Resurrection

[Athetotheist]

As I understand Christian doctrine, it says that every human being who dies is to be physically resurrected with the bodies of the righteous being perfected for existence in paradise and the bodies of the unrighteous being cast into hell.

Suppose there is a pair of conjoined twins who share the same body from the neck down. When they die, one of them is a Christian and the other is not. Which of them gets the body in the resurrection?

[JehovahsWitness]

Regarding the specific scripture in Mark you mention, it is generally accepted by bible scholars that the passage was not part of the original text. In the ESV the text is bracketed off and a heading note reads, “Some of the earliest manuscripts do not include 16:9-20.” .

Speaking of Mark 16: 9-10 Meyer's NT Commentary states :

" Now begins the apocryphal fragment of some other evangelical treatise (doubtless written very much in the way of epitome), which has been added as a conclusion of our Gospel."

"The long conclusion (consisting of 12 verses) is found in the Alexandrine Manuscript, the Codex Ephraemi Syri rescriptus, and the Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis. It also appears in the Latin Vulgate, the Curetonian Syriac, and the Syriac Peshitta. But it is omitted in the Sinaitic Manuscript, the Vatican Manuscript No. 1209, the Sinaitic Syriac codex, and the Armenian Version. Certain late manuscripts and versions contain the short conclusion. The Codex Regius of the eighth century C.E. has both conclusions, giving the shorter conclusion first. It prefixes a note to each conclusion, saying that these passages are current in some quarters, though it evidently recognized neither of them as authoritative. - Bible Encylopedia Insight on the Scripture Vol II p. 339

"The Short Conclusion connects much better with Mark 16:8 than does the Long, but neither can be considered an original part of the Gospel of Mark” - Edgar J. Goodspeed, The Goodspeed Parallel New Testament, 1944, p. 127."

[Athetotheist]

all resurrected people will need entirely new bodies, whether they died physically impaired or not.

Why would Jesus have nail wounds in his "new" body after being resurrected?

[JehovahsWitness]

all resurrected people will need entirely new bodies, whether they died physically impaired or not.

Why would Jesus have nail wounds in his "new" body after being resurrected?

By all accounts that was probaly on only two occassions; one to convince the Apostles it was really him and the second, to teach Thomas that hyperbole should be used with caution.

For more on this question please see my earlier post
viewtopic.php?p=967900#p967900

JW



RELATED POSTS


Did Thomas declare Jesus to be Almighty God?
viewtopic.php?p=979091#p979091

[Athetotheist]

For more on this question please see my earlier post
viewtopic.php?p=967900#p967900

If Jesus's face was bruised just before death, that would reasonably have contributed to the impossibility of making a positive identification of his body three days after death. So the conclusion that his expired body simply couldn't be identified to disprove the resurrection is more reasonable than the conclusion that he rose from the dead and went around bruising and un-bruising himself at will.

[unknown soldier]

No, the bible say God will condemn only "the wicked". Someone incapable of thought, is by necessity incapable of intentional wickedness so such a person biblically would not be conndemned.

I suppose that depends on which Bible you cite.

No not really. All the scripture I cited either use the word "wickedness" or "iniquity" (which is simply an marchais Word for wickedness".

There are links to various translations so boucan comparé, you will see there is little variation on the working.

Proverbe 2:22
https://biblehub.com/proverbs/2-22.htm

Psaume 37:10
https://biblehub.com/psalms/37-10.htm

2 Peter 2:9
https://biblehub.com/2_peter/2-9.htm

That has got to be the most blatant instance of cherry-picking I have ever seen. You completely ignored almost everything I posted about unbelievers being condemned to hell.

[JehovahsWitness]

Sorry duplicate--

[JehovahsWitness]

If Jesus's face was bruised just before death, that would reasonably have contributed to the impossibility of making a positive identification of his body three days after death. So the conclusion that his expired body simply couldn't be identified to disprove the resurrection is more reasonable than the conclusion that he rose from the dead and went around bruising and un-bruising himself at will.

I'm sorry you've lost me...who was asked to identify Jesus body three days after his death?

[Athetotheist]

For more on this question please see my earlier post
viewtopic.php?p=967900#p967900

If Jesus's face was bruised just before death, that would reasonably have contributed to the impossibility of making a positive identification of his body three days after death. So the conclusion that his expired body simply couldn't be identified to disprove the resurrection is more reasonable than the conclusion that he rose from the dead and went around bruising and un-bruising himself at will.

I'm sorry you've lost me...who was asked to identify Jesus body three days after his death?

That's supposed to be a big apologist "gotcha"----"If Jesus didn't rise from the dead, why didn't the authorities just bring out his body?" Since the fullness of the face was required to identify a body, there's a perfectly reasonable answer.

[tam]

Peace to you,

Peace to you!

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

Interesting question.

Without getting into a debate on what "Christian doctrines" state (since not all hold to the doctrine of 'hell'), I would suggest that they are each resurrected into their own body. That any 'error' in the flesh that had led to the lack of physical separation or development of individual bodies would be healed. So this would not be an issue.

(that being said, the blood of the lamb saves entire households, just as the blood of the lamb protected the entire household of an Israelite when Death passed over Egypt; so again it might not be an issue... but that might be another topic altogether)


Peace again to you!

How could such an "error" be "healed" without an entirely new body being created?

I don't think that's an issue (though it would not be an entirely new body; the building blocks would already be there). Consider Ezekiel 37:1-14 (valley of the dry bones). https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=NIV

And if the blood of Jesus saves entire households, what need is there for any Christian to evangelize relatives? As long as there's one Christian in the family, shouldn't the whole bunch go to heaven?

Bearing witness to Christ might not be about need (unless of course there is a person who is seeking Him, seeking Truth, seeking God - and a member of their own family might be able to bear witness and serve them). Bearing witness might be more about doing as one is directed (as Philip was directed to go to the Ethiopian; as Peter was directed to go to Cornelius; etc.)... and/or... doing as LOVE compels them. Not fear. But love. Love for God and for His Son of course, and so love for the Truth (so that one is compelled to speak), and also love for one's own household and any in the household who might be seeking as well. Love always hopes.

That is as far as any Christian can go though... bearing witness, planting a seed, possibly watering it just a bit. Because no one comes to the Son unless the Father draws them.


(people being saved from Death - and so granted LIFE - does not mean that they go to heaven; not when the Kingdom is to be upon the earth, but THAT might also be another topic, lol).



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[tam]

Peace to you,

Without getting into a debate on what "Christian doctrines" state (since not all hold to the doctrine of 'hell'), I would suggest that they are each resurrected into their own body. That any 'error' in the flesh that had led to the lack of physical separation or development of individual bodies would be healed. So this would not be an issue.

I've often wondered why God doesn't correct his "errors in the flesh" now rather than wait until the resurrection. For that matter, why does he goof to begin with?

Well, they're not his errors. There is sin (error) and death in the flesh, our bodies, hence we can get sick and we die. But we do not have the bodies that Adam had (before he sinned and ate from the tree of knowing good/life and bad/death). We have the bodies that Adam had AFTER he ate from the tree of knowing good/life and bad/death. We inherited sin (in the flesh) from Adam, since we are made in his image (after he sinned and ate from the tree of knowing good/life and bad/death).

Another explanation for congenital deformities is that we are all the product of unconscious and very imperfect natural forces that do not and cannot care if we are born "perfect" or not.

The flesh is imperfect (has sin/error and death in it). But it did not start out that way.

(that being said, the blood of the lamb saves entire households, just as the blood of the lamb protected the entire household of an Israelite when Death passed over Egypt; so again it might not be an issue... but that might be another topic altogether)

The "blood of the lamb" can split up families too which is what Christ reputedly said he would do. It's one prophecy of his that did come to pass.

Not the blood of the lamb, but the truth that He spoke (and that He is), perhaps, yes... albeit temporarily. If there are members of a household where one or some are for Christ and one or some are against Christ, then there will be at least some kind of division.

But not because we (who belong to Christ) are supposed to shun or hate or turn away from our own flesh and blood. Some of our own flesh and blood might do this to us, but we are not to do that to them.

Isaiah 58:6

“Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen:
to loose the chains of injustice
and untie the cords of the yoke,
to set the oppressed free
and break every yoke?
7
Is it not to share your food with the hungry
and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter—
when you see the naked, to clothe them,
and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?






Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy