|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2005 4:32 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| In Grant's tomb? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
in_seoul_2003
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
...
Last edited by in_seoul_2003 on Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:44 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 7:52 am Post subject: Re: Questions for Muslims |
|
|
| seoulunitarian wrote: |
| Derrek wrote: |
1. Where is the body of Jesus buried?
2. Where is the body of Mohammad buried? |
Question for Christians (of the conservative type):
Do you mean, (of the Biblical type)? I don't think believing that the resurrection matters so much makes a christian a conservative one.
Why does the resurrection matter so much?
Well, Jesus said:
22And he said, "The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life."
That is from Luke 9 but is stated in Mark and Matthew as well. Apparently, Jesus thought his death and resurrection were musts.
Paul has some strong things to say about the importance of resurrection as well:
12But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.
That is from 1 Corinthians.
Any good religion is about life, not about death.
Are those two completely unrelated? I think "any good religion" has to deal with the reality of death.
Focusing on the bodily resurrection draws too much attention to the afterlife, and not enough to the here and now.
No it doesn't. It draws attention to the triumph of life over death. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seoulunitarian
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 6:13 pm Post subject: re: |
|
|
In my first post, I was very clear to distinguish between the importance of the bodily resurrection to that of resurrection spiritually. My question was why is the bodily resurrection of Christ so important to conservative Christians, and that is still my question. Christ was clear that he came "to give life, and to give it more abundantly." I do believe in a type of resurrection (spiritual), but I cannot understand why the actual, physical body of a resurrected Christ is so important. To clarify, I do understand its importance theologically, but practically, I think it's irrelevant.
I'm not sure, but is the OP's intent to pose a contest between Muslims and Christians? Does the OP think there's ample evidence that Christ's body is no longer in the grave somewhere or that, if it is not, it was not stolen by his disciples or others? Though not a scholarly reason to dismiss the bodily resurrection, intentions like these is pragmatic enough reason to stop arguing over the bodily resurrection.
Peace (I sign this way because it is my wish for all),
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 6:56 pm Post subject: Re: re: |
|
|
| seoulunitarian wrote: |
In my first post, I was very clear to distinguish between the importance of the bodily resurrection to that of resurrection spiritually. My question was why is the bodily resurrection of Christ so important to conservative Christians, and that is still my question. Christ was clear that he came "to give life, and to give it more abundantly." I do believe in a type of resurrection (spiritual), but I cannot understand why the actual, physical body of a resurrected Christ is so important. To clarify, I do understand its importance theologically, but practically, I think it's irrelevant.
I'm not sure, but is the OP's intent to pose a contest between Muslims and Christians? Does the OP think there's ample evidence that Christ's body is no longer in the grave somewhere or that, if it is not, it was not stolen by his disciples or others? Though not a scholarly reason to dismiss the bodily resurrection, intentions like these is pragmatic enough reason to stop arguing over the bodily resurrection.
Peace (I sign this way because it is my wish for all),
Daniel |
Fair enough. And the motive of the OP does seem a bit fishy, I agree. However, I wonder if you clear something up for me. I'm just curious, but if Jesus was not resurrected physically, then how was he seen for forty days afterwards? Is that part made up or did his spirit inhabit a different body or was he just spirit but still visible or what? I'm just curious about other ways to explain the Biblical accounts of Christ's having been seen after his crucifixion. I know that some people take the resurrection to be more metaphorical or "spiritual" but I haven't heard the explanations. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seoulunitarian
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 7:34 pm Post subject: Re: re: |
|
|
| flakfizer wrote: |
| seoulunitarian wrote: |
In my first post, I was very clear to distinguish between the importance of the bodily resurrection to that of resurrection spiritually. My question was why is the bodily resurrection of Christ so important to conservative Christians, and that is still my question. Christ was clear that he came "to give life, and to give it more abundantly." I do believe in a type of resurrection (spiritual), but I cannot understand why the actual, physical body of a resurrected Christ is so important. To clarify, I do understand its importance theologically, but practically, I think it's irrelevant.
I'm not sure, but is the OP's intent to pose a contest between Muslims and Christians? Does the OP think there's ample evidence that Christ's body is no longer in the grave somewhere or that, if it is not, it was not stolen by his disciples or others? Though not a scholarly reason to dismiss the bodily resurrection, intentions like these is pragmatic enough reason to stop arguing over the bodily resurrection.
Peace (I sign this way because it is my wish for all),
Daniel |
Fair enough. And the motive of the OP does seem a bit fishy, I agree. However, I wonder if you clear something up for me. I'm just curious, but if Jesus was not resurrected physically, then how was he seen for forty days afterwards? Is that part made up or did his spirit inhabit a different body or was he just spirit but still visible or what? I'm just curious about other ways to explain the Biblical accounts of Christ's having been seen after his crucifixion. I know that some people take the resurrection to be more metaphorical or "spiritual" but I haven't heard the explanations. |
In my opinion, the post-resurrection appearances of Jesus were spiritual in nature, not physical. The gospel passage that refers to Jesus walking through the wall to his disciples gives some credence to this position I think. Of course, the post-resurrection accounts also contain passages that would seem to present a physical body. Though the Bible is important to me, I still consider it more a document of faith than of literal fact, especially in reference to post-resurrection events. I think it's important to keep in mind, that even by conservative estimates, the first gospel (Mark) wasn't written until between AD 49 and 70, years after the events which occurred. Of course, this is due to the fact that Jewish culture was primarily oral in their practice of passing on historical events. But given that time frame, it's probable that some faith perceptions entered into the canon.
Peace,
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seoulunitarian
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 8:58 pm Post subject: re: |
|
|
Also, I want to make it clear that I do not minimalize faith; on the contrary I think it is necessary. Kierkegaard, a Christian himself, said "faith is a kind of madness whose hope comes by virtue of the absurd - the abandonment of conventional logic in response to a higher truth."
Peace,
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:37 am Post subject: Re: re: |
|
|
| seoulunitarian wrote: |
| I'm not sure, but is the OP's intent to pose a contest between Muslims and Christians? |
If you've read even a few of Derek's posts, yoiu be aware that, yes, this was exactly his intention. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
