Corpus-Paul

["Stevan Davies" <miser17 AT epix.net>]

John Dickson:
> Since we have raised this point several times already, let me make some =
> comments and ask some questions.
> 
> First, Paul does not appear to me to conflate Christ's resurrection and =
> his appearances in/to others, as if the former consisted in the latter. =
> Is this not clear from 1 Cor 15:4b? Christ was raised at a point in time =
> (TH hHMERA TH TRITH) and subsequently 'appeared' to others. Furthermore, =
> the fact that 'resurrection' rather than 'appearance' language =
> predominates in Paul's discussions of this theme weakens the possibility =
> that Paul thought Christ to be raised only in the sense that he =
> appears/lives to/in Christians, as has been suggested in a previous =
> post.

I may be the suggestor you have in mind, but I do not think "Paul thought 
Christ to be raised ONLY in the sense that he appears/lives to/in 
Christians." That is a consequence of his resurrection but not the be
all and end all as I see it.

> Secondly, when Paul says that the one who was crucified and then buried =
> was also EGHGERTAI (1 Cor 15:4b), what else can this mean other than =
> that the dead and buried body of Jesus came back to life? We may find =
> this notion philosophically repulsive or historically repugnant, but we =
> are discussing here what Paul thought, not what actually happened. Does =
> this not seem to be the obvious meaning of this text?=20

No. It's not quite that obvious. See below.

> Thirdly, there can be little doubt that Paul's language of and belief in =
> the resurrected Christ derived from Palestinian Christian tradition (Rom =
> 1:2-4). What conception of resurrection from the dead are we to imagine =
> such a tradition taught? A non-physical 'resurrection' seems extremely =
> unlikely. Thus, is it the opinion of those who think Paul teaches only a =
> non-physical resurrection of Christ that he has inherited the language =
> of the tradition but filled it with new meaning? This would not be =
> amazing in itself (I am sure he has done it to a number of his terms) =
> but it would require good evidence. Where is this evidence?=20

Well, it raises in my mind the question "if Christ was raised in his
physical body, what happened to it?" Those who believe in a 
resurrection of the body evidently expect that body to remain in
perpetuity. But Christ did not remain embodied on earth in 
perpetutity. Did he live on for awhile longer and then die again? No.

Romans 6:9 For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, 
he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him.

Did this physical body, around what 5'6" 150 pounds go to
be at God's physical? right hand? 

Romans 8:34  Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died--more 
than that, who was raised to life--is at the right hand of
God and is also interceding for us.

Isn't it much more likely that raised to life - at the right hand of 
God is one event? I think we agree that raised - appearances are
not the same event (cf. your comments above). The sequence 
raised - appeared - ascended does not seem to be Paul's sequence
but rather raised -ascended seem to be synonymous, leaving no
space for his physical body to have been back in Judea. 

> Fifthly, I would be interested in the opinion of others as to whether =
> the desire of some sections of scholarship to read into Paul a =
> non-physical resurrection for Jesus is, in fact, symptomatic of an =
> attempt to domesticate Paul into our modern philosophical and historical =
> outlook. Since we find the notion of bodily resurrection hard to swallow =
> we reinterpret Paul as saying the resurrection of Jesus is fundamentally =
> a subjective phenomenon that believers may experience.=20

I dunno. Ascriptions of extrinsic motivations to scholars to account for 
their 
conclusions, when they themselves do not announce such motivations,
seems usually to be a mistaken endeavor. If they are right, they're 
right, and if they're wrong they're wrong. Why they are motivated to 
do what they do is almost inevitably going to give rise to ad hominem
fallacies.

Steve Davies
College Misericordia