem clear to me, though, that the gospel authors wanted to show that there is continuity between Christ's pre-Resurrection and post-Resurrection body. And so they relate that the resurrected body still bears the marks of his crucifixion.

If Thomas had seen Jesus with his old body (and he knew him very well), it would not have even been necessary to show him any holes in the hands.

That's not exactly how John relates the story.

In John 20:24-29, before Thomas has seen anything -- since he was not with the other disciples when they first saw Jesus -- he says he will only believe that Jesus has been resurrected if he can see and touch his wounds.

The implication here seems to be that Thomas thinks the other disciplines have been deceived in some way -- today we might call it a hallucination. And so Thomas insists he will only believe Jesus has been resurrected if he can see and touch the actual body.

There is no suggestion in the text that Thomas did not recognize Jesus when he later sees him.

You said it yourself. The possibility of anyone thinking that Jesus was a hallucination was of concern. Therefore Jesus made the statement that he still had the holes made at his crucifixion. The main issue was---is this really Jesus? Not whether or not he had a body of flesh.

.

[onewithhim]

No, Paul was talking about a spirit body.

Paul does not use the word "spirit body" but rather "spiritual body."

As I've noted several times above, the Greek word for "spiritual" here is pneumatikos. It simply cannot mean 'made out of spirit', and so cannot mean 'spirit body', as you would have it.

He is comparing physical with spirit bodies . . . Physical = "natural." Spirit = "spiritual."

No, the word Paul uses here for "natural" is psychikos. It does not mean "physical."

This is clear from how Paul contrasts these same terms earlier in the same letter:

The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one.

Paul is talking here about how people respond to the "proclamations" and "wisdom" that he previously imparted to the Corinthians. He says that some of them cannot accept this wisdom because they are a "natural" person, while the "spiritual" person understands what Paul taught.

Obviously, it is absurd to say that Paul thinks some of the people in Corinth are 'physical' while others are spirits.

The adjectives "natural" and "spiritual" here simply don't refer to what a person (or a body) is made of.

Flesh and bones cannot go to heaven, just as flesh and blood cannot.

As has already been pointed out earlier in the thread, Paul does not say that flesh and blood cannot go to heaven.

Why do you complicate a very simple teaching?

It's not me who is complicating this for you, it's Paul.

Notice, you're literally changing what Paul wrote -- substituting your own words like "spirit body" and "heaven" -- in order to make this passage conform to your view.

I'm simply undoing those changes -- and pointing out where you are making false assumptions about what various words mean -- in order to show that Paul is not saying what you want him to say.

I Corinthians 15:45-50 shows what Paul meant by "spiritual" and "earthly" or "natural." It's clear that he's talking about earthly bodies and spirit bodies.

.

[onewithhim]

Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

Was Jesus lying?

He was simply trying to assure them that it was he and not an apparition.

Or, more precisely, that he is assuring them that he is not a "spirit."

But that's precisely the problem, you're arguing Jesus is a spirit:

a powerful spirit person. Jesus Christ

Kinda awkward, that.

If his body had been flesh and bones he would not have been able to get through the door which had been locked! (John 20:19,26)

See post #52.

I did and it doesn't provide any rebuttal to my comments.

.