Okay, I thought I'd ask this one over here.
Helemon, on Post Mo brought it up some time ago, and I always thought he had an extremely good point.
Our bodies, everything that we are made of is re-cycled matter. That means that I could have atoms in me
that were once plants, dinosaurs, fish, trees, maybe even a couple of kings. My physical body belongs to this
physical universe.
When we die, why on earth would we need our body again in it's physical form? (If we give as taken that life continues)
And if we believe in a physical resurrection using our own unique make up of material (doesn't it renew itself every few months anyway)
then which bits of material, and which bits go to which body - the dinosaur, the tree, the flower, Shakespeare, me!?
So, for me, if they found Jesus' bones. It would make absolutely no difference to my belief in him as a son of god, and wonderful
teacher. He himself said we are all children of god.
Physical Resurrection has some inherent problems to it in my opinion.
What think you?
Mary
Theological implications if the body of Jesus is found?
Re: Theological implications if the body of Jesus is found?
Miss Taken wrote:Okay, I thought I'd ask this one over here.
Helemon, on Post Mo brought it up some time ago, and I always thought he had an extremely good point.
Our bodies, everything that we are made of is re-cycled matter. That means that I could have atoms in me
that were once plants, dinosaurs, fish, trees, maybe even a couple of kings. My physical body belongs to this
physical universe.
When we die, why on earth would we need our body again in it's physical form? (If we give as taken that life continues)
And if we believe in a physical resurrection using our own unique make up of material (doesn't it renew itself every few months anyway)
then which bits of material, and which bits go to which body - the dinosaur, the tree, the flower, Shakespeare, me!?
So, for me, if they found Jesus' bones. It would make absolutely no difference to my belief in him as a son of god, and wonderful
teacher. He himself said we are all children of god.
Physical Resurrection has some inherent problems to it in my opinion.
What think you?
Mary
How could we possibly verify that it is indeed his body? We cannot. We could carbon date it but all that would tell us is that the body stopped taking in certain isotopes at a certain point in time, quite accurately I might add.
And crawling on the planet's face
Some insects called the human race
Lost in time
And lost in space...and meaning
Some insects called the human race
Lost in time
And lost in space...and meaning
Okay, maybe we can keep this in the hypothetical then Vegas
Whether or not Jesus' body has been found (and I'm quite intrigued by the evidence so far)
do you think physical resurrection has some inherant problems given that we are made up
of atoms from all sorts of life, and that our cells are continually renewing?
Whether or not Jesus' body has been found (and I'm quite intrigued by the evidence so far)
do you think physical resurrection has some inherant problems given that we are made up
of atoms from all sorts of life, and that our cells are continually renewing?
Miss Taken wrote:Okay, maybe we can keep this in the hypothetical then Vegas
Whether or not Jesus' body has been found (and I'm quite intrigued by the evidence so far)
do you think physical resurrection has some inherant problems given that we are made up
of atoms from all sorts of life, and that our cells are continually renewing?
Definitely the implications of what our specific chemical makeup is shoots holes in the idea of resurrection. But I think these ideas are themselves constructs based on other silly constructs.
And crawling on the planet's face
Some insects called the human race
Lost in time
And lost in space...and meaning
Some insects called the human race
Lost in time
And lost in space...and meaning
Whether or not Jesus' body has been found (and I'm quite intrigued by the evidence so far)
do you think physical resurrection has some inherant problems given that we are made up
of atoms from all sorts of life, and that our cells are continually renewing?
I don't see any problem with it. An atom is an atom and I don't think the promise of resurrection guarentees all the specific atoms that were associated with the original body will once again be associated with it.
When we die, why on earth would we need our body again in it's physical form?
For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy; D&C 93:33
Obviously there is a need, but not having been resurrected, I can't describe it for you as this is all that has been revealed as far as I can tell.
I don't see a problem with the possibility of a physical reaction especially knowing that within a single cell of your body is your complete genetic code to reproduce you. Secondly, the atoms and molecules that make you up now are not the same as the atoms that make you up 20 years from now. Last of all, if our DNA is in fact fallen and defective, who would really want to use exactly the same stuff in creating a perfect resurrected body?
The problem is in how the story is laid out and in past statements by other prophets. The simple statement that, "He is not here but is risen," could take on an entirely different meaning than we originally interpreted. The resurrection is a pretty important doctrine in Christianity in my view. I just couldn't imagine the religion without it.
The second problem for Mormonism is that modern prophets have stated that Christ's resurrected body is basically the same material as what died but transformed into a glorified resurrected material. This doesn't really leave behind room for the full skeleton to be left behind in the tomb.
I've always wondered why Christ's resurrected and perfected body would still have nail prints in his hands and feet. Seeing the nail prints there would lead one to believe he was just in a catatonic state and didn't really die. Yet on the contrary I don't see how someone could walk down the road after having a nail driven through each foot.
The problem is in how the story is laid out and in past statements by other prophets. The simple statement that, "He is not here but is risen," could take on an entirely different meaning than we originally interpreted. The resurrection is a pretty important doctrine in Christianity in my view. I just couldn't imagine the religion without it.
The second problem for Mormonism is that modern prophets have stated that Christ's resurrected body is basically the same material as what died but transformed into a glorified resurrected material. This doesn't really leave behind room for the full skeleton to be left behind in the tomb.
I've always wondered why Christ's resurrected and perfected body would still have nail prints in his hands and feet. Seeing the nail prints there would lead one to believe he was just in a catatonic state and didn't really die. Yet on the contrary I don't see how someone could walk down the road after having a nail driven through each foot.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.