Being saved while believing in a non-physical resurrection?

Tolworth John

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 10, 2017
8,278
4,680
68
Tolworth
✟369,559.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I just came across this article about how scholars accept 1Cor 15:3-7 as being a very early that is within three years of the crucifixtion.
see:-https://winteryknight.com/2019/10/03/why-do-so-many-atheist-historians-think-that-1-corinthians-15-is-reliable-history-2/

Well worth reading.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
I’m familiar with the viewpoint , though I believe in a more traditional resurrection.

“Physical” has an odd meaning in this context. The resurrected Jesus was not a normal physical human. He could appear and disappear, and pass through walls. But he did have a physical existence, because he could be touched, and he could be recognized (although he wasn’t always). Paul refers to this as a resurrection body, and says that it’s a different nature from our physical bodies. I’ve seen the term “trans-physical” used.

The Gospels tell us that the tomb was empty. What does this mean? Jesus wasn’t a zombie. The corpse wasn’t simply reanimated. While the Bible doesn’t quite say this, I think most Christians read the story as saying that his body was transformed into the transphysical existence. So it’s not a resuscitation. but a transformation.

People like what you’re talking about believe Paul’s witness, but don’t see it as a transformation of Jesus’ original physical body. Rather, they think the resurrected form is independent of his original physical body. I’ve seen varying opinions on how close to physical his trans-physical existence was, varying from something reasonably close to physical to a vision. But those I’m familiar with all think the resurrected Christ is real, and accept Paul’s witness to him.

It’s clear that this is at least possible. Jesus’ resurrection is the forerunner of our own resurrection. But whenever this happens, many bodies will have decayed. So while Paul says those who are alive will be transformed, but those whose body aren’t around will have a trans physical existence too. So Jesus could have had a resurrected existence independent of his original body.

I think the empty tomb was real. I don’t think Scripture describes the exact process that produced Jesus’ resurrected trans-physical existence. I’d assume it was the kind of transformation that Paul says will happen to those who are alive at the End, i.e.a transformation of his original body. But I also accept fellow Christians who think the resurrected Jesus was real, but the empty tomb was not.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
There was no need for the time, place or date. Paul was stating that many people had seen the risen Jesus and that those who wanted to challenge it could do so by contacting eyewitnesses.

A better question would be 'How did they know that this person was Jesus?'
That's actually an interesting question. In John, neither Mary nor the disciples in John 21 recognize Jesus initially. He has to open their eyes. This is one reason for suggesting that Jesus' resurrected existence wasn't just his original body brought back to life, but something new, which requires spiritual understanding to recognize. But note that in John this spiritual aspect of Jesus' resurrection coexists with the empty tomb.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

JohnClay

Married Mouth-Breather
Supporter
Oct 27, 2006
1,129
186
Australia
Visit site
✟443,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
I just came across this article about how scholars accept 1Cor 15:3-7 as being a very early that is within three years of the crucifixtion.
see:-https://winteryknight.com/2019/10/03/why-do-so-many-atheist-historians-think-that-1-corinthians-15-is-reliable-history-2/

Well worth reading.
I'm saying that verse 6 could be based on a real event, but unlike the 1988 appearance we don't have photos to check if the appearance looked like how Jesus was supposed to look.

I think my explanation is better than Richard Carriers at least:
Then He Appeared to Over Five Hundred Brethren at Once! • Richard Carrier
I think he is saying it was just a mass hallucination
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,125
9,946
The Void!
✟1,125,863.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
A female Anglican priest I like to talk to believes that the resurrection of Jesus wasn't necessarily physical. I'm not sure of the technical term. If a person is overwise a Christian (e.g. they put Jesus first and are sorry for their sins) but just doesn't believe that Jesus rose physically, are they saved? They could believe that Jesus appeared in hallucinations - or my theory, that it involved mistaken identity and maybe legends/rumours. Or it was intended to be symbolic/parables.

John, I think it's fairly obvious that while that priest may mean well in providing you an "alternative" way to think about the Resurrection, she's not really doing you a favor by telling you that the New Testament accounts are a manifestation of metaphysical metaphor.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,125
9,946
The Void!
✟1,125,863.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'm saying that verse 6 could be based on a real event, but unlike the 1988 appearance we don't have photos to check if the appearance looked like how Jesus was supposed to look.

I think my explanation is better than Richard Carriers at least:
Then He Appeared to Over Five Hundred Brethren at Once! • Richard Carrier
I think he is saying it was just a mass hallucination

Richard Carrier? I wouldn't be relying too much on his view of things, John.

You're right though. He's saying it was a 'kind' of mass hallucination, and I think you and I don't buy that.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Clare73
Upvote 0

Maria Billingsley

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 7, 2018
9,576
7,775
63
Martinez
✟893,955.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
A female Anglican priest I like to talk to believes that the resurrection of Jesus wasn't necessarily physical. I'm not sure of the technical term. If a person is overwise a Christian (e.g. they put Jesus first and are sorry for their sins) but just doesn't believe that Jesus rose physically, are they saved? They could believe that Jesus appeared in hallucinations - or my theory, that it involved mistaken identity and maybe legends/rumours. Or it was intended to be symbolic/parables.
This is a Gnostic belief and should be rejected. Some ancient Christians maintained that Jesus was raised in the spirit, not in the body, that his body died and rotted in the grave, as bodies do, but that his spirit lived on and ascended to heaven. This view became prominent among various groups of Gnostic Christians and was considered heretical.
Blessings
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Clare73
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
From my own experiences, I would say that it's okay to struggle with the sort of modernist mindset that makes it hard to accept miracles, but that you need to admit that you're struggling. There's really no point in abandoning orthodoxy and trying to build your own easy-to-believe version of Christianity instead. Might as well just be a deist.
In the case of the Resurrection, the Bible itself dismisses any thought that Jesus rose spiritually but not physically. That is the wonder and significance of the Resurrection. After all, people generally believe in life after death...as a spirit. They wouldn't need to see the ghost of Christ in order to be impressed by that possibility.
 
Upvote 0

Sanoy

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2017
3,169
1,421
America
✟118,024.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
A female Anglican priest I like to talk to believes that the resurrection of Jesus wasn't necessarily physical. I'm not sure of the technical term. If a person is overwise a Christian (e.g. they put Jesus first and are sorry for their sins) but just doesn't believe that Jesus rose physically, are they saved? They could believe that Jesus appeared in hallucinations - or my theory, that it involved mistaken identity and maybe legends/rumours. Or it was intended to be symbolic/parables.
Ask her to clarify because there is some nuance here. She might be referring to 1 Corinthians 15:42-44...
So will it be with the resurrection of the dead: What is sown is perishable; it is raised imperishable. It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.​
Is it spiritual? - yes. Is it physical? - yes
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

tampasteve

Pray for peace in Israel
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Angels Team
CF Senior Ambassador
Supporter
May 15, 2017
25,200
7,288
Tampa
✟767,751.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
MOD HAT ON
Please remember the following rules for this particular forum and overall:
- No more than one non-Christian Seeker (the OP) may post in a thread.

- Please note the Terms of Service to be listed as "Christian", there is some wiggle room for debate:
.......
came down from Heaven, (John 6:33,35)
and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, (Luke 1:35)
and became man. (John 1:14)
And was crucified for us (Mark 15:25; 1Cointhians 15:3)
under Pontius Pilate, (John 19:6)
and suffered, (Mark 8:31)
and was buried. (Luke 23:53; 1Corinthians 15:4)
And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures. (Luke 24:1 1Corinthians 15:4)

- Flaming women priests (you can disagree with women priests/pastors/ministers, but do so without flaming)

MOD HAT OFF
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
I'm saying that verse 6 could be based on a real event, but unlike the 1988 appearance we don't have photos to check if the appearance looked like how Jesus was supposed to look.

I think my explanation is better than Richard Carriers at least:
Then He Appeared to Over Five Hundred Brethren at Once! • Richard Carrier
I think he is saying it was just a mass hallucination
I think the wording of the article discredits itself. The Gospels have been dealt with by quite a range of people, Christian and not. That they are inerrant, perfect witnesses is an assertion of faith, which even I don't believe. That they are worthless, however, is at least as hard to support. Almost no atheists who work with Christian history believe that, even if they don't accept the reality of the Resurrection.

As I noted above, I think there's a kind of ambiguous nature to Jesus' resurrected existence. But hallucination is not a credible understanding of Paul's words. He gives us a sequence of 4 events: death, burial, resurrection, appearances. So he sees the resurrection as an event separate from the appearances. The other three events are objective, public events. The natural reading is that the resurrection is too. This does not establish the empty tomb, but it does imply some kind of resurrection event before the appearances. Something like the stories in the Gospels seems like the obvious form of that.

That there's a specific resurrection event is also implied by his discussion of the End. Jesus' resurrection is a proleptic form of his final coming. Also a specific event.

One of the most interesting things about Paul's citation of the early creed is that it doesn't mention Mary, who was the first witness according to the Gospels. If Paul differentiated between the resurrection event and Jesus' appearances, perhaps he considered Mary's experience at the tomb to be part of the resurrection. Mark seems to make this distinction. It describes the women as part of the resurrection story, but leaves the appearance to Peter and the disciples as a separate, future event, to take place in Galilee. (Matthew agrees. Luke and John, of course, show appearances to Peter and the other disciples immediately. I think 1 Cor 15 gives support to the version in Mark and Matthew.)

It's also worth noting that even liberal scholars take seriously the early tradition that Mark is based on Peter's preaching. I find it highly improbable that Mark would have added a non-existent empty tomb to that.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Tolworth John

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 10, 2017
8,278
4,680
68
Tolworth
✟369,559.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
How would they be able to contact the eyewitnesses if there is no mention of when or where it was - the only detail was that there were "over five hundred" and some were dead.


Like the example here:
Seeing/meeting Jesus in modern times
they just believed it was Jesus

Paul was doing two things, saying it is not just me other people have seen Jesus and saying if you don't believe me you can talk to them.

Much the same as you are doing with the reports of people seeing Jesus today.
 
Upvote 0

Tolworth John

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 10, 2017
8,278
4,680
68
Tolworth
✟369,559.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I'm saying that verse 6 could be based on a real event, but unlike the 1988 appearance we don't have photos to check if the appearance looked like how Jesus was supposed to look.

I think my explanation is better than Richard Carriers at least:
Then He Appeared to Over Five Hundred Brethren at Once! • Richard Carrier
I think he is saying it was just a mass hallucination

If his appearance to more than 500 people is based on a real event then you are acknowledging that Jesus rose physically from the dead.
 
Upvote 0

JohnClay

Married Mouth-Breather
Supporter
Oct 27, 2006
1,129
186
Australia
Visit site
✟443,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
If his appearance to more than 500 people is based on a real event then you are acknowledging that Jesus rose physically from the dead.
I'm saying that could have happened in a way similar to this event in 1988:
V: Jesus in Nairobi, Kenya, 1988
i.e. it could be a case of mistaken identity - even if many of the crowd were sure it was actually Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,978
9,399
✟377,931.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
A female Anglican priest I like to talk to believes that the resurrection of Jesus wasn't necessarily physical. I'm not sure of the technical term. If a person is overwise a Christian (e.g. they put Jesus first and are sorry for their sins) but just doesn't believe that Jesus rose physically, are they saved? They could believe that Jesus appeared in hallucinations - or my theory, that it involved mistaken identity and maybe legends/rumours. Or it was intended to be symbolic/parables.
She is wrong, and she should be defrocked. Paul made it very clear in 1 Corinthians 15 that believing in the bodily resurrection of Christ is essential.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Clare73
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Davidz777

Newbie
Nov 23, 2012
118
26
SF Bay Area
✟10,303.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Reads like a misunderstanding. She may consider "spirit" a non-physical condition as there are many that think God and angels exist on another plain of existence simultaneously in another dimension within the same space. An idea I personally tend to reject out of science logic. Jesus didn't get put into a duplicate organic body as what value would there be unless the new body was not subject to decay. Further Jesus himself relates those in Heaven are as spirit however that does not necessarily mean it is some invisible state of non-matter or non-energy as no one knows what spirit might be though we may speculate.

It is possible that a full body that sort of looks humanoid-like is actually made of totally inorganic matter or energy. One might argue that advanced entities that have long evolved beyond their physical organic bodies might design their inorganic decay free machine bodies into an external form of their ancestral organic species.

Exodus 25:17>22 and 40:34>38 show God at least in one of his forms to be of a cloud nature, a cloud that could be of a water nature. Also at John 3-5 and 4:13>14 within the Samaritan woman story:


Exodus 40:34-38 Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the Tabernacle ... And throughout all their journeys whenever the cloud was taken up from over the tabernacle, the sons of Israel would set out; but if the cloud was not taken up, then they did not set out until the day when it was taken up ... the cloud of the Lord was on the tabernacle by day, and there was fire in it by night...

Jhn 3:5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Jhn 4:13>14 Jesus answered and said to her, “Everyone who drinks of this water will thirst again;
but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him shall never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life.”


That does tend to indicate directly the nature of spirit involves water, hydrogen dioxide, one of the most common and arguably the most remarkably unique chemical molecule in our universe including an absolute necessity for organic DNA life. And note it does not state born of water then spirit but rather possibly both in some way.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Tolworth John

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 10, 2017
8,278
4,680
68
Tolworth
✟369,559.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I'm saying that could have happened in a way similar to this event in 1988:
V: Jesus in Nairobi, Kenya, 1988
i.e. it could be a case of mistaken identity - even if many of the crowd were sure it was actually Jesus.
I'll concede that some in the crowd may not have known Jesus personally and had met him face to face, but only that a few.
There is no point in magicaly appearing from the dead to people who do not know. The point of the resurrection appearances is to demonstrate that he was alive.

The kenya incident is of no importance and is irrelevent as it proves nothing.

That Jesus lived, died and was burried is universally acknowledged by historians. Fact.
That most historians accept that his tomb was found to be empty and that the disciples believed they had met with the risen Jesus is also a fact.

Those who say Jesus did not rise from the dead have vto present viable evedence to prove there claim.
 
Upvote 0

JohnClay

Married Mouth-Breather
Supporter
Oct 27, 2006
1,129
186
Australia
Visit site
✟443,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
I'll concede that some in the crowd may not have known Jesus personally and had met him face to face, but only that a few.
Paul only said they were "brothers and sisters" and that some were living and some were dead. For every other item in the list he mentions their names or whether they were apostles, etc. That implies that no-one in the group knew Jesus personally.

There is no point in magicaly appearing from the dead to people who do not know. The point of the resurrection appearances is to demonstrate that he was alive.
I think it still makes sense if the group thought it was Jesus even if they hadn't met him before. BTW Paul had a vision of Jesus even though he hadn't seen what Jesus actually looks like before.

The kenya incident is of no importance and is irrelevent as it proves nothing....
I think it is a modern example of a large group of people who thought they saw Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

Tolworth John

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 10, 2017
8,278
4,680
68
Tolworth
✟369,559.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Paul only said they were "brothers and sisters" and that some were living and some were dead. For every other item in the list he mentions their names or whether they were apostles, etc. That implies that no-one in the group knew Jesus personally.


I think it still makes sense if the group thought it was Jesus even if they hadn't met him before. BTW Paul had a vision of Jesus even though he hadn't seen what Jesus actually looks like before.


I think it is a modern example of a large group of people who thought they saw Jesus.

Paul didn't want to list 500 names, even if he knew them all.

Yes Paul met Jesus, who also identified himself to him.

So what if people think they have seen Jesus today, it proves nothing.
It is the historical accounts that are important for demonstrating that Jesus rose from the dead.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Davidz777

Newbie
Nov 23, 2012
118
26
SF Bay Area
✟10,303.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Paul only said they were "brothers and sisters" and that some were living and some were dead. For every other item in the list he mentions their names or whether they were apostles, etc. That implies that no-one in the group knew Jesus personally

From a logic basis "Implies" is way too strong a term as that rejects possibilities that were not stated. To suggest all those followers had probably not known Jesus personally rejects common sense that those large crowds that followed him before the Resurrection were not among many that did so afterward. It is like stating Jesus didn't have any believing followers until afterward. One has to understand if someone in such an ancient society was performing supernatural signs, that a whole lot of people are going to be extremely interested. Any of those that actually witnessed such or had reliable first hand information from others they trusted would have been.
 
Upvote 0