tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post8573693392033739207..comments2024-03-28T10:26:20.408-04:00Comments on Ponderings on a Faith Journey: The New Physicality of ResurrectionRobert Cornwallhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04581876323110725024noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post-31396623060801800992010-05-26T05:03:42.481-04:002010-05-26T05:03:42.481-04:00Personally I CAN get my head around the resurrecti...Personally I CAN get my head around the resurrection. It's the ascention that makes no sense to me. How does a physical body eneter "heaven"?<br /><br />And why do the gospel writer(s) fdescribve it floating up until it's out of view... as though heaven were a physical place, just beyond the clouds.....phil_stylenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post-43937572166168219042010-05-25T11:13:23.158-04:002010-05-25T11:13:23.158-04:00Keith, thank you for your comments -- and the reco...Keith, thank you for your comments -- and the recommendations of resources!Robert Cornwallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04581876323110725024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post-49907043151850316722010-05-25T11:08:08.447-04:002010-05-25T11:08:08.447-04:00Since I'm 78, with a low-level bout with cance...Since I'm 78, with a low-level bout with cancer in my medical history, discussions of resurrection are taking on a certain timeliness. Thank you, Bruce and Bob, for your contributions. Books that provide constructive materials for the discussion are Peter Berger's "Questions of Faith," Larry Hurtado's "How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God?" and "Resurrection: Theological and Scientific Assessments,' edited by Ted Peters, Robert John Russell, and Michael Welker." I have not read the essays in the last of the books. We should continue the discussion.Keith Watkinshttp://keithwatkinshistorian.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post-68185531744439588762010-05-24T22:08:23.683-04:002010-05-24T22:08:23.683-04:00"Mystical perception allows us to leave the t..."Mystical perception allows us to leave the time-space continuum and experience the mystery of eternity." I like that. Most of us must have all experienced this at least once?<br /><br />"talking about the resurrection of Jesus or aspects of a post-death existence seem as relevant as talking about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin."<br /><br />I agree.David Mcnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post-52252623091578364082010-05-24T21:19:30.171-04:002010-05-24T21:19:30.171-04:00To me, talking about the resurrection of Jesus or ...To me, talking about the resurrection of Jesus or aspects of a post-death existence seem as relevant as talking about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It is absolutely indeterminable and has zero relevance to life - it is a waste of time.<br /><br />How well we can abandon and ignore such discussions is a measure of our faith and trust in God.Doug Sloannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post-86853013898604556712010-05-24T15:18:40.306-04:002010-05-24T15:18:40.306-04:00I like Wright, but his apologetic attempts play ri...I like Wright, but his apologetic attempts play right into the hands of both religious fundamentalists and atheists. As long as he leaves the meaning of resurrection locked in the notion that "it's important because it really happened", I think he's keeping us from ever getting past that horrible modern divide. <br /><br /><i>"What Paul is asking us to imagine is that there will be a new mode of physicality, which stands in relation to our present body does to a ghost."</i><br /><br />I like much of what NT Wright has done to promote more reasonable scholarship within Evangelical theology, but what is the difference in this reasoning and the kind of pseudo-science found at the creation museum? On what grounds can Wright (or Paul) make claims to know something about this "new physicality"? Here is where Wright turns from exegesis to something that sounds more like a flying saucer enthusiast. <br /><br />What is this other kind of physical existence? How is that different from dualism (the belief in some other kind of substance like a spirit or soul)? Maybe he's drawing from Aristotle than Plato, but do they get the last word?<br /><br />Let's assume Wright is right about Paul. What gives Paul the right to be an authority on these scientific matters for every generation after him? Should we take his word on nuclear fission? How about the germ theory of disease? Why does being Christian have to be tied up with adopting an understanding of the universe common in the 1st century? <br /><br />I don't think being Christian means we have to agree on metaphysics with Plato, Aristotle, or even Paul. More importantly, I don't think Paul was even trying to argue for his own view over other common metaphysical explanations. When it comes to the possibility of resurrections, I think Paul probably had the same view as most everyone else at the time. The modernist fixation on "it had to have happened" shifts us away from the bigger questions of meaning. Paul's real emphasis has to do with the real world and the implications of following Jesus in the world, not getting people to adopt a 1st century metaphysical view.Mike L.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15978997781556741350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post-59992370294763115762010-05-24T14:06:31.989-04:002010-05-24T14:06:31.989-04:00I love the title of your Blog.I love the title of your Blog.Abundancetrekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02172605993275056084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post-1256287302851675572010-05-24T14:05:18.116-04:002010-05-24T14:05:18.116-04:00My concern is that all too many Christians reject ...My concern is that all too many Christians reject those of us who can't affirm literal resurrections, people walking on water, people turning water into wine and other supernatural events. Also, I and many millions of us find the evidence for evolution overwhelming and indeed beautiful.<br /><br />I simply don't believe a loving God would insist that we must believe in certain kinds of supernatural miracles as a litmus test of who can be called Christians and who can't. Also, I'm fascinated by the insistence that these miracles only happened for Christians and to the earlier Israelites. The same kind of supernatural miracles are often presented by other wisdom traditions but narrow-minded Christians have no trouble denying that those miracles happened. You can't have it both ways. <br /><br />I believe in a mystical approach which is the foundation of all of our wisdom traditions. It is often called The Perennial Philosophy. Mystical perception allows us to leave the time-space continuum and experience the mystery of eternity. Yes, in that realm, we become More and not Less but I can not bring myself to describe that as a physical event as we understand that here on planet Earth.<br /><br />A wonderful description of Christian myth and ritual and how it basically embraces the Perennial Philosophy is found in MYTH AND RITUAL IN CHRISTIANITY by Alan Watts.<br /><br />love, john + <a href="http://www.abundancetrek.com/" rel="nofollow">www.abundancetrek.com</a> + We are intimately, intricately and infinitely connected by a matrix of unconditional, unlimited and uniting love which is miraculous, mysterious and marvelous.Abundancetrekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02172605993275056084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post-77245858350783661682010-05-24T13:02:52.537-04:002010-05-24T13:02:52.537-04:00Great discussion, Bob. I, too, watched the Lost fi...Great discussion, Bob. I, too, watched the Lost finale (even though I was not a faithful watcher through all 6 seasons) and it's got me thinking hard about resurrection. That and a couple of recent discussions with people who are extremely grounded in science and therefore find it impossible to make the case for a physical resurrection. Much as I wanted to make a strong case, I was unable to. <br /><br />So what you're suggesting, in a sense, is a reclaiming of the word "reincarnation." We may become bodily beings after death, in an entirely different sense than that word is often used. I've read Paul's words but interpreted them in the context of his warnings about immorality of "the flesh." [i.e. you'll mess up your resurrection body if you don't live a "pure" life]. I'm wary of Paul's tendencies toward dualism in this regard (but maybe that's just my interpretation of Paul, which could be incorrect.)<br /><br />You present a much more interesting and powerful interpretation that is non-dualistic. I'll continue to think on it.Rebecca Bowman Woodshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01533314225565736972noreply@blogger.com