Do you believe in the Resurrection of Jesus?

[RI]

Option 2 for me.

I believe that a spirit is not a physical thing, but rather the metaphorical totality of a person. It is their personality, their thoughts, their memories, their actions, their philosophy, their zeitgeist, their very way of living. As such, I believe that the Resurrection of Jesus was not the reanimation of his body, but rather the reaffirmation of his Body, his followers to the spirit of Jesus, to the philosophy that Jesus taught. Though he was killed, his spirit was revived and lived on in his disciples, eventually ascending the stature of a mere man, becoming instead an idea, an immortal dedication to the virtues of love, peace, hope, and community.

Similarly, the Second Coming is not a reappearance of a long dead man into this world, but rather the appearance of his spirit, this Holy Spirit, in each of us as individuals. By accepting his spirit, by accepting the very ideas of love, peace, hope, community, and reciprocity into our lives, we are bringing Jesus into this world ourselves.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

yes, bodily

[Marokai Backbeat]

I don't believe in a damn thing, I'm afraid.

[President Mitt]

No

[Alcon]

I think this is a reasonable, and very aesthetically appealing, definition of "Resurrection."  In fact, not believing in the concept of bodily Resurrection, I might as well adopt it.  

I'll vote Option 2, although I should caveat by saying that I don't necessarily agree with the associated prophecies -- that is, I may agree with the definitional concept of the Second Coming, but I do not believe it is predestined through any cohesive metaphysical spiritual...thingy.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Option 2 for me.

I believe that a spirit is not a physical thing, but rather the metaphorical totality of a person. It is their personality, their thoughts, their memories, their actions, their philosophy, their zeitgeist, their very way of living. As such, I believe that the Resurrection of Jesus was not the reanimation of his body, but rather the reaffirmation of his Body, his followers to the spirit of Jesus, to the philosophy that Jesus taught. Though he was killed, his spirit was revived and lived on in his disciples, eventually ascending the stature of a mere man, becoming instead an idea, an immortal dedication to the virtues of love, peace, hope, and community.

Similarly, the Second Coming is not a reappearance of a long dead man into this world, but rather the appearance of his spirit, this Holy Spirit, in each of us as individuals. By accepting his spirit, by accepting the very ideas of love, peace, hope, community, and reciprocity into our lives, we are bringing Jesus into this world ourselves.

in other words: you're not a Christian

[RI]

Option 2 for me.

I believe that a spirit is not a physical thing, but rather the metaphorical totality of a person. It is their personality, their thoughts, their memories, their actions, their philosophy, their zeitgeist, their very way of living. As such, I believe that the Resurrection of Jesus was not the reanimation of his body, but rather the reaffirmation of his Body, his followers to the spirit of Jesus, to the philosophy that Jesus taught. Though he was killed, his spirit was revived and lived on in his disciples, eventually ascending the stature of a mere man, becoming instead an idea, an immortal dedication to the virtues of love, peace, hope, and community.

Similarly, the Second Coming is not a reappearance of a long dead man into this world, but rather the appearance of his spirit, this Holy Spirit, in each of us as individuals. By accepting his spirit, by accepting the very ideas of love, peace, hope, community, and reciprocity into our lives, we are bringing Jesus into this world ourselves.

in other words: you're not a Christian

Well, I'm at best a Christian-Pantheist.

But really, does believing in a more metaphorical interpretation of the Bible necessarily make someone not a Christian?

[Хahar 🤔]

No, because he didn't die.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Option 2 for me.

I believe that a spirit is not a physical thing, but rather the metaphorical totality of a person. It is their personality, their thoughts, their memories, their actions, their philosophy, their zeitgeist, their very way of living. As such, I believe that the Resurrection of Jesus was not the reanimation of his body, but rather the reaffirmation of his Body, his followers to the spirit of Jesus, to the philosophy that Jesus taught. Though he was killed, his spirit was revived and lived on in his disciples, eventually ascending the stature of a mere man, becoming instead an idea, an immortal dedication to the virtues of love, peace, hope, and community.

Similarly, the Second Coming is not a reappearance of a long dead man into this world, but rather the appearance of his spirit, this Holy Spirit, in each of us as individuals. By accepting his spirit, by accepting the very ideas of love, peace, hope, community, and reciprocity into our lives, we are bringing Jesus into this world ourselves.

in other words: you're not a Christian

Well, I'm at best a Christian-Pantheist.

But really, does believing in a more metaphorical interpretation of the Bible necessarily make someone not a Christian?

yes.  and, in addition, it makes a complete mockery out of the single most important point of the New Testament.

Read 1Cor 15, for it is directed at your attempt to gain Jesus without accepting his literal bodily resurrection:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20corinthians%2015;&version=31;

[RI]

Option 2 for me.

I believe that a spirit is not a physical thing, but rather the metaphorical totality of a person. It is their personality, their thoughts, their memories, their actions, their philosophy, their zeitgeist, their very way of living. As such, I believe that the Resurrection of Jesus was not the reanimation of his body, but rather the reaffirmation of his Body, his followers to the spirit of Jesus, to the philosophy that Jesus taught. Though he was killed, his spirit was revived and lived on in his disciples, eventually ascending the stature of a mere man, becoming instead an idea, an immortal dedication to the virtues of love, peace, hope, and community.

Similarly, the Second Coming is not a reappearance of a long dead man into this world, but rather the appearance of his spirit, this Holy Spirit, in each of us as individuals. By accepting his spirit, by accepting the very ideas of love, peace, hope, community, and reciprocity into our lives, we are bringing Jesus into this world ourselves.

in other words: you're not a Christian

Well, I'm at best a Christian-Pantheist.

But really, does believing in a more metaphorical interpretation of the Bible necessarily make someone not a Christian?

yes.  and, in addition, it makes a complete mockery out of the single most important point of the New Testament.

Read 1Cor 15, for it is directed at your attempt to gain Jesus without accepting his literal bodily resurrection:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20corinthians%2015;&version=31;

Nothing in 1 Corinthians 15 explicitly says that Jesus had a bodily resurrection. It even says, "it is raised a spiritual body", explicitly stating that resurrection is not of a physical nature. It does say that Jesus appeared to his apostles, but it does not say that it was in bodily form. It could just as easily be his spirit appearing to them.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

I read once on a forum something I didn't think about before. This believing in the resurrection would have helped people/societies that adopted Christianity to overcome when they have a lot of problems in their life, to think that no matter how much they cold have been touch, they could always rebound, go ahead, trying new things, having new perspectives in their lives, oppositely I guess to societies that stayed with beliefs like maledictions. I don't of the actual relevance of this, but it makes sens. If so, it is one of the good things that Christianity carried.

So, I don't believe in it.

Option 2 for me.

I believe that a spirit is not a physical thing, but rather the metaphorical totality of a person. It is their personality, their thoughts, their memories, their actions, their philosophy, their zeitgeist, their very way of living. As such, I believe that the Resurrection of Jesus was not the reanimation of his body, but rather the reaffirmation of his Body, his followers to the spirit of Jesus, to the philosophy that Jesus taught. Though he was killed, his spirit was revived and lived on in his disciples, eventually ascending the stature of a mere man, becoming instead an idea, an immortal dedication to the virtues of love, peace, hope, and community.

Similarly, the Second Coming is not a reappearance of a long dead man into this world, but rather the appearance of his spirit, this Holy Spirit, in each of us as individuals. By accepting his spirit, by accepting the very ideas of love, peace, hope, community, and reciprocity into our lives, we are bringing Jesus into this world ourselves.

In that sens everyone can resurrect and have a second coming, no?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

But really, does believing in a more metaphorical interpretation of the Bible necessarily make someone not a Christian?

yes.  and, in addition, it makes a complete mockery out of the single most important point of the New Testament.

Read 1Cor 15, for it is directed at your attempt to gain Jesus without accepting his literal bodily resurrection:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20corinthians%2015;&version=31;

Nothing in 1 Corinthians 15 explicitly says that Jesus had a bodily resurrection. It even says, "it is raised a spiritual body", explicitly stating that resurrection is not of a physical nature. It does say that Jesus appeared to his apostles, but it does not say that it was in bodily form. It could just as easily be his spirit appearing to them.

First, his literal spirit being resurrected is DIFFERENT than your contention that simply the idea of his teachings were methaphorically "resurrected".  So, 1Cor 15 DOES conflict your idea.

Second, the gospels all have his body dissappearing from the tomb and John and Luke describe Jesus' body AFTER resurrection:


John 20:19 On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 20After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord....25 So the other disciples told Thomas, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."...27 Then Jesus said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."


Luke 24:37 They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost. 38He said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds? 39Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have."

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

the New Testament clearly portrays that Jesus body was NOT left in the grave, but rather was transformed into a glorious body upon his resurrection.  The exact nature his physical flesh took on upon his resurrection is NOT stated in scripture, but it is clear that his physical body was transformed and came back to life by the resurrection.

anyone that denies Jesus' body was resurrected is simply not a Christian.

[RI]

Option 2 for me.

I believe that a spirit is not a physical thing, but rather the metaphorical totality of a person. It is their personality, their thoughts, their memories, their actions, their philosophy, their zeitgeist, their very way of living. As such, I believe that the Resurrection of Jesus was not the reanimation of his body, but rather the reaffirmation of his Body, his followers to the spirit of Jesus, to the philosophy that Jesus taught. Though he was killed, his spirit was revived and lived on in his disciples, eventually ascending the stature of a mere man, becoming instead an idea, an immortal dedication to the virtues of love, peace, hope, and community.

Similarly, the Second Coming is not a reappearance of a long dead man into this world, but rather the appearance of his spirit, this Holy Spirit, in each of us as individuals. By accepting his spirit, by accepting the very ideas of love, peace, hope, community, and reciprocity into our lives, we are bringing Jesus into this world ourselves.

In that sens everyone can resurrect and have a second coming, no?

In a sense, yes. I believe that is how we live on. If our spirit is carried on by others, then it does not die. What exactly the nature of our spirit is is determined by our actions. The spirit of Jesus is special because it is more than just the spirit of the man; it has become the spirit of goodness itself.

As to the actual nature of the 'afterlife', I am torn. Part of me believes that what I just said is all there is, and part of me doesn't. I will continue to ponder this.

the New Testament clearly portrays that Jesus body was NOT left in the grave, but rather was transformed into a glorious body upon his resurrection.  The exact nature his physical flesh took on upon his resurrection is NOT stated in scripture, but it is clear that his physical body was transformed and came back to life by the resurrection.

anyone that denies Jesus' body was resurrected is simply not a Christian.

I believe that the new 'Body' of Christ was not of physical personhood, but, rather, more than that; his followers are his Body. Anyone who believes in the spirit of Jesus is part of this Body. His spirit acts through each person individually.

I do not mind if you do not consider me a Christian. It makes little difference to me. My beliefs are different than yours, and I accept that.

[12th Doctor]

Well, it is interesting that you believe that, but scripture directly contradicts that notion.  We are explicitly told that there was nothing left in the tomb, and that, while there was a clear change in Christ's physical personage (he was not recognized on the road) that there was a real body present.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Option 2 for me.

I believe that a spirit is not a physical thing, but rather the metaphorical totality of a person. It is their personality, their thoughts, their memories, their actions, their philosophy, their zeitgeist, their very way of living. As such, I believe that the Resurrection of Jesus was not the reanimation of his body, but rather the reaffirmation of his Body, his followers to the spirit of Jesus, to the philosophy that Jesus taught. Though he was killed, his spirit was revived and lived on in his disciples, eventually ascending the stature of a mere man, becoming instead an idea, an immortal dedication to the virtues of love, peace, hope, and community.

Similarly, the Second Coming is not a reappearance of a long dead man into this world, but rather the appearance of his spirit, this Holy Spirit, in each of us as individuals. By accepting his spirit, by accepting the very ideas of love, peace, hope, community, and reciprocity into our lives, we are bringing Jesus into this world ourselves.

In that sens everyone can resurrect and have a second coming, no?

In a sense, yes. I believe that is how we live on. If our spirit is carried on by others, then it does not die. What exactly the nature of our spirit is is determined by our actions. The spirit of Jesus is special because it is more than just the spirit of the man; it has become the spirit of goodness itself.

As to the actual nature of the 'afterlife', I am torn. Part of me believes that what I just said is all there is, and part of me doesn't. I will continue to ponder this.

the New Testament clearly portrays that Jesus body was NOT left in the grave, but rather was transformed into a glorious body upon his resurrection.  The exact nature his physical flesh took on upon his resurrection is NOT stated in scripture, but it is clear that his physical body was transformed and came back to life by the resurrection.

anyone that denies Jesus' body was resurrected is simply not a Christian.

I believe that the new 'Body' of Christ was not of physical personhood, but, rather, more than that; his followers are his Body. Anyone who believes in the spirit of Jesus is part of this Body. His spirit acts through each person individually.

I do not mind if you do not consider me a Christian. It makes little difference to me. My beliefs are different than yours, and I accept that.

realisticidealist,

what definition of "spirit" are you using?  are you talking about a literal spirit-being, or are you referring to "spirit" as a state of mind?

because, Christianity is about the literal spirit-being...the actual person.  Meaning that Jesus Christ literally came back to life apart from anyone accepting his teachings.   His resurrection was NOT predicated upon anyone accepting his teachings.  

By Christ living in me, it literally means that the spirit-being of Jesus Christ lives in my body, and that occurred PRIOR to my acceptance of his teachings.  Likewise, someone who accepts his teachings and attempts to put them into practice may NOT have yet received the spirit-being of Jesus Christ, rather they may simply be attempting to obey.

Those who have been filled with the spirit-being of Jesus Christ are part of a Priesthood because who lives in them is the High Priest - Jesus Christ.

Again, receiving the Holy Spirit (aka Spirit of Jesus Christ) does NOT simply mean you receive the intention (spirit) of his teachings, rather it means you are literally receiving the spirit-being of Jesus Christ into your own being.

Have you ever read the New Testament?

[RI]

realisticidealist,

what definition of "spirit" are you using?  are you talking about a literal spirit-being, or are you referring to "spirit" as a state of mind?

I am using the same definition that I used in the OP.

because, Christianity is about the literal spirit-being...the actual person.

According to your (literal) interpretation, which could be right, but it is not mine.

By Christ living in me, it literally means that the spirit-being of Jesus Christ lives in my body, and that occurred PRIOR to my acceptance of his teachings.  Likewise, someone who accepts his teachings and attempts to put them into practice may NOT have yet received the spirit-being of Jesus Christ, rather they may simply be attempting to obey.

Once again, your interpretation. You choose to accept the Bible as literal, while I see it as much more metaphorical.

Again, receiving the Holy Spirit (aka Spirit of Jesus Christ) does NOT simply mean you receive the intention (spirit) of his teachings, rather it means you are literally receiving the spirit-being of Jesus Christ into your own being.

Again, I do not believe in 'spirit-beings', so your interpretation is automatically different than mine.

Have you ever read the New Testament?

Many times. I even attended a Christian school for several years.

Well, it is interesting that you believe that, but scripture directly contradicts that notion.  We are explicitly told that there was nothing left in the tomb, and that, while there was a clear change in Christ's physical personage (he was not recognized on the road) that there was a real body present.

If taken literally, yes, you are correct. I do not do so.

Anyway, I did not mean this thread to be about me...

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

By Christ living in me, it literally means that the spirit-being of Jesus Christ lives in my body, and that occurred PRIOR to my acceptance of his teachings.  Likewise, someone who accepts his teachings and attempts to put them into practice may NOT have yet received the spirit-being of Jesus Christ, rather they may simply be attempting to obey.

Once again, your interpretation. You choose to accept the Bible as literal, while I see it as much more metaphorical.

1Cor 15:3 "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. 6After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born."

Anyone in their right mind can obviously see that Paul is speaking about a literal resurrection.  In addition, there are the accounts in the gospels and in the book of Acts, all of which assume a literal resurrection.

If you and Alcon choose to only accept it as metaphorical, then fine...but don't be dishonest and say the New Testament wasn't written with a literal resurrection in mind.  Might as well be honest with yourself and reject it outright, at least then you and Alcon wont come across as looking absolutely preposterous.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Not at all.

[RI]

I suppose that the simple truth of the matter is that my beliefs are an expression of pantheism placed into a Christian mindset. The basis of my beliefs is not the text of the Bible, but instead an interpretation of the Bible through the lense of a non-Christian. I suppose that I am of an atheistic, scientific mind and a Christian, wondrous heart, and this is my attempt to bridge that gap. I believe what I do because, to me, it reconciles the nature of the universe as observed with the supernatural world, and, in doing so, simplifies the complexities and absolves the contradictions that I otherwise find between the two.

It is true that the Bible, taken literally, does not support me. But that is ok. I am not looking for its support or its approval, or yours jmfcst.

As such, I take what I believe only on faith, the faith that if I continue to search along my spiritual journey I will find pieces of truth here and there that will eventually add up to something more. What I believe today may not be what I believe tomorrow because I may find something new I never before saw. To me, that is the intrigue of the journey of faith, that you never know what God has yet to show you or what is around the corner, and that what is there might just be more than you could ever previously imagine.

[12th Doctor]

I suppose that the simple truth of the matter is that my beliefs are an expression of pantheism placed into a Christian mindset. The basis of my beliefs is not the text of the Bible, but instead an interpretation of the Bible through the lense of a non-Christian. I suppose that I am of an atheistic, scientific mind and a Christian, wondrous heart, and this is my attempt to bridge that gap. I believe what I do because, to me, it reconciles the nature of the universe as observed with the supernatural world, and, in doing so, simplifies the complexities and absolves the contradictions that I otherwise find between the two.

It is true that the Bible, taken literally, does not support me. But that is ok. I am not looking for its support or its approval, or yours jmfcst.

As such, I take what I believe only on faith, the faith that if I continue to search along my spiritual journey I will find pieces of truth here and there that will eventually add up to something more. What I believe today may not be what I believe tomorrow because I may find something new I never before saw. To me, that is the intrigue of the journey of faith, that you never know what God has yet to show you or what is around the corner, and that what is there might just be more than you could ever previously imagine.

Well, the Catholic Church is technically pantheist, as it sees itself as the one Universal Church (thus not even recognizing the possibility of other options), as is implicit in it's very name.  I am Catholic.  I don't agree with what you are saying, nor does my Church.  You are going to have to come up with something more than just "I'm a pantheist."

[RI]

I suppose that the simple truth of the matter is that my beliefs are an expression of pantheism placed into a Christian mindset. The basis of my beliefs is not the text of the Bible, but instead an interpretation of the Bible through the lense of a non-Christian. I suppose that I am of an atheistic, scientific mind and a Christian, wondrous heart, and this is my attempt to bridge that gap. I believe what I do because, to me, it reconciles the nature of the universe as observed with the supernatural world, and, in doing so, simplifies the complexities and absolves the contradictions that I otherwise find between the two.

It is true that the Bible, taken literally, does not support me. But that is ok. I am not looking for its support or its approval, or yours jmfcst.

As such, I take what I believe only on faith, the faith that if I continue to search along my spiritual journey I will find pieces of truth here and there that will eventually add up to something more. What I believe today may not be what I believe tomorrow because I may find something new I never before saw. To me, that is the intrigue of the journey of faith, that you never know what God has yet to show you or what is around the corner, and that what is there might just be more than you could ever previously imagine.

Well, the Catholic Church is technically pantheist, as it sees itself as the one Universal Church (thus not even recognizing the possibility of other options), as is implicit in it's very name.  I am Catholic.  I don't agree with what you are saying, nor does my Church.  You are going to have to come up with something more than just "I'm a pantheist."

I am not claiming to be a Catholic. I am referring to pantheism as "the view that everything is part of an all-encompassing immanent God." I take this to mean that God and the Universe are coextensive. I am not familiar enough with the teachings of Catholicism to know what they take 'pantheist' to mean, but I believe we have different definitions.

[12th Doctor]

I suppose that the simple truth of the matter is that my beliefs are an expression of pantheism placed into a Christian mindset. The basis of my beliefs is not the text of the Bible, but instead an interpretation of the Bible through the lense of a non-Christian. I suppose that I am of an atheistic, scientific mind and a Christian, wondrous heart, and this is my attempt to bridge that gap. I believe what I do because, to me, it reconciles the nature of the universe as observed with the supernatural world, and, in doing so, simplifies the complexities and absolves the contradictions that I otherwise find between the two.

It is true that the Bible, taken literally, does not support me. But that is ok. I am not looking for its support or its approval, or yours jmfcst.

As such, I take what I believe only on faith, the faith that if I continue to search along my spiritual journey I will find pieces of truth here and there that will eventually add up to something more. What I believe today may not be what I believe tomorrow because I may find something new I never before saw. To me, that is the intrigue of the journey of faith, that you never know what God has yet to show you or what is around the corner, and that what is there might just be more than you could ever previously imagine.

Well, the Catholic Church is technically pantheist, as it sees itself as the one Universal Church (thus not even recognizing the possibility of other options), as is implicit in it's very name.  I am Catholic.  I don't agree with what you are saying, nor does my Church.  You are going to have to come up with something more than just "I'm a pantheist."

I am not claiming to be a Catholic. I am referring to pantheism as "the view that everything is part of an all-encompassing immanent God." I take this to mean that God and the Universe are coextensive. I am not familiar enough with the teachings of Catholicism to know what they take 'pantheist' to mean, but I believe we have different definitions.

What I meant was not that the Catholic Church uses that term, but rather that the mentality of the Church is such that it is all encompassing, because God is all encompassing, and the Church is the body of Christ.  That does not, however, disclude its adherence to scripture.

[JSojourner]

There are very few ditches I am willing to die in when it comes to Christian doctrine.  The few I am willing to die in are...


1.  The deity of Jesus Christ
2.  The substitutionary and redeeming sacrifice of Jesus on the cross
3.  A literal, bodily resurrection from the dead.

[Lief 🗽]

Nah. While I leave open the possibility of a God, the idea that people can come back to life is just silly. Furthermore, his resurrection is probably the most uninteresting part of the Bible, in my opinion. The sermon on the mount is good stuff. His death is good stuff. But the resurrection? Eh... a little anticlimactic.