Sorry, but Job 19:26 must agree with Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:42-54, and Paul makes it plain that the resurrection is not to another flesh body. Even Lord Jesus made that plain, and I believe Him instead of man...
Matt 22:30
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
KJV
So now you're trying to tell me that my Lord Jesus messed up and got His information about that wrong??? Yeah, sure... right!
No, I am trying to tell you that you messed up and put words in our savior’s mouth. Nowhere in Matthew 22:30 does he deny the bodily resurrection. He merely states that in our resurrected flesh, we will not be sexual.
And with regards to 1 Corinthians 15 and Job 19, it appears you are saying that you are rejecting the obvious interpretation of Job 19 because it clashes with your interpretation of St. Paul. But this is not how we do exegesis. If Job 19 contradicts your interpretation of St. Paul, and of our Lord as recorded by St. Matthew, then you have made an error. And Job 19 makes it very clear that we will be raised incorruptible, and in our flesh see God. First, here is the Authorized Version (KJV):
25For I know
that my redeemer liveth, and
that he shall stand at the latter
dayupon the earth:
26And
though after my skin
worms destroy this
body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:
27Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another;
though my reins be consumed within me.
The KJV Old Testament is translated from the Hebrew Textus Receptus, which is sourced from the 9th century Masoretic Text, and was cross checked against the Syriac Peshitta and the Latin Vulgate, which were also translated from pre-Masoretic Hebrew texts. However, 200 years before Christ, a group of 70 Jewish scholars translated the Tanakh into Greek, a translation called the Septuagint, or referred to by the Roman numeral LXX, and while very similiar to the later Hebrew text, this earlier Greek translation, which has been validated by the discovery of corresponding variant Hebrew texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls, is often more intense and contains more obvious Christological prophecy, so I make a point to always check the Septuagint when studying the Old Testament.
Here are the same verses, Job 19:25-27, from the LXX:
25For I know that he is eternal who is about to deliver me,
26and to raise up upon the earth my skin that endures these
sufferings: for these things have been accomplished to me of the Lord;
27which I am conscious of in myself, which mine eye has seen, and not another, but all have been fulfilled to me in
my bosom.
Thus, we can say, based on both the Masoretic and Septuagint, that Job 19 is clearly promising a bodily resurrection. And we are not reading Job in isolation; there are many more texts in the Old Testament, in Ezekiel for example, which support and even, in the case of Ezekiel, depict, the resurrection of the Body. And there is also Jesus eating fish in the Gospel of Luke, which requires a body, and being touched physically by Thomas.
This makes it plain that you have misread Paul, and the words of our Savior, and your quasi-Docetic error is by the way one that was refuted in the First Century, and indeed, is even referenced by St. John the Apostle in his Epistles (Cerinthus was the leader of the Docetic sect).
And this takes us to the main thrust of the argument poignantly raised by
@ViaCrucis , that being why should we accept your novel doctrine instead of that which has been believed by all Christians everywhere for the past 2,000 years? What makes you right, and everyone else wrong?
And by everyone else, I mean everyone, from Irenaeus of Lyons, to Athanasius, to Thomas Aquinas, to Martin Luther, to John Calvin, to John Wesley, and to the leading theologians of all major churches of the past century, including but not limited to Karl Barth, John Zizoulas, NT Wright, CS Lewis, Thomas Merton, Fr. John Behr, RC Sproul, Albert Mohler, Rev. Billy Graham, and Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, to name just a few.
