So is the resurrected Jesus flesh or spirit?

[Red Wolf]

In Luke's gospel Jesus tells his disciples after his resurrection.....
Luke 24:39(King James Version)
39Behold 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.

I think that this verse is quite definite in saying that the risen Jesus was flesh.
But the Scriptures by the Apostle Paul in 1Corinthians 15 are quite definite that the risen Jesus is spirit.
1 Corinthians 15:45(King James Version)
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
1 Corinthians 15:50(King James Version)
Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
So is the resurrected Jesus flesh or spirit?
Or is this just more evidence that the Bible is fiction?

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 46 by brunumb]

The cloud took the fleshy Jesus "out of their sight." After that he wasn't fleshy anymore, but dematerialized, just as angels in ancient times had done, going back and forth between the earth and heaven. When the cloud took him out of their sight, it showed just how he would come back---not in literal sight, but invisibly, and we will understand that he is here and what he will be doing. ("Oh, I see!" is the expression when we understand something.)


.

It all seem unnecessary to me. Dematerialising in front of everyone would make for quite a memorable statement. Coming and going on clouds smack of primitive ignorance of the nature of things. Then there is the burning question. Why go away at all? Seems like a lot could be accomplished by sticking around for a bit longer and demonstrating to everyone that he was the son of God after all. Or, the authors needed to have Jesus vanish so that there was no evidence to prove that it was all just creative fiction.

I don't recall that the account mentioned Jesus dematerializing in front of the disciples. It indicated that somehow he came through a locked door and suddenly was there in their midst.

I think Jesus knew that sticking around longer would not accomplish anything more. He had performed miracles, and many people believed because of that. Others saw the miracles and still rejected him, the religious leaders being a significant lead in dissuading the people from believing.

Why would Jesus' vanishing give credence to the thought that it all was fiction? I don't understand that line of thinking.


.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 51 by onewithhim]

I don't recall that the account mentioned Jesus dematerializing in front of the disciples.

I was responding to your statement:
"The cloud took the fleshy Jesus "out of their sight." After that he wasn't fleshy anymore, but dematerialized, just as angels in ancient times had done, going back and forth between the earth and heaven."
That said, dematerialising in front of people would be far more impressive than doing it in secret.

I think Jesus knew that sticking around longer would not accomplish anything more.

And I am pointing out that a resurrected Jesus, the ultimate miracle, would have accomplished far more by sticking around. He may have performed miracles that were not particularly impressive to some, but a dead man turning up to confront his accusers and executioners would have been truly convincing.

Why would Jesus' vanishing give credence to the thought that it all was fiction? I don't understand that line of thinking.

It doesn't directly give credence to the fictional nature of the story. If the events did actually occur and Jesus stuck around, then he would be clear evidence that it was all true. But, if the whole event is fictional, we would need to somehow have Jesus disappear and be unavailable for examination.

[Yahwehismywitness]

After that he wasn't fleshy anymore, but dematerialized, just as angels in ancient times had done, going back and forth between the earth and heaven."

Are not angels spirits, Satan was an angel but either enter someone or take on human form don't know which.

Humans are different they were made flesh from the beginning so does it dematerialize? Jesus recognized Elias and Moses Mathew 17:3

[tam]

Peace to you!

There is no contradiction because my Lord was not just flesh OR just spirit. The new body (also known as the white robe Rev 6:11; 7:9), the spirit body, can move between matter and energy, flesh and spirit (it is all energy). Same as the angels can do (hence they can move between the physical and spiritual realms). But while this flesh with its blood (the bodies that we all have right now) has sin and death in it (or it could not get sick, and it could not die)... there is no sin or death in the new body. The new body has only life in it.

In Luke's gospel Jesus tells his disciples after his resurrection.....
Luke 24:39(King James Version)
39Behold 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.

I think that this verse is quite definite in saying that the risen Jesus was flesh.

Indeed. But in the new body.

But the Scriptures by the Apostle Paul in 1Corinthians 15 are quite definite that the risen Jesus is spirit.
1 Corinthians 15:45(King James Version)
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

Yes, and Christ is the Spirit that Paul writes about at 2 Corinth 3:17.

1 Corinthians 15:50(King James Version)
Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

Correct, but Paul is referring to THIS flesh and blood (that has sin and death in it).

So is the resurrected Jesus flesh or spirit?

Christ is the Spirit - with the new body, the white robe, the spirit body (that can move between the physical and spiritual realms - that can move from energy to matter to energy, etc). Just as the angels can do; just as we will also be able to do if/once we receive the new body, the white robe.


We (who are spirit in clay vessels) will put off the long garment of skin (this flesh with ITS blood, having sin and death in it) and will put on the white robe (the new body with ITS blood, having LIFE in it).

Or is this just more evidence that the Bible is fiction?

A contradiction would not indicate that the bible is fiction. Regardless, there is no contradiction here.




Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[tam]

Peace to you,

"In Luke's gospel Jesus tells his disciples after his resurrection.....
Luke 24:39(King James Version)
39Behold 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.

I think that this verse is quite definite in saying that the risen Jesus was flesh.
But the Scriptures by the Apostle Paul in 1Corinthians 15 are quite definite that the risen Jesus is spirit.
1 Corinthians 15:45(King James Version) "

RESPONSE: Acts of the Apostles tells us that Jesus remained on earth for 40 days before his ascension. Paul (not a witness) claims that Jesus was seen by 500 people.

But there is no report from anyone that he was seen by anyone nor is their a report that he "ascended" for 20 years or longer. Does it really seem that no one reported his Resurrection?

Thus is this a creditable bit of history?

But it was reported. It was reported verbally. It wasn't written down until later, but that has no bearing on when it was reported verbally.


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Waterfall]

[Replying to post 1 by Red Wolf]

What do the four gospels agree about?

That Joseph of Arimathea got Jesus dead body and put it in a tomb...that Jesus body was missing...that Jesus was seen alive...what are one to think:

http://uk.vandrermodlyset.dk/m-a28.htm

http://uk.vandrermodlyset.dk/m-ko28.htm

If this account is not true, then how to understand things? Is it possible to understand things when nobody agrees about what happent? Are we free to think whatever we want? Can God say to me...why did you not believe? Believe what? I believe that Joseph of Arimathea got Jesus dead body and put it in a tomb...that Jesus body was missing...that Jesus was seen alive...

Do we really know what went on at the time of Jesus:

http://uk.vandrermodlyset.dk/m-a29.htm

http://uk.vandrermodlyset.dk/m-ko29.htm

Is this account more likely to be true? Lets say it is true...would that be so terrible? Lets say the Bible is true...would that be so terrible? That depends on what the Bible is saying...does it matter to us if God exist forever if we do not exist forever? Does it matter to God if we exist forever if God do not exist forever? Why not just give us eternal life? If people do not want eternal life then they can just ask God to be erased from existence? But who in their right mind would do that? Has God done anything to deserve eternal life? We all understand that we cant have eternal life if we run around and kill each other...so eternal life demands that we love each other...how else have eternal life? Eternal life is something we give to each other?

I would like to make everybody happy again

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 52 by brunumb]

Your reasoning evades my humble mind. All I can say to your somewhat undiscernable post is: Jesus stuck around for 40 days after being resurrected, so he did show hundreds of people that he was alive again.



.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 52 by brunumb]

Your reasoning evades my humble mind. All I can say to your somewhat undiscernable post is: Jesus stuck around for 40 days after being resurrected, so he did show hundreds of people that he was alive again.



.

No one of any significance unfortunately. The 40 days is only an unverified claim.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 52 by brunumb]

Your reasoning evades my humble mind. All I can say to your somewhat undiscernable post is: Jesus stuck around for 40 days after being resurrected, so he did show hundreds of people that he was alive again.



.

No one of any significance unfortunately. The 40 days is only an unverified claim.

In your opinion, no one of significance. Significance to who...you?

We are talking about claims made 2000 years ago in a very different society and time.

To expect claims made in a biography to be suitably verified is asking for the moon.

[Yahwehismywitness]

No one of any significance unfortunately. The 40 days is only an unverified claim

Of that time period what writings are suitable have some from Irenaeus or Eusebius. Tertulian do any of these interest you?