Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!njin!paul.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: sandrock@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (Mark Sandrock) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: The missing body/Empty tomb Message-ID: Date: 3 May 91 06:32:35 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Lines: 90 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu tblake@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu (Thomas Blake) writes: >Why? Why does a change mean that something perfect either is closer to >perfection or farther from it? It is now something different, and it can >be perfect both as what it was, and as what it is now. If I took a >perfect stool, and added a back to it to make it a perfect chair, does >that deny that it was a perfect stool to begin with? This does not seem at all logically equivalent to the statements I am making. The fact remains that a *perfect* GOD could never change. This has nothing at all to do with stools or chairs. And neither could His perfect laws be changed or interrupted. What statement would this being making about the perfection of said laws? We don't understand perfection, but we need to learn to understand it, in order to understand our God. And it IS possible to do so. >Why? God created imperfect human beings, (right?) And who is to say we >know all of the laws of creation, (sometimes labled laws of physics or >laws of nature), scientists have not ceased to explore these laws. >Indeed, the more we learn, the more questions we have. God did not create imperfect human beings!!! We have free will and are capable of DEVELOPING ourselves to perfection, as is willed by God. The fact that human beings can and do CHOOSE imperfectly does not mean that we were CREATED imperfectly, only that we are CAPABLE of choosing imperfectly. We are ALSO capable of choosing to follow God's Will, which will lead us to develop towards perfection. How could it be otherwise in Creation? >It would seem logical to me that a creator capable of creating the >cosmos should be able to re-animate human flesh. Before Jesus death, he >demonstrated the ability to walk on water, and Peter too demonstated >this ability, so violation of the "laws of physics" does not appear to >require that the physical body no longer lives. The same natural laws which sufficed to bring Creation into existence naturally also suffice to maintain it. I would say that any "miracle" that would require violating the natural laws is impossible and never really took place. On the other hand, many more things are possible according to the natural laws than what we have been hitherto aware of. The raising of Lazarus "from the dead" for instance, was possible as the soul of Lazarus had not yet severed its connection with the physical body, i.e., the so-called silver cord often spoken of in this regard. The Divine power available to Jesus was required in the case of Lazarus, but this happening was in accordance with the natural laws of Creation. As far as "walking on water", I have to say that I do not know the answer at this time as to whether or not it happened, but I do know that if it did take place that there must be an explanation which accords with the natural laws -- as in every happening! >Is the act of walking though walls more difficult than walking on water? >Both require something outside the laws of physics we know. As for not >recognizing Jesus; These people were in a state of shock, they had seen >the man die! Quite often, when I run into someone I know in a different >context, I don't recognize them at first. (Since I don't expect to see >them.) For instance, seeing a co-worker in a store may leave me at a >loss for a time. These people had seen Jesus die, probably they didn't >expect to meet him on the street. Perhaps he took on a different >appearance, we have a occurance of him being transfigured before his >death as well. Yes, I would say that it is impossible, according to the natural laws, for a physical body to pass through a wall. In the case of walking on water, I am not so sure. It does happen that human beings sometimes have help from animistic beings, which may seem "miraculous" to those unaware of such help. In the same way I believe it was possible for Jesus to command the wind and the sea, since these phenomena are also influenced by "invisible" animistic beings, who work in the Will of God. >>As for the physical body of Jesus, one would have to assume then that it was >>in fact taken from the tomb, by persons unknown and for reasons unknown, but >>I expect that in the future this too shall be made clear. >Why does one *have* to assume this? You are willing to accept the >miracle of Christ's resurrection, but *only* if it was not bodily!? The >workings of souls and spirits have yet to be explained by "physical >laws". Why do you accept one apparant lack in "physical laws", but >outright reject another? "Souls and spirits" are subject to the laws governing THEIR respective realms. They are NON-physical forms and therefore would NOT be subject to physical laws. This is entirely logical and consistent. What I reject is any interpretation which implies an imperfection in God, His Holy Will, and His perfect laws in Creation. Mark Sandrock -- BITNET: sandrock@uiucscs Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Internet: sandrock@aries.scs.uiuc.edu Chemical Sciences Computing Services Voice: 217-244-0561 505 S. Mathews Ave., Urbana, IL 61801