> Debbie wrote:
>> ... it's transformed that our bodies will be, not
>> "discarded".
>
> Good point, but doesn't transformation of this sort truly imply a discarding
> of our bodies?
>> ... it's transformed that our bodies will be, not
>> "discarded".
>
> Good point, but doesn't transformation of this sort truly imply a discarding
> of our bodies?
DS: No. Except in a somewhat strained
sense of discarding "the way our bodies were". It is quite hard to equate the
normal understandings of "discard" and "transform". If what you are really
saying in your post is, "Yes, our bodies will be transformed, and I would
like to use the word 'discard' for that", then, OK, read no further. We will
just understand that you have an idiosyncratic use for the word
"discard"; you are a heterolexual. :-)
The caterpillar that transforms into a butterfly
might be
> said to be discarding his previous body.
> said to be discarding his previous body.
DS: As
above.
Think about it. The previous body
> was large with very different digestive system and diet requirements and
> without the ability of flight. Paul wrote that flesh and blood cannot
> inherit the kingdom of God and goes to great lengths to explain the great
> difference between the earthly body and the spiritual body.
> was large with very different digestive system and diet requirements and
> without the ability of flight. Paul wrote that flesh and blood cannot
> inherit the kingdom of God and goes to great lengths to explain the great
> difference between the earthly body and the spiritual body.
DS: As above, only in this case
the before and after were more alike than that. Jesus' resurrected body retained
his wounds; not only did he look like a man, but his face and voice were
recognizable (except in cases where people were temporarily kept from perceiving
this), he ate the same kind of food, he was touchable... and, well,
OK, he went through walls! I did say transformed! (There are things
about matter that aren't nailed down yet...)
>
> Debbie wrote:
>> Transformation, and not discard, is the whole
>> point of salvation.
>
> Interesting perspective. Can you elaborate?
DS: Sure. If you simply get rid of a thing, how have
you saved it?
I see a very different
> viewpoint in Scripture. The body must die before it is transformed.
> viewpoint in Scripture. The body must die before it is transformed.
DS: No problem. That is the cool thing about
resurrection. The thing that died actually comes back to life, only it is
different.
That
> is an important issue concerning our salvation (e.g., 1 Cor. 15:36 ff.).
> is an important issue concerning our salvation (e.g., 1 Cor. 15:36 ff.).
DS: "It is sown..., it is raised..." The pronoun refers
to the same thing in each case.
>
> Debbie wrote:
>> Don't forget, there was no body left
>> behind by Jesus anywhere.
>
> True, just as a butterfly does not leave his old body behind.
>
> Debbie wrote:
>> To pretend we can escape our bodies
>> now, is the gnosticism.
>
> Do you have a link for this idea? The term "gnosticism" is a very broad
> term that includes a wide variety of beliefs.
>
> Debbie wrote:
>> Don't forget, there was no body left
>> behind by Jesus anywhere.
>
> True, just as a butterfly does not leave his old body behind.
>
> Debbie wrote:
>> To pretend we can escape our bodies
>> now, is the gnosticism.
>
> Do you have a link for this idea? The term "gnosticism" is a very broad
> term that includes a wide variety of beliefs.
DS: I agree with you about that, David. My
understanding of gnosticism (root gnosis, knowledge) is that
it has to do primarily with a belief in special, restricted access to
superior, esoteric knowledge (in the case of the historical Gnostics,
syncretized from various sources) as a means to salvation. But this
was intrinsically related to a devaluing of the body just because it is
a body, i.e., a view that matter is evil (which is not what Paul is
advocating in the verses you allude to below). I may have been a
bit loose in expressing that above, but I think they would have done
away with their bodies if they
could've!
I don't remember reading of
> any gnostics who claimed to have victory over sin in the way Izzy is talking
> about, but I'm certainly no expert in this field. Most of them did
> emphasize dualism to a great degree, so much so that some taught that one
> could indulge the flesh and not be sinning because their spirit was not
> sinning. *They emphasized gaining knowledge through the spirit* and escaping
> the pitfalls of the material world, including the flesh, but the way they
> did so is far different than anything Izzy wrote. Surely you must recognize
> this. The belief in dualism does not make one a gnostic. Paul taught that
> there was no good thing in the flesh and that we should mortify the deeds of
> the body on a daily basis. He further taught that we should seek the things
> of the spirit and that this is how we apprehend God and partake of life.
> This is classic dualism, is it not?
>
> Peace be with you.
> David Miller.
>
>
> ----------
> "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
>
> If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
>
>
>
> any gnostics who claimed to have victory over sin in the way Izzy is talking
> about, but I'm certainly no expert in this field. Most of them did
> emphasize dualism to a great degree, so much so that some taught that one
> could indulge the flesh and not be sinning because their spirit was not
> sinning. *They emphasized gaining knowledge through the spirit* and escaping
> the pitfalls of the material world, including the flesh, but the way they
> did so is far different than anything Izzy wrote. Surely you must recognize
> this. The belief in dualism does not make one a gnostic. Paul taught that
> there was no good thing in the flesh and that we should mortify the deeds of
> the body on a daily basis. He further taught that we should seek the things
> of the spirit and that this is how we apprehend God and partake of life.
> This is classic dualism, is it not?
>
> Peace be with you.
> David Miller.
>
>
> ----------
> "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
>
> If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
>
>
>
