Re: Seeing a life-giving spirit with a camcorder

From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. <>
Date: Wed Oct 19 2005 - 17:50:13 EDT

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 06:14:40 +0100 writes:
> wrote:
> > Aspects of the discussion remind me of a conversation among a
> group of
> > women that my wife reported. One mother said that the doctor said
> he
> > child felt bad because of intestinal parasites. Another woman
> said, "I
> > don't believe in worms," bringing the topic to an end. There are
> so many
> > things some people can't believe in, whatever the evidence. But
> they can
> > believe that unequalled legends arose within a couple decades of
> events,
> > even while participants were still alive.
> Paul does complain about people preaching a different Jesus, so
> legends do occur quickly.
Nice twist, but it won't stand. The different Jesus was one reduced from
what was known by the apostles.

> Pleased to know that you do not think that the story of Muhammad
> being visited by the Angel Gabriel can be a legend which grew within
> the 23 years of Muhammads career.
> Or that the story of the Golden Plates is entirely legendary, as it
> occurred within years of the Book of Mormon appearing.
You confuse the time it takes for a legend to arise and the time it takes
a lying "prophet" to make up a tale to bolster his position. Typical
approach of the charlatan.

> Or that the sightings of Elvis are entirely legendary.
Apparently you think that nothing is misunderstood or misinterpreted.
> Still does have
> photographic documentation of the literary nature of the miracles
> stories. I believe the evidence of my senses. It works for the Koran
> and the BoM. I guess it works for the NT too.
> Of course the Corinthians also wondered what a resurrected body
> could be like. I guess they were fed up to the teeth hearing all
> these stories of how the resurected Jesus could be touched and ate
> fish, and wanted to ask somebody who waa not there what a
> resurrected body would be like.
> These ex-Gentile Corinthians and new converts to Christianity must
> have been baffled by sayings like 'Flesh and blood cannot inherit
> the Kingdom of God' which takes scholars like NT Wright years of
> training in Jewish thought to decipher as meaning that flesh and
> blood *can* inherit the Kingdom of God.
> They must have wondered how a body which had been cremated,
> scattered to the winds or eaten by fishes could be resurrected, if
> the body which is resurrected is the body died. They did not know
> about atoms after all, and naively thought a body turned into smoke
> and ashes had disappeared , leaving nothing to be resurrected.
> No problem for Paul though, who realised that our new bodies were
> already waiting for us, and were not our old bodies literally warmed
> up again.
> 2 Corinthians
> 1Now we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we
> have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by
> human hands. 2Meanwhile we groan, longing to be clothed with our
> heavenly dwelling, 3because when we are clothed, we will not be
> found naked. 4For while we are in this tent, we groan and are
> burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed
> with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed
> up by life.
> A clothing metaphor implies discontinuity. We replace old clothes
> with new ones.
Let me note the express language of Paul in I Corinthians 15: /soma
psychikos/ and /soma pnevmatikos/. The reference is strictly to body,
which is qualified. Both /psyche/ and pneuma/ are difficult to interpret
physically, unless the latter is claimed to apply strictly to "breath."
More could be said, but I am convinced that it would be twisted to score
points, not understanding. So this is the last I have to say to you.
Received on Wed Oct 19 17:54:39 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Oct 19 2005 - 17:54:47 EDT