I don't want to assume I understand what you mean, so could you explain what you mean?
Resurrection: Does Your Minister/Church Preach What You Believe?
- Thread starter Waterfall
- Start date
Welcome to Wondercafe2!
A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!
blackbelt1961
Well-Known Member
scripture says he rose physically in a new body 500 saw Him, Jesus also said he will rase himself
others say Jesus rose spiritually, metaphorically but not physically
its one or the other, both cant be true
So I'm wondering what scripture would lead one to believe the resurrection has metaphorical meaning or spiritual if that is what one believes.
You possibly may not be the one who could answer this? But I could be wrong.
BetteTheRed
Resident Heretic
- Pronouns
- She/Her/Her
Both can be true. The New Testament itself has Jesus walking through walls, appearing in locked rooms, walking for long distances with people who don't recognize him, etc. Not exactly "real person" material.
blackbelt1961
Well-Known Member
by simply reading all the replies on this thread , including your view shows a clear contradiction, its obvious that both views cant be true
What do you make of John 3:3-8? where Jesus speaks of the kingdom being spiritual in substance and you must be born spiritually to inherit the kingdom and have eternal life?
Bible Gateway passage: John 3:3-8 - New International Version
KayTheCurler
Well-Known Member
Maybe both versions are untrue?
blackbelt1961
Well-Known Member
I see our closed spirit being give a re generation to be able to see spiritually and not just with our physical 5 senses, and become alive to the Creator while still in our old bodies
When you say both can be true are you referring to truth within the "story"? If so what truth do you get from this understanding of the resurrection?
blackbelt1961
Well-Known Member
that would fit
Just trying to understand what people believe....and why.
blackbelt1961
Well-Known Member
whos arguing? I was just showing the obvious, and Kaythecurle had a valid point
I edited the response.
revsdd
Well-Known Member
I believe what Scripture tells me: basically, that Jesus died and that after he died his tomb was discovered to be empty, his disciples were confused, and then he was then seen alive and interacted with them on a number of occasions. But Scripture says nothing about the actual resurrection. The resurrection is implied by the above (and highly abridged ) narrative. My preaching on both Good Friday and Easter Sunday flows from that basic conviction.
On Good Friday my preaching would centre on the death of Jesus and on addressing the meaning of Jesus' death. For me Jesus' death has several meanings. I am not opposed to traditional atonement theology (ie, Jesus died for our sins) although I think some Christians over-emphasize it. I would probably strike a balance of "Jesus died for our sins/Jesus died because of our sins." The former alone I think lets "us" off the hook, the latter alone would make Jesus a martyr but little else. I also often note that Jesus' death is an essential aspect of divine-human solidarity. Through Jesus, God chooses to experience all aspects of human life (both pleasant and unpleasant - up to and including death.) Thus Good Friday is, to me, the ultimate sign of God's love: God chose to become one of us with all that entailed.
On Easter Sunday, I obviously preach that Jesus, whose death we marked two days before, lives again. I will often make note of the fact that Scripture speaks of the aftermath of the resurrection (the discovery of the empty tomb and Jesus' resurrection appearances) but says nothing about the process of resurrection - exactly how it happened or what it was like. For me, that is part of the mystery of Easter Sunday, and in the mystery itself is great power. God can accomplish things we cannot even imagine. However it happened, my Easter proclamation always revolves around the inevitable conclusion of an actual resurrection: death is defeated, life is victorious, Jesus lives, God reigns.
I am not actually preaching on Easter Sunday this year. My colleague preaches about once every five Sundays, and as the calendar worked out, April 1 is hers this year. I look forward to hearing what she will have to say.
) narrative. My preaching on both Good Friday and Easter Sunday flows from that basic conviction.On Good Friday my preaching would centre on the death of Jesus and on addressing the meaning of Jesus' death. For me Jesus' death has several meanings. I am not opposed to traditional atonement theology (ie, Jesus died for our sins) although I think some Christians over-emphasize it. I would probably strike a balance of "Jesus died for our sins/Jesus died because of our sins." The former alone I think lets "us" off the hook, the latter alone would make Jesus a martyr but little else. I also often note that Jesus' death is an essential aspect of divine-human solidarity. Through Jesus, God chooses to experience all aspects of human life (both pleasant and unpleasant - up to and including death.) Thus Good Friday is, to me, the ultimate sign of God's love: God chose to become one of us with all that entailed.
On Easter Sunday, I obviously preach that Jesus, whose death we marked two days before, lives again. I will often make note of the fact that Scripture speaks of the aftermath of the resurrection (the discovery of the empty tomb and Jesus' resurrection appearances) but says nothing about the process of resurrection - exactly how it happened or what it was like. For me, that is part of the mystery of Easter Sunday, and in the mystery itself is great power. God can accomplish things we cannot even imagine. However it happened, my Easter proclamation always revolves around the inevitable conclusion of an actual resurrection: death is defeated, life is victorious, Jesus lives, God reigns.
I am not actually preaching on Easter Sunday this year. My colleague preaches about once every five Sundays, and as the calendar worked out, April 1 is hers this year. I look forward to hearing what she will have to say.
I believe what Scripture tells me: basically, that Jesus died and that after he died his tomb was discovered to be empty, his disciples were confused, and then he was then seen alive and interacted with them on a number of occasions. But Scripture says nothing about the actual resurrection. The resurrection is implied by the above (and highly abridged
Interesting, I don't know why but I always thought scripture did speak about the actual resurrection.
In John 20:8 it states that the beloved disciple (John?) looked into the tomb and believed......believed what? In the resurrection or just that Jesus' body was not there?
Then John 20:9 says that "for as yet they knew not the scripture that He must rise again from the dead.".......so is there scripture somewhere that mentions the resurrection do you suppose?
I don't know what @revsdd meant. I was responding to your question, "so is there scripture somewhere that mentions the resurrection do you suppose?"
revsdd
Well-Known Member
It does not say anything about the actual moment of resurrection. What was it actually like when Jesus arose. How exactly did God accomplish this? What did Jesus feel, see, experience as life returned to his body? It tells us that an empty tomb was discovered and that after that the disciples encountered Jesus alive.
I assume that it means that this was the moment at which he believed in what Jesus had taught him about the Son of Man being raised from the dead. What we see in the Gospels is that the disciples became very upset with Jesus when he spoke about his pending death, suggesting that they weren't even willing to think about resurrection. This was a sort of "Oh! Now I get it!" moment.Waterfall said:
Waterfall said:
John 20:9 is an interesting verse indeed. Most translators and commentators that I'm familiar with take that verse in the sense of not understanding the Scripture rather than not knowing it, but it still begs the question: what Scripture? By the time John wrote Christian Scripture was still largely undefined and in flux, with different Christian communities having different "canons." I've discussed the development of the Christian canon before, so don't propose to go into it again here, except to say that "Scripture" today (in mainline Protestant churches at least) is the 66 books of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. There's lots of Scripture there that talks about the resurrection - but none that "describe" it in the sense I'm meaning that I'm aware of. If by "Scripture" you mean extrabiblical writings, I'm still not aware of an account of the actual moment of resurrection.
To me, it seems perhaps more likely that the point in John 20:9 was that the disciples hadn't understand from prophecy (ie, the Old Testament) or perhaps from the words of Jesus (by the time John was written, it's likely that the synoptic Gospels at least had been accorded sort of "quasi-canonical" status) that this was going to happen. Not entirely clear, though, what "Scripture" he is referring to.