Re: Physical Resurrection

At 01:35 PM 4/10/2006, Michael Roberts wrote:

>This does not mention the PHYSICAL resurrection
>Michael

It has been argued on the basis of Paul's testimony that Jesus's
resurrection body was spiritual in the sense of being unextended,
immaterial, intangible, and so forth. But neither the argument
appealing to the nature of Paul's Damascus Road experience nor the
argument from Paul's doctrine of the resurrection body supports such
a conclusion. On the contrary, Paul's information serves to confirm
the gospels' narratives of Jesus's bodily resurrection. Not only is
the gospels' physicalism well-founded, but it is also, like Paul's
doctrine, a nuanced physicalism.

Source: "The Bodily Resurrection of Jesus," in Gospel Perspectives I,
pp. 47-74. Edited by R.T. France and D. Wenham. Sheffield, England:
JSOT Press, 1980.

[snip] The Bodily Resurrection of Jesus Dr. William Lane
Craig http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/bodily.html

~ Janice

>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:janmatch@earthlink.net>Janice Matchett
>To: <mailto:Dawsonzhu@aol.com>Dawsonzhu@aol.com
>Cc: <mailto:asa@lists.calvin.edu>asa@lists.calvin.edu
>Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 5:13 PM
>Subject: Re: Physical Resurrection
>
>At 11:27 AM 4/10/2006, <mailto:Dawsonzhu@aol.com>Dawsonzhu@aol.com wrote:
>
>I'm not the theologian here, but what is prudent to understand here
>is that there are a number of conflicting issues that have _always_
>troubled the church. Out of the many, one is the question of how
>Christ can be both divine and human (the divinity/humanity
>issue). If you put any thought to it, you will soon recognize that
>the divinity/humanity issue is not trivial to explain. When you
>push the divinity too far, you end up denying Jesus died, and when
>you push the humanity too far, you wind up with an unrisen
>Christ. Either extreme calls our salvation into question, as the
>former implies that there was no sacrifice and the latter means we
>should be pitied. Many a great mind has wrestled with this, but
>there is yet no answer to the best of my knowledge.
>
>by Grace we proceed, Wayne ...What exactly Michael means by that
>short statement, but knowing something of how well read he is, it
>certainly requires more inquiry.
>
>@ The Christian faith is what it IS. "Watch, stand fast in THE
>faith, be brave, be strong." [1 Cor. 16:13]
>
>The fact that some professing Christians down through history have
>been/are emotionally "troubled by certain issues" --- which causes
>them to want to find excuses to get rid of the Scriptures that don't
>fit their personal "theology" --- isn't germane. ~ Janice
>
>"The Christian faith is a definite system of beliefs with definite
>content (<http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?jude+1:3>Jude 3
>Off-site Link
>) ... Because these central doctrines define the character of
>Christianity, one cannot be saved and deny these."
>
>Theology http://www.apologeticsindex.org/c45.html
>
>A cult of Christianity is a group of people, which claiming to be
>Christian, embraces a particular doctrinal system taught by an
>individual leader, group of leaders, or organization, which (system)
>denies (either explicitly or implicitly) one or more of the central
>doctrines of the Christian faith as taught in the sixty-six books of
>the Bible.
>"Central doctrines" of the Christian faith are those doctrines that
>make the Christian faith Christian and not something else.
> * The meaning of the expression "Christian faith" is not like a
> wax nose, which can be twisted to mean whatever the speaker wants it to mean.
> * The Christian faith is a definite system of beliefs with
> definite content (<http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?jude+1:3>Jude 3
> []
> )
> * Certain Christian doctrines constitute the core of the faith.
> Central doctrines include the
> <http://www.apologeticsindex.org/t10.html>Trinity, the deity of
> <http://www.apologeticsindex.org/j20.html>Christ, the bodily
> resurrection, the atoning work of Christ on the cross, and
> <http://www.apologeticsindex.org/s12.html>salvation by grace
> through faith. These doctrines so comprise the essence of the
> Christian faith that to remove any of them is to make the belief
> system non-Christian.
> * Scripture teaches that the beliefs mentioned above are of
> central importance (e.g.,
> <http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?matthew+28:19>Matt. 28:19
> []
> ; <http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?john+8:24>John 8:24
> []
> ; <http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?1+corinthians+15>1 Cor. 15
> []
> ; <http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?ephesians+2:8-10>Eph. 2:8-10
> []
> ).
> * Because these central doctrines define the character of
> Christianity, one cannot be saved and deny these.
> * Central doctrines should not be confused with peripheral
> issues, about which Christians may legitimately disagree.
> * Peripheral (i.e. non-essential) doctrines include such issues
> as the timing of the tribulation, the method of baptism, or the
> structure of church government. For example, one can be wrong about
> the identity of "the spirits in prison"
> <http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?1+peter+3:19>1 Peter 3:19
> []
> ) or about the timing of the rapture and still go to heaven, but
> one cannot deny salvation by grace or the deity of Christ
> (<http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?john+8:24>John 8:24
> []
> ) and be saved.
> * All Christian denominations -- whether
> <http://www.apologeticsindex.org/c16.html>Roman Catholic,
> <http://www.apologeticsindex.org/o06.html>Eastern Orthodox, or
> <http://www.apologeticsindex.org/p11.html>Protestant -- agree on
> the essential core. The relatively minor disagreements between
> genuinely Christian
> <http://www.apologeticsindex.org/d10.html>denominations, then,
> cannot be used to argue that there is no objectively recognized
> core of fundamental doctrine which constitutes the Christian faith.
>Source: Alam Gomes,
><http://www.apologeticsindex.org/c09a01.html>Cult: A Theological
>Definition, excerpt from
><http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0310704413/christianministr>"Unmasking
>The Cults"
>[]
>
>
>
>----------
>