lew (02/25/83)
The following is a continuation of the discussion about I Cor. 15:39-41, which begins "For not all flesh is alike". I consulted "The Interpreters Bible" and found that the interpretation given there is, at least in part, very close to what I was saying. Although there is a warning that "we ought not to press the analogy too far in matters of detail, or make it carry more than the apostle had in mind.", the exegesis concludes, "These illustrations bear upon Paul's contention at the one central point: God has shown his power to create radically different bodies." I can only repeat my contention that our knowledge that the expression of this power is confined by physical law (in all the examples) removes the cogency of the analogies. I hope it is unnecessary to point out that Paul's view of nature was necessarily radically different from ours today. For example, the exegesis states, "In many passages in the O.T. the stars are looked upon as angels (I Kings 22:19; Neh. 9:6; Job 38:7; etc.), and this was assumed by Paul." I don't claim that science "disproves" the doctrine of the Resurrection, just that this doctrine fits comfortably in Paul's view of nature, but departs radically from ours - so much so that I find it totally alien. Steve Hutchison took me to task for saying that Paul was asserting "that the spirit can take different forms." Let me again defend my remarks by comparing the language of The Interpreters Bible - "... just as there are differences between man and the animals, and between celestial bodies, so is there a difference between the body with which the SPIRIT was, so to speak, clothed in this life, and that with which it is to be adorned in the Resurrection." (emphasis mine) If Steve is going to say that being clothed in different bodies is not the same as taking different forms, then he has lost me. I would comment that in the text, Paul gives no name to the sine qua non of human personal existence, but only implicitly refers to it when he says, "As we have worn the likeness of the man made of dust, so we shall wear the likeness of the heavenly man.", and in similar statements. Whatever this invariant "we" is that can be common to such different bodies, is what I and the commentator I quoted were referring to as "spirit". Lew Mammel, Jr. ihuxr!lew