We cannot limit the Son of God by stating he could not have risen physically and did what He did post resurrection. But, as 1 Corinthians 1: Was there anything unique about the way the crucified body was dispensed after a death or crucifixion? What would have happened had the body of Jesus been found that morning by Mary and Mary Magdalene? What was their chore? What would happen after they completed what they thought they were going to do?
Who else would have come to pay homage? Did it make a difference that this particular corpse was a Jewish or Roman criminal? How long would he have remained a corpse in that tomb? Ultimately what were the customs of the time? Thank you for your thoughts… I appreciate the dialogue…. I think there is a passage that is often not looked at in this discussion, however would be good to meditate upon…. Davids tomb was with them to that day 1st cent , David had a promise he held on to that one of his descendants would be on his throne.
He spoke of the resurrection of Christ…. God raised this Jesus to life…. Jesus has been exalted to the ultimate position of authority under God himself. Jesus has received from God His manifested presence, and Christ has now poured out the manifested presence of God which is what you see and hear now……. When the crowd in Jerusalem heard this heard this they were cut to the heart…. I am not sure of the nature of body of resurrected Christ, there seems to be fairly good evidence it was not flesh and bone!!
However one thing I feel quite sure about……. The physical body was not left to decay in the grave!! I believe that, in some form still unknown to us, Jesus exists. I also believe in the empty tomb. When my father lay dying in a coma in , he came to me in a vision and told me that I had to let him go. Months later, he appeared to me in a vivid dream and we embraced each other. Yes, there are many things we will not understand until that day when we stand before God. Reading the comments and seeing Marcus Borg on various documentaries, lets me know that Paul was right when he stated that the wisdom of this world is foolishness to God and God has given the foolishness of what is preached to confound the wise I Corinthians chapters Scholars seem to have trouble with very basic Biblical statements and would rather come up with their hypothesis of what is meant instead of believing the text.
Jesus thanked the Father that the knowledge about His Kingdom was hidden from the wise and prudent and given instead to babes Matthew Jesus appeared in flesh and bone in front of his disciples Luke. He was not a ghost. When He ascended, He poured out his spirit upon all flesh so that they would learn the truth. He promised the disciples that if he did not go the Spirit would not come.
He fulfilled Joel according to what Peter preached in Acts. I appreciate very much your reply and was pleasantly surprised at how quickly you responded. I am a newly retired hospital chaplain and sense when someone takes the time to care as you do. Your manifold reply was both informative and helpful. I have long struggled with the thorniest theological and theodicy-related questions chaplains run into the latter frequently and have pretty much concluded that such questions are largely unanswerable.
You are right that experience is at the defining crux of spirituality and that certainly religious symbols play a sacramental part in that, including the symbol of Jesus…or even Krishna. God is at work in many arenas outside of Christianity, I am convinced. So it matters little, as you say, as to the ontological state of deceased spiritual figures.
I too am content to say that they do not die into nothingness. They die into God. Thank-you again for your gracious reply. Borg, I have long admired your work and have read several of your books. Your work provides a credible alternative to the literalistic, more fundamentalist approach to the Bible and religion. I do have two questions that I have never been able to resolve over the years. I would appreciate your responding directly to it if you can spare the time. You have characterized the early followers of Jesus as having experienced his resurrection by way of vision or apparition, as well as a non-visionary sense of his ongoing presence.
I would like to accept that, except that I have never heard of a vision or apparition happening to more than one person at a time. It is normally a very individualistic experience. Or are we to simply see those stories as parables or metaphoric in nature? My other question has to do with Jesus post-resurrection consciousness. Do you see Jesus as a conscious being today in the 21st century?
Or are you uncertain as to his exact state of being after dying? Such visions are reported and not just in the New Testament. Perhaps the best-known 20th century reports that many Christians have heard about are collective visions of Mary at Fatima in Portugal in the early part of the century, where allegedly thousands experience the same vision; and the appearances of Mary to a group of young people in the old Yugoslavia in the s.
My point is more modest: I think we will never go wrong treating the Easter stories as parabolic. What I am sure about is that the early followers of Jesus, and a significant percentage of Christians throughout the centuries, had and continue to have experiences that convincingly seem to them to be experiences of Jesus.
He is a figure of the present and not just of the past. To suggest an analogy that may or may not be illuminating. People in India have had and continue to have experiences of Lord Krishna. To introduce a philosophical term: Does one exist and the other not? Or are both ways the sacred continues to be experienced? I think we best understand the language of religion when we keep it as close as possible to the language of experience.
I conclude by emphasizing an earlier statement: What that means ontologically, I do not know. If one were to seek the truth to this answer, I would imagine the most reliable source to find the answer would be the Bible itself. Whether or not one agrees with what the Bible says is another discussion, but should not a Christian base his argument on this topic and any other theological question by looking to the Bible for the answer?
In Matthew 28, Mary Magdalene and Mary approach the tomb but are told by an angel that Jesus was not there. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He is not here. See the place where they laid Him. A plain reading these Gospels show that the Bible unequivocally states that the body was not present on the third day. I would imagine there could be 4 explanations: If one accepts the Bible as true, then I fail to see how there is any argument on this subject. I think that Dr. Borg puts the case clearly and defends it well.
I think, however, that we can show the empty tomb to be irrelevant on other grounds. Suppose that Adolf Hitler or Osama Bin Laden was shown to have a virgin birth, to walk on the sea, and to physically rise up from the grave. In other words, the supposedly Supernatural episodes in the life of Jesus are not meaningful apart from the message he taught, lived, and demonstrated. As to how does Jesus differ from King, Gandhi, etc: Borg would say, and I would agree with this, that he differs only in degree and not in Kind. Insofar as King, Gandhi, St.
Francis, Buddha, or whoever, incarnates justice, love, compassion, inclusion, and peace such a person is also an incarnation of God. There is an integrity to his position that I respect. I would say, Bill, that only Jesus Himself can convince you that He still has consciousness. I would also say that from my present perspective I believe there is a strong enough logical case for His being alive that I think I could talk my old self into it, but I realize that must sound a bit weak.
The point being that becoming a Christian did not make me less committed to logic and the intellect than I was before. It does seem to me, Doug, that finding the bones of Jesus would entirely alter His message in the way Bill described. He would go from God to being a very wise man and that is a big enough difference that it would lose me.
Very wise men are not uncommon. Bill, Faith in the continued consciousness of the exalted Christ is not something one can come to through the efforts of Modern logic and reason. In my own journey many people gave me some decent books on why faith is logical and I should believe. Several contained several compelling arguments, yet none were compelling. Apologetics is for the believer, not the unbeliever.
Specifically, does Jesus, in the year , still possess consciousness in some unknown realm? Thus, the man himself becomes irrelevant. But convincing me that his ideas are good only makes me an atheist who thinks Jesus was a wise man. When you say that if anyone could convince you that Jesus had a consciousness in then you would become a Christian instantly, I wonder how that could be.
I also doubt that if you had what you thought might be a real proof, that you would accept it in the end. I wonder if that kind of proof is even possible in your understanding of the physical world. The gospels give many supposedly real proofs of Jesus, but it seems you reject those as being possible. How then could one be presented now? I would guess that Jesus might repeat the parable of Lazarus and the rich man as a response.
What difference would it make if an ossuary was found that undeniably contained the bones of Jesus? To the message of Jesus — that God is personal and present and characterized by love and grace, whose passion for us is to provide justice and compassion, generosity and hospitality, and who invites us and welcomes us and includes us without exception or exclusion — that message would neither be changed nor diminished in any way.
Something happened on Easter morning. Until that morning, the disciples still saw the message of Jesus as an unassembled puzzle with no idea as to what image would be revealed by the completed puzzle. On Easter morning, someone had a profound comprehensive epiphany. I am not sure which person had this epiphany, but the Gospels tell us it was a woman or several women.
It was as if every piece of the puzzle had been turned upside-right and sufficiently assembled that the picture could be easily discerned. The validation of this epiphany was in the universal response of the disciples and followers — each one saw the same completed puzzle and each one was transformed by what was revealed. To each person, it was as if the curtain that covered the holy of holies had been ripped in two and God was fully revealed to any who would see.
Answer: The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is the most important event in history, providing irrefutable evidence that Jesus is who He claimed to be – the. It has been argued on the basis of Paul's testimony that Jesus's resurrection body was spiritual in the sense of being unextended, immaterial, intangible, and so.
Somehow, in those first few years, this same epiphany would happen to Paul and hundreds of others. Repeatedly, it was such a powerful experience that people were transformed. The desperation and fatalism of day-to-day living in a domination empire supported and ratified by imperial theology was replaced by the dual realization that the one true God is loving and immediate and that life did not require their participation in empire or its domination practices or its imperial theology.
The previous comments show that the reader is giving some serious deep thought to the subject at hand. Any lack of understanding he feels he has would probably find resolution through a bit more reading of the various views presented here. Best wishes on his quest, he seems ready! I am not an atheist, but I agree with Bill.
It seems to me that all these visions and experiences have everything to do with what happened to the corpse. Paul specifically tied his understanding of his vision to the missing corpse. It was exactly that missing corpse that made the appearances of Jesus qualitatively different from appearance of other dead loved ones who are still in their graves. As for being physical, that seems to me to be critical. Jesus did not simply die to save sinners; He died to save the whole material physical creation, from worms to aardvarks. The meaning of the resurrection, at least partly, was that He united the spiritual into the physical permanently, like a husband is joined to his wife, not that He withdrew the spiritual from the physical.
You seem to be interpreting the text by selection, interpreting only part of the text while ignoring the rest. Everyone is entitled to their view. For me, I need a more rational one.
Also, he would have to live here, hang out, sleep somewhere, etc. These examples point to non-physicality, to spiritual presence, I agree with Marcus on this point:. The mystical meaning of the resurrection, that he united spirit and body is true, but that is reading in a mystical and metaphoric sense…not a literal one. In this sense, rising from the dead is parable pointing to the oneness of spirit and matter. I think that some people need a literal, physical reading, but for some people this is not an option.
I have some problems with the interpretation and idea that Jesus was executed. The argument on visions of the resurrection I can easily understand. Muhammad is said to have experienced an ascension into heaven; the various early Christian and Jewish apocalypses, describe visions, which often are given to holy men prior to death, or during some tribulation.
Angels reveal to them secrets, and visions of the future of souls in heaven or hell. So Jesus, or an angel in the likeness of Jesus revealed things to John; appeared to people just slightly after the alleged death of Jesus. But all the canonical texts, even some un-canonical texts, even Josephus, and even the later Quran, claim that Jesus appeared alive on Sunday as a man not a phantasm.
He had his scars, he ate, he was physical. Even the orthodox Trinitarians, combated and twisted the gospels to prove this point to docetic believers of Jesus. I conceive as Jesus as a historical mortal who like all other mortals eventually die. Unlike most scholars however, I just do not see the evidence that Jesus actually died in the scientific sense on the cross.
Death for these people referred to living people like Lazarus, Tabitha, etc… In christian language one who is lost, who is ill, who is sleeping, who is a sinner, who has demons, who is ignorant, who is in poverty, in jail, etc…. They are in hell alive and being tormented. I find this post and the one previous to it about Easter completely baffling. In full disclosure, I am an atheist who grew up with a conservative understanding of Christianity supernatural theism, Jesus as the substitutionary sacrifice, etc…. Nevertheless, reading these posts makes me wonder: Both sacrificed their lives for their visions of peace and non-violent resistance to oppression.
Both had followers who carried on their cause after their deaths. Both had people who came to understand what they were about after their death in the case of MLK, racists who changed their way of thinking. For someone with a conservative Christian background, the way this language is used is quite confusing. Why devote oneself to the study of Jesus of Nazareth, a person we historically little about, living in a society much removed from our own.
If Jesus is nothing but a great moral teacher, to be completely honest, whilst good for His time, I believe Ghandi, Mandela or Dr King probably are better and more relevant for us here today. I wonder if the reality is more mundane and human. What do theologians like Prof Borg, after years of study of ancient dead languages and the like, do when they realise they no longer believe? I am somewhat reminded of Richard Dawkins, who has said on many occassions that he kind of respects conservative religious fundamentalists, as they at least really believe their religions.
The Resurrection of Jesus: May 16, by Marcus Borg 54 Category ies: Marcus was an American New Testament scholar, theologian and author. He was among the most widely known and influential voices in progressive Christianity and internationally known in both academic and church circles. John Wallace Posted January 22, 4: Stephen Ferguson Posted November 26, 8: Beth Boyce Posted June 7, Brian Posted December 9, 4: Jim Doyel Posted August 20, 1: Elwood McDowell Posted July 25, 5: Louis Muller Posted July 10, 5: What happened to the corpse of Jesus?
Why the ascension — if his old body lay smoldering in the grave? Carroll Boswell Posted June 30, The Pilgrim Posted June 19, 2: The best advice I ever got was to follow the way and stop talking about following the way. Karen Posted May 4, 9: Jason Posted April 21, 4: Edwin Holton Posted December 30, 8: Carroll Boswell Posted March 15, 9: Daniel Posted March 14, Steve McIntyre Posted March 5, 2: I look forward to hearing you speak tomorrow at the Lenten service at Calvary Church in Memphis.
Bill Dysons Posted March 2, Carroll Boswell Posted February 29, 7: Jason Posted February 29, 4: Bill Posted February 7, 4: Jeanette Posted February 6, 4: Mark Posted January 14, 9: Doug Sloan Posted December 26, 9: The reason for the season is Emmanuel — God with us. Livia Posted November 22, 4: Barbara Muller Posted November 19, 1: JanetBrown Posted March 29, 2: John Wattis Posted October 29, Christine Magrega Posted October 10, Laurence Anderson Posted September 29, 5: Oscar Del Santo Posted August 30, 5: Patterson Posted August 18, 9: Wes Posted August 14, 8: Fleet Posted August 1, 6: Jeff Posted July 18, 3: Barry Chitwood Posted July 7, 8: Frank McKibben Posted June 8, 6: Robert Engstrom Posted June 3, 8: Robert Engstrom Posted June 2, 9: Marcus Posted June 2, 3: Thanks for your comments and your questions.
More than one thing to say. Jay Posted June 1, 9: Matt Wion Posted May 31, 4: Carroll Boswell Posted May 31, 3: Paul DeBaufer Posted June 29, 7: Bill Dysons Posted May 25, Dear Bill, When you say that if anyone could convince you that Jesus had a consciousness in then you would become a Christian instantly, I wonder how that could be. Doug Sloan Posted May 23, 5: This resurrected, physical body was a glorified, spiritual body. The spiritual body is not merely "spirit. The above statement is the correct doctrine of Scripture.
As such, it stands against the Jehovah's Witness and the Shepherd's Chapel groups that state that Jesus did not rise bodily but spiritually. Neither group seeks to deny the obvious biblical declaration of Christ's resurrection; but they change the meaning of the resurrection, so that it really didn't happen. Did Jesus rise from the dead in the same physical body in which He died? After the resurrection, Jesus was able to eat Luke He showed people His hands and feet with the nail prints in them Luke As the reports of Jesus' resurrection were spreading, Thomas, who was doubting the resurrection of Christ , said, "Unless I shall see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.
Later, Jesus appeared to Thomas and said to him, "Reach here your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand, and put it into My side; and be not unbelieving, but believing. If Jesus' body had not risen, then He would not have feet and hands with the same holes of the nails of the crucifixion.
Consider the following verses as further proof that His very body was raised:. It is obvious that Jesus was raised in the same body in which He died--with the same holes in His hands and feet. We see that Jesus proclaimed He had flesh and bones. Does a "spirit body" consist of flesh and bones? I have heard it said that Jesus' physical body died, but His spiritual body was raised. If this is so, then does the spiritual body consist of flesh and bones as well as the physical one? It makes no sense. Also, if Jesus did not rise physically, then what happened to His body?
Was it moved somewhere? There is no biblical account of what happened to Jesus' body other than that it was raised from the dead. Therefore, His body was raised from the dead.
The phrase "I will raise" is translated from the single Greek word "egeiro. The active voice in Greek designates who is performing the action. In this case, since it is first person, singular "I" , Jesus is saying that He Himself would perform the action of the resurrection. This is precisely what the Greek says. However, some still deny that Jesus rose from the dead physically--even when examining John 2: We can clearly see that Jesus prophesied that He would raise up the temple of His body as is clarified in verse 21 by John the apostle who states that Jesus was speaking of "the temple of his body.
Is this enough to put this issue to rest? You'd think so but resistance persists. And with what kind of body do they come?. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.