Thanks for posting on one of the subjects of conversation we had yesterday Bruce.

Here is a debate between Don Preston and Brian Shwertley on this subject of the resurrection of mankind:

Part 1:
http://www.blubrry.com/player/?e=278070&p=2840

Part 2:
http://www.blubrry.com/player/?e=278071&p=2840

In my mind, Preston makes a much more convincing and logical argument against Schwertly's view of the bodily resurrection.

Ryan,
Thanks for providing the links, I have the debate on my IPOD. It's 1:30 in the morning right now, more to say later.
Jesse

Ryan,

Is this debate available in mp3 format?

Jesse may be able to answer that question Iggy since he has it on his IPOD. In the mean time, here is another debate Preston had on this subject with Gregg Strawbridge in MP3 format.

Part 1:
http://www.wordmp3.com/details.aspx?id=7839

Part 2:
http://www.wordmp3.com/details.aspx?id=7840

enjoy

Ryan,
The question remains:
Immortal Body Now (IBN) or Immortal Body at Death (IBD)?
Iggy, I can copy these files and put them on a blog for you if you wish.

I found the podcasts on iTunes and downloaded them. Hopefully I will get to listen to them before next Thursday... and hopefully I can be there again this week!

"Immortal Body Now (IBN) or Immortal Body at Death (IBD)?"

Immortal Spirit Now. (ISN)
Glorified Immortal Body at Resurrection. (GIBR)

= )

iggy

The IBN, IBD terminology is new to me but from what I understand now about the resurrection, the IBN makes more sense if I must choose either/or. The concept of a glorified immortal physical body at death does not appeal to me after listening to both sides of the argument. Jesse I know you've studied this in depth, is there any other debates or articles you've found helpful?

Ryan,

I really do not know of any books per-say, but as I study the bible and read the early church fathers like Iraenaus I see they affirmed the bodily resurrection of Jesus and of the believers.

Here is an article the goes into this a bit.

Iraenaus used the bodily resurrection as means to disprove the Gnostics.

Justin Martyr also affirmed the bodily resurrection of the believer.



http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.viii.ii.html

Personally I see that since Iraenaus was a discipled in the linage of John the Apostle and held such views that it is safe to say that John held the same views. So for me I see that if the view was handed down by an Apostle, it holds great merit.

Ryan,

Preston on the resurection:
http://www.blubrry.com/player/?e=278070&p=2840
http://www.blubrry.com/player/?e=278071&p=2840

Also David Pease gave me a DVD with Preston discussing the resurrection. Read 1 Cor 15 without any paradigms preterist or otherwise, let me know what you think.

Personally, I'm really not sure exactly what our bodies will be like after we die. I don't think anyone knows for sure.

Jesse, did you ever watch the DVD I gave you of Preston and Bell?

I'm bacccck! :D

I wasn't able to listen to all of the audio files, but this looks like a great discussion. As a believer in the bodily resurrection, I personally find it very exciting that Christians are beginning to rediscover this key biblical teaching and its application in the church. I've found that many Christians I know (including those who are not preterists) embrace or emphasize the IMN view without even realizing it, by emphasizing eternal disembodied life in heaven over eternal embodied life in a perfected heaven and earth.

There are a lot of scriptures that we could bring into this debate, but one issue that I would like to focus on is the nature of Christ's resurrection. The New Testament teaches that the resurrection of Christ is the pattern of our own resurrection - such that 1 Corinthians 15:20 teaches that Christ is the 'firstfruits' of those who have died.

The question, then, is whether Christ's resurrection was physical in nature. I believe the gospels make it abundantly clear that Christ was raised in the very same body that died on the cross. His disciples could touch him and he even made a point of eating and drinking in their presence in order to demonstrate that he was not a disembodied spirit, or ghost.

If Christ was raised in the same physical body that died on the cross, why should we expect our own resurrection to be different from his - especially when Scripture tells us that we will be like Christ in the resurrection?

Here is a good overview of the traditional doctrine of the resurrection, with scriptures: http://www.geocities.com/athens/Delphi/8449/body2.html

Jesse the links you posted were the same ones I posted, I think Iggy was wondering how you got that same debate as MP3 format.

After going back to 1 Cor 15 and reading again while trying to hold back my presuppositions, I still don't see how you guys are getting a physical resurrected body from this passage. I went to all the links you guys posted and I'm not convinced. I don't really feel like debating on this but after listening to the pros debate the subject, the physical resurrected body idea clearly looses. Preston makes some brilliant points in that debate. Notice towards the end of the second debate Schwertly gets desperate and resorts to name calling! If Schwertly's view is the traditional doctrine of the resurrection, I'm not interested.

This is just one more thing I'll add to my list of traditional ideas that need to be rethought.
Traditional ideas, whether they be true or not, give us comfort in knowing that popularity is on our side.

Anyone notice the banner at the Covenant Radio home page before they changed it?

"For most people, a conclusion is simply where they got tired of thinking."