Eschatology is the study of last things, the end of the world. Beyond that is our eternal state. What is the final disposition of humanity? The traditional Christian view has always been that our physical bodies will be resurrected; we will continue to exist in some sort of perfected physical form. Not everyone agrees with this view. Some heretical forms of Christianity deny a physical resurrection. Those who hold the so-called Full Preterist view[9] believe in a strictly spiritual resurrection; only our non-corporeal souls ascend to Heaven at our death. Liberal Christianity[10] denies the physical resurrection as part of its rejection of miracles in toto. Neither Full Preterism's nor Liberal Christianity's view of non-physical resurrection is consistent with scripture.
We will examine the scriptures used to argue for physical and non-physical resurrection. Other issues of eschatological theology, such as millenialism, the intermediate state (of the soul between death and the resurrection), baptism for the dead[11], and other related topics that might be brought up in the passages we will examine are outside the scope of this study. However, in addition to apologetics for the orthodox belief in a physical resurrection, we will also look at historical context to understand the terms of the discussion in Scripture.
1 Corinthians 15 is Paul's premiere essay on the topic of Resurrection and will be the central focus of this study, around which it will be structured. On the basis of a few select verses in this chapter, ripped from their context, it is argued by the heterodox non-physical resurrection views that Paul did not teach a physical resurrection.
1 Co 15:44it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body....1 Co 15:46However, the spiritual did not come first, but the natural, then the spiritual. 15:47The first man is from the earth, made of dust; the second man is from heaven....1 Co 15:50Now this is what I am saying, brothers and sisters: Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.[2]
To correctly understand these verses, we must examine the greater context. That context includes not just the whole of chapter 15, but also the whole of scripture and the historical context in which 1 Corinthians was written by Paul and received by its addressees.
1 Co 15:1Now I want to make clear for you, brothers and sisters, the gospel that I preached to you, that you received and on which you stand, 15:2and by which you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. 15:3For I passed on to you as of first importance what I also received—that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures, 15:4and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day according to the scriptures, 15:5and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 15:6Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 15:7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 15:8Last of all, as though to one born at the wrong time, he appeared to me also. 15:9For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 15:10But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me has not been in vain. In fact, I worked harder than all of them—yet not I, but the grace of God with me. 15:11Whether then it was I or they, this is the way we preach and this is the way you believed.
This paragraph is Paul's introduction to his essay on the resurrection. The first two verses are a long, complicated sentence in the Greek, complexity which is reflected in many English translations as well. It will prove constructive to break it down. The core of the sentence is the statement "I want to make clear for you... the gospel". The "you" being addressed is adelphoi, literally "brothers", but plural masculine is often inclusive of both genders[12]. Paul is addressing all the believers in Corinth, not just the men. The word "gospel" is modified by four phrases:
The final phrase is further modified by the conditional "if you hold firmly to the message I preached to you", then finally a statement of the alternative to being saved if the gospel were to be false "unless you believed in vain." The alternative situation is not contrasting what happens if you don't believe, but rather what happens if you are not saved in spite of that belief.
The NIV simplifies this by breaking it up into three sentences.
1 Co 15:1Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 15:2By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. [NIV]
The point that Paul is making here, and that he will expand upon, is the objective truthfulness of the gospel message and the importance of that truthfulness with regard to the efficaciousness of the gospel.
Scholars recognize verses 3 through 7 as a primitive creedal statement, although it is perhaps more accurately called a testimonial statement with its long list of witnesses, most of whom would have still been alive (v. 6). Two sets of witnesses are cited: scriptures and disciples. The core of the gospel message is that "Christ died for our sins... was buried.. was raised on the third day... and... appeared". We see this emphasis in the four Gospels too which are effectively accounts of the crucifixion and resurrection introduced by short accounts of his prior ministry[3]. It is probable that this creedal statement with its testimonials is not Paul's composition but is a liturgical statement memorized and well known throughout the church, and Paul is quoting it.[7]
In verses 8 through 10, Paul adds his own testimony to the other witnesses. It is not just the account of what he has seen, but the change in his life, what he has become ("by the grace of God I am what I am", which I would understand ingressively, that is "I have become what I am"), that testifies to the veracity of the gospel message. He summarizes in verse 11 that the gospel preached by himself and the other witnesses is the same, and that it is this gospel that the Corinthians believed.
This stands in contrast to Liberal Christianity's de-emphasis on historical veracity of the Gospel events. Bultmann, for example, thought he could "demythologize" the New Testament yet still maintain a true gospel message. Paul would call such a belief "vain". The scenario proposed by Liberal Christianity is that of course Jesus wasn't physically resurrected, but the early church experienced Jesus in perhaps visions. Paul taught a spiritual resurrection. Then only later, the Gospel writers invented a physical resurrection. They assume their conclusion, however. It is only the desire to not see the Gospel accounts as accurately representing the beliefs of the early church, let alone the actual teachings and life of Jesus, that leads to a late dating for the Gospels. In actuality there is really little, if any, evidence for dating the Gospels to after Paul's time[8].
The creedal statement quoted by Paul here cites "scripture" behind the primary gospel events. Most commentaries assume that by "scripture" Paul must have meant the Old Testament. However, in 1 Timothy 5:18, Paul cites a verse from Luke 10:7 as scripture, and in 2 Peter 3:16, Peter refers to Paul's letters as "scripture". There is no need to assume that Paul must have meant the Old Testament here. In fact, the difficulty of identifying what Old Testament passages the statements would be alluding to is an embarrassment. Although there are passages that prophesy the gospel events in a general way, such as Isaiah 53:5-6, Psalm 16:8-11, the precise details that are said to be "according to scripture" are not found in the Old Testament. They are, of course, found in the Gospels. The scriptures in mind are more likely an early canonical Gospel (Mark's is a likely candidate since Matthew and Luke's were probably not written till the early 60's while Paul wrote 1 Corinthians in the mid 50's) or a proto-Gospel that stands behind the canonical ones (Luke 1:1-4). Thus the Liberal view of an evolution of the resurrection doctrine is not supported by actual historical evidence, but rather it is the assumption behind the Liberal interpretation of the scriptures.
1 Co 15:12Now if Christ is being preached as raised from the dead, how can some of you say there is no resurrection of the dead? 15:13But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 15:14And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is futile and your faith is empty. 15:15Also, we are found to be false witnesses about God, because we have testified against God that he raised Christ from the dead, when in reality he did not raise him, if indeed the dead are not raised. 15:16For if the dead are not raised, then not even Christ has been raised. 15:17And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is useless; you are still in your sins. 15:18Furthermore, those who have fallen asleep in Christ have also perished. 15:19For if only in this life we have hope in Christ, we should be pitied more than anyone.
In the next paragraph, Paul turns from the gospel in general to the resurrection specifically. Evidently the Corinthians thought they could dispense with the resurrection, much like Bultmann's demythologization (there is truly "nothing new under the sun"!), and still have the gospel. Paul in no uncertain terms denies that this is possible. If we can't be raised, then neither could Christ. If Christ was not raised in historical fact, then the gospel is futile and empty. Then the witnesses have been lying (the "we" in verse 15 are the witnesses cited above: Paul, the Apostles, and the other disciples). Then when we die we will simply cease to exist. Then we "should be pitied more than anyone" for ever believing otherwise.
To understand why the Corinthians were having trouble with the concept of resurrection, we need to examine the historical context here. Chapter 32 of Bulfinch's Mythology synopsizes a portion Virgil's Anneid that sheds light on what the ancient Pagans believed. We'll look at a few extracts below.[1] Here we'll see that the Pagan concept of the afterlife is as a disembodied spirit.
.....
Then a roaring was heard in the earth, the woods on the hill-tops were shaken, and the howling of dogs announced the approach of the deities. "Now," said the Sibyl, "summon up your courage, for you will need it." She descended into the cave, and Æneas followed. Before the threshold of hell they passed through a group of beings who are enumerated as Griefs and avenging Cares, pale Diseases and melancholy Age, Fear and Hunger that tempt to crime, Toil, Poverty, and Death,- forms horrible to view. The Furies spread the couches there, and Discord, whose hair was of vipers tied up with a bloody fillet. Here also were the monsters, Briareus, with his hundred arms, Hydras hissing, and Chimaeras breathing fire. Æneas shuddered at the sight, drew his sword and would have struck, but the Sibyl restrained him. They then came to the black river Cocytus, where they found the ferryman, Charon, old and squalid, but strong and vigorous, who was receiving passengers of all kinds into his boat, magnanimous heroes, boys and unmarried girls, as numerous as the leaves that fall at autumn, or the flocks that fly southward at the approach of winter. They stood pressing for a passage and longing to touch the opposite shore, But the stern ferryman took in only such as he chose, driving the rest back. Æneas, wondering at the sight, asked the Sibyl, "Why this discrimination?" She answered, "Those who are taken on board the bark are the souls of those who have received due burial rites; the host of others who have remained unburied are not permitted to pass the flood but wander a hundred years, and flit to and fro about the shore, till at last they are taken over." Æneas grieved at recollecting some of his own companions who had perished in the storm. At that moment he beheld Palinurus, his pilot, who fell overboard and was drowned. He addressed him and asked him the cause of his misfortune. Palinurus replied that the rudder was carried away, and he, clinging to it, was swept away with it. He besought Æneas most urgently to extend to him his hand and take him in company to the opposite shore. But the Sibyl rebuked him for the wish thus to transgress the laws of Pluto; but consoled him by informing him that the people of the shore where his body had been wafted by the waves should be stirred up by prodigies to give it due burial, and that the promontory should bear the name of Cape Palinurus, which it does to this day. Leaving Palinurus consoled by these words, they approached the boat. Charon, fixing his eyes sternly upon the advancing warrior, demanded by what right he, living and armed, approached that shore. To which the Sibyl replied that they would commit no violence, that Æneas's only object was to see his father, and finally exhibited the golden branch, at sight of which Charon's wrath relaxed, and he made haste to turn his bark to the shore, and receive them on board. The boat, adapted only to the light freight of bodiless spirits, groaned under the weight of the hero.
[see source: Virgil's Aeneid, Book VI, lines 355-540].......
Ixion was there, fastened to the circumference of a wheel ceaselessly revolving; and Sisyphus, whose task was to roll a huge stone up to a hill-top, but when the steep was well-nigh gained, the rock, repulsed by some sudden force, rushed again-headlong down to the plain. Again he toiled at it, while the sweat bathed all his weary limbs, but all to no effect. There was Tantalus, who stood in a pool, his chin level with the water, yet he was parched with thirst, and found nothing to assuage it; for when he bowed his hoary head, eager to quaff, the water fled away, leaving the ground at his feet all dry. Tall trees laden with fruit stooped their heads to him, pears, pomegranates, apples, and luscious figs; but when with a sudden grasp he tried to seize them winds whirled them high above his reach.
[see also: Plato's Gorgias 523-526]
[see also: Ixion - painting by Cornelis van Haarlem - 28K]
[see source: Virgil's Aeneid, Book VI, lines 708-809]The Sibyl now warned Æneas it was time to turn from these melancholy regions and seek the city of the blessed. They passed through a middle tract of darkness, and came upon the Elysian fields, the groves where the happy reside. They breathed a freer air, and saw all objects clothed in a purple light. The region has a sun and stars of its own. The inhabitants were enjoying themselves in various ways, some in sports on the grassy turf, in games of strength or skill, others dancing or singing. Orpheus struck the chords of his lyre, and called forth ravishing sounds. Here Æneas saw the founders of the Trojan state, magnanimous heroes who lived in happier times. He gazed with admiration on the war chariots and glittering arms now reposing in disuse. Spears stood fixed in the ground, and the horses, unharnessed, roamed over the plain. The same pride in splendid armour and generous steeds which the old heroes felt in life, accompanied them here. He saw another group feasting and listening to the strains of music. They were in a laurel grove, whence the great river Po has its origin, and flows out among men. Here dwelt those who fell by wounds received in their country's cause, holy priests also, and poets who have uttered thoughts worthy of Apollo, and others who have contributed to cheer and adorn life by their discoveries in the useful arts, and have made their memory blessed by rendering service to mankind. They wore snow-white fillets about their brows. The Sibyl addressed a group of these, and inquired where Anchises was to be found. They were directed where to seek him, and soon found him in a verdant valley, where he was contemplating the ranks of his posterity, their destinies and worthy deeds to be achieved in coming times. When he recognized Æneas approaching, he stretched out both hands to him, while tears flowed freely. "Have you come at last," said he, "long expected, and do I behold you after such perils past? O my son, how have I trembled for you as I have watched your career!" To which Æneas replied, "O father! your image was always before me to guide and guard me." Then he endeavoured to enfold his father in his embrace, but his arms enclosed only an unsubstantial image.
[see source: Virgil's Aeneid, Book VI, lines 810-911]
[see also: A Roman View of the Afterlife - The Dream of Scipio]
[see also: Underworld and Afterlife]......
1 Co 15:20But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 15:21For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead also came through a man. 15:22For just as in Adam all die, so also all will be made alive in Christ. 15:23But each in his own order: Christ, the firstfruits; then when Christ comes, those who belong to him. 15:24Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, when he has brought to an end all rule and all authority and power. 15:25For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 15:26The last enemy to be eliminated is death. 15:27For he has put everything in subjection under his feet. But when it says “everything” has been put in subjection, it is clear that this does not include the one who put everything in subjection to him. 15:28And when all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will be subjected to the one who subjected everything to him, so that God may be all in all.
Paul now draws a tight connection between the resurrection of Jesus and the resurrection of all Christians.[4] Jesus' resurrection is the firstfruits of the more general resurrection. We are to understand from this that his resurrection and our resurrection are essentially of the same nature: both are physical or both are non-corporeal. See Romans 6:5 where Paul states this same dogma: "For if we have become united with him in the likeness of his death, we will certainly also be united in the likeness of his resurrection."
The Gospel accounts give the orthodox view of Jesus' resurrection. First we have the empty tomb: Matthew 28:1-15, Luke 24:1-12, 22-23, and John 20:1-9. The empty tomb makes no sense if it was not the body that was resurrected.
Luke 24:36-43 makes several points to emphasize that the resurrection had physically happened:
Lk 24:36While they were saying these things, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” 24:37But they were startled and terrified, thinking they saw a ghost. 24:38Then he said to them, “Why are you frightened, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? 24:39Look at my hands and my feet; it’s me! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones like you see I have.” 24:40When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet. 24:41And while they still could not believe it (because of their joy) and were amazed, he said to them, “Do you have anything here to eat?” 24:42So they gave him a piece of broiled fish, 24:43and he took it and ate it in front of them.
In John 20:20 we have another account of this episode where he shows his hands and his side (again to point out the wounds).
Jn 20:20When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord.
Then later, in John 20:24-28, when Thomas is with the group, Jesus invites him to touch the wounds, finally erasing his doubts.
Jn 20:24Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. 20:25The other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he replied, “Unless I see the wounds from the nails in his hands, and put my finger into the wounds from the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will never believe it!” 20:26Eight days later the disciples were again together in the house, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” 20:27Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and examine my hands. Extend your hand and put it into my side. Do not continue in your unbelief, but believe.” 20:28Thomas replied to him, “My Lord and my God!”
Also, the women Jesus appeared to in Matthew 28:9 were able to grasp his feet. So, there is no doubting that the Gospel accounts teach a physical resurrection of Jesus' body.
Acts also makes it clear that Jesus' resurrection was physical. Peter, preaching to those who witnessed the miracle of tongues, cited Psalm 16:10 when pointing out that Jesus' body did not see decay because he was raised (Acts 2:31-32). In Acts 10:39-41, Peter told Cornelius that the Apostles ate and drank with Jesus after he was raised. In Acts 13:34-35 Paul sites the same prophecy as Peter above:
Ac 13:34But regarding the fact that he has raised Jesus from the dead, never again to be in a state of decay, God has spoken in this way: ‘I will give you the holy and trustworthy promises made to David.’ 13:35Therefore he also says in another psalm, ‘You will not permit your Holy One to experience decay.’
Paul also applied this cessation of decay with regard to our resurrection in Romans 8:19-23.
Ro 8:19For the creation eagerly waits for the revelation of the sons of God. 8:20For the creation was subjected to futility—not willingly but because of God who subjected it—in hope 8:21that the creation itself will also be set free from the bondage of decay into the glorious freedom of God’s children. 8:22For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers together until now. 8:23Not only this, but we ourselves also, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we eagerly await our adoption, the redemption of our bodies. [emphasis added]
Since Luke was Paul's traveling companion and the author of Luke-Acts, it is inconceivable that his resurrection theology would be significantly different from Paul's. Jesus himself refers to a physical resurrection in Matthew 10:28, where he refers to both the soul and body going to Hell, making it clear that our resurrection is physical.
1 Co 15:35But someone will say, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?” 15:36Fool! What you sow will not come to life unless it dies. 15:37And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare seed—perhaps of wheat or something else. 15:38But God gives it a body just as he planned, and to each of the seeds a body of its own. 15:39All flesh is not the same: People have one flesh, animals have another, birds and fish another. 15:40And there are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies. The glory of the heavenly body is one sort and the earthly another. 15:41There is a glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon and another glory of the stars, for star differs from star in glory.
Even in the Gospel accounts, although Jesus' body is still physical, it is not simply reanimated. In Luke 24:30-31[5], Jesus was able to conceal his identity, then vanish from the two disciples' sight, and in John 20:26[6], he was able to enter a locked room. Resurrection also differs from simple resuscitation in another fundamental way. A body that is simply resuscitated, such as Lazarus' (John 11), will eventually die again. But Jesus is now immortal (see on 1 Corinthians 15:42-44 below). He will not die again.
The Corinthians presumably imagined resurrection as a crude resuscitation and were repulsed by the idea. But Paul here explains how there are many kinds of bodies. Note that all these examples are of physical bodies. Ghosts are decidedly absent from his list. Paul explains that the resurrection body rises transformed, analogous to the way a seed is buried and "dies" to grow into a plant. There is continuity of identity between the body of the seed and the body of the plant, but they are two different kinds of bodies. There are many kinds of flesh in living items was well as many kinds of inanimate matter in non-living items (Verse 41 makes it clear that the distinction between heavenly and earthly bodies in verse 40 refers to astronomical items, and not to angels vs. men).
1 Co 15:42It is the same with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable, what is raised is imperishable. 15:43It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 15:44it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.
Here Paul makes explicit connection to the seed metaphor. The body that is buried is transformed into the body that is raised. The point is not that a body is buried, and a ghost is raised. Taken out of context, and in English translation, verse 44 is easy to mistake as making such an implication. But the words translated "natural" and "spiritual" here are contrasting moral qualities. In both cases we still have bodies, which implies a physical object, not a body and a ghost.
The Greek word translated "natural" here is PSUXIKOS. In 1 Corinthians 2:14, PSUXIKOS DE ANTHROPOS means an unbeliever (a "natural man"). In James 3:15, it is applied to wisdom, to mean wisdom that is not of God. In Jude 17, it refers to people who are scoffers of Christ. The word "spiritual", PNEUMATIKOS, is used in contrast with the PSUXIKOS . See for example 1 Corinthians 2:14-15 which contrasts the "natural man" with a PNEUMATIKOS, a spiritual man.
1 Co 2:14The unbeliever [Grk "natural person"] does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him. And he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 2:15The one who is spiritual discerns all things, yet he himself is understood by no one.
1 Co 15:45So also it is written, “The first man, Adam, became a living person; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit.” 15:46However, the spiritual did not come first, but the natural, then the spiritual. 15:47The first man is from the earth, made of dust; the second man is from heaven. 15:48Like the one made of dust, so too are those made of dust, and like the one from heaven, so too those who are heavenly. 15:49And just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, let us also bear the image of the man of heaven.
The contrast between natural and spiritual is continued here as the contrast between Adam and Jesus. But it does not say we cease to be physical. In fact verse 49 emphasizes the opposite when it says "just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, let us also bear the image of the man of heaven." [emphasis added]. Note the "also", not "instead".
1 Co 15:50Now this is what I am saying, brothers and sisters: Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 15:51Listen, I will tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— 15:52in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 15:53For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. 15:54Now when this perishable puts on the imperishable, and this mortal puts on immortality, then the saying that is written will happen,
“Death has been swallowed up in victory.”
15:55“Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?”15:56The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 15:57But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ!
Verse 50, taken out of context, seems to contradict our thesis -- "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God". It would also seem to contradict Luke 24:39 that we sited above: "a ghost does not have flesh and bones like you see I have". But consider the fuller context here to see what Paul means. In verses 51 and 52 he twice says we will be changed. Verse 53 and 54a make the point that "this perishable body must put on the imperishable....". That is, the perishable body is not replaced with something different, but takes on something additional and is transformed. Remember earlier Paul's discourse on how different flesh and objects have different attributes ("glory"). The old body of flesh and blood is transformed into a different kind of body, but there is continuity between the two. Paul's use of the word "flesh" here and elsewhere emphasizes the fallen, sinful nature, where as Jesus' use of the word emphasizes the physical, solid, material nature. They mean different things by "flesh" and therefore do not contradict each other.
Romans 8:5-11 makes this usage of the words "flesh" and "spirit" very clear, plus it ends with an explicit statement of physical resurrection.
Ro 8:5For those who live according to the flesh have their outlook shaped by the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit have their outlook shaped by the things of the Spirit. 8:6For the outlook of the flesh is death, but the outlook of the Spirit is life and peace, 8:7because the outlook of the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to the law of God, nor is it able to do so. 8:8Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. 8:9You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, this person does not belong to him. 8:10But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is your life because of righteousness. 8:11Moreover if the Spirit of the one who raised Jesus from the dead lives in you, the one who raised Christ from the dead will also make your mortal bodies alive through his Spirit who lives in you. [emphasis added]
Paul speaks of transformation elsewhere too. In Philippians 3:21, he wrote:
Php 3:20But our citizenship is in heaven—and we also await a savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, 3:21who will transform these humble bodies of ours into the likeness of his glorious body by means of that power by which he is able to subject all things to himself.
Also note the details in one of Paul's earliest letters, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18:
1 Th 4:13Now we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve like the rest who have no hope. 4:14For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, so also we believe that God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep as Christians. 4:15For we tell you this by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will surely not go ahead of those who have fallen asleep. 4:16For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a shout of command, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 4:17Then we who are alive, who are left, will be suddenly caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord always. 4:18Therefore encourage one another with these words.
The relevant points are in verse 14, where, when Jesus returns, he brings with him those Christians who have died, and then, in verse 16, where the dead Christians are resurrected. If the resurrected are just disembodied souls floating around, what does it mean for them to come back to earth to be resurrected (are they playing peek-a-boo with Satan or something?). Rather our souls go to be with Christ upon death (see 2 Corinthians 5), then we come back with him and are bodily resurrected at the "end of the world".
By lifting a few passages out of context some have attempted to argue against a physical resurrection. Some Corinthians did this because their Pagan background caused them to think of the afterlife in terms of being ephemeral ghosts. In more modern times Full Preterists begin with the presupposition that all scriptural prophecy has already been fulfilled. This leads them to conclude the resurrection, rather then being a future event, is something that has been happening upon believers' death, and has nothing to do with the physical body. Liberal Christianity, presupposing that the miraculous doesn't really ever happen, argues that the belief in the resurrection must have evolved.
We have seen that interpreting certain of Paul's statements to say that the resurrection is only of the spirit fails to properly take into account the way Paul uses the words elsewhere. Paul insisted he taught the same gospel as the disciples who had seen the resurrected Christ. He emphasized the historical reality of Christ's resurrection and how that was the assurance of our resurrection. Both he and the other disciples, especially Luke, taught a physical resurrection.
The Full Preterist view can only be sustained by tortured misinterpretation of scripture in the service of a faulty presupposition. The Liberal Christian view is not tenable either. Only by picking a few verses out of context can Paul be imagined to have a different view on resurrection than the Gospel writers. The context shows that Paul did not refer to a non-physical resurrection in the passages in question, and elsewhere, he clearly teaches a physical resurrection.
[1] Public domain text found at http://www.bulfinch.org/fables/bull32.html.
[2] Scripture quotations are from the NET (http://www.netbible.org) unless otherwise specified.
[3] I don't recall where I heard this witticism. It is not original with me.
[4] Paul doesn't say anything here about what happens to those that are not his. This passage also hints at the timing of the resurrection and other topics, but these are beyond the scope of this essay.
[5] Lk 24:30When he had taken his place at the table with them, he took the bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them. 24:31At this point their eyes were opened and they recognized him. Then he vanished out of their sight.
[6] Jn 20:26Eight days later the disciples were again together in the house, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!”
[7] Habermas, The Historical Jesus. pp. 152-158.
[8] Robinson, Redating the New Testament.
[9] The Full Preterist view presupposes that all Biblical prophecy has already been fulfilled.
[10] It is questionable that one should apply the word "Christianity" to this view. The term is used here only because it would be used by those holding this view.
[11] 1 Corinthians 15:29.
[12] Bauer, "ADELPHOS", A Greek-English Lexicon.
W. Bauer et al. 2000. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. (AKA, BDAG)
Thomas Bulfinch. Bulfinch's Mythology. (1993 Modern Library Edition). See also http://www.bulfinch.org.
Rudolf Bultmann. New Testament & Mythology (an Other Basic Writings). Selected, edited, an translated by Shubert M. Ogen. 1984.
Kenneth O. Gangel. 1968. "According to the Scriptures". Bibliotheca Sacra (Vol. 125, pp. 123-128).
Normon L. Geiser. 1989. "The Significance of Christ's Physical Resurrection". Bibliotheca Sacra (Vol. 145, p. 148).
Gary R. Habermas. 1996. The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ.
Charles Hodge. 1 Corinthians. (The Crossway Classic Commentaries. 1995).
John A. Jelinek. 1991. "1 Corinthians 15:35-58: A Preliminary Study On The Nature Of Christ's Resurrection Body". Michigan Theological Journal (Vol. 2, pp. 19-21, 113-114).
L. J. Kreitzer. 1993. "Resurrection". Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Ed., Gerald F. Hawthorne.
John F. MacArther. 1984. 1 Corinthians.
W. Harold Mare. 1976. "1 Corinthians". The Expositor's Bible Commentary (Vol 10). Ed., Frank E. Gaebelein.
G. R. Osborne. 1992. "Resurrection". Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Ed., Joel B. Green, et al.
Richard E. Oster, Jr. 1995. 1 Corinthians. (College Press NIV Commentary).
John A. T. Robinson. 1976. Redating the New Testament.
Robert H. Stein. 1977. "Was the Tomb Really Empty?". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society (Vol. 20 p. 23-29).
Randall C. Webber. "A Note on 1 Corinthians 15:3-4". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society (Vol. 26, pp. 265-269).