John's gospel tells us that Thomas was invited to check for himself whether the Lord bore the marks of crucifixion. However, the gospel does not actually state that the Lord's hands and feet and side did bear wound marks. It is almost always assumed that they did but surely this would imply that our resurrection bodies will also bear all the marks of infirmity. What is your view?
Anonymous.Thanks for writing in and with a very interesting question. Although, I am afraid that the response is highly speculative and I am not much of a speculator but will offer a couple of options. I would not agree that “the gospel does not actually state that the Lord's hands and feet and side did bear wound marks” since when Thomas states, “Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.” Jesus ends up telling him, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing” (John 20:27).Jesus is clearly presenting his wounds for the examining. Some believe that Jesus’ wounds will remain forever as a living testimony to His love and sacrifice.In such as case, I would imagine that His glorified body would not lack functionality due to the wounds. For example, after the resurrection He cooks fish, etc. apparently, without trouble. Some believe that Jesus’ wounds will remain until His return so that He will be clearly recognized. But since, “God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away” (Revelation 21:4) I think it safe to say that our bodies will be optimal. aDios,Mariano
I think its a big mistake to attach the risen Jesus, who is God, to any body --as if he could not appear any way he wishes.Could Jesus manifest invisible and whisper in your ear? Could Jesus appear as traveler on the road? Even after the resurrection the Bible describes him as appearing in another form and on more than one occasion he was not recognized.Restricting the appearance of Jesus visible body to the physical laws of the universe(the tuning fork analogy) places Jesus at the mercy of creations laws.I am firmly convinced that Jesus could appear as a Herseys kiss if he wanted to. I would also not be surprised if we will have that ability too.This topic always contains thinkers who think in the box too much. Why is yelllow bright? Is it bright because its bright to God or did God, at random decide it was bright to us. Its the latter. We dont like chocolate because its good. We like it because God decided it would taste good to US. He could have as easily made leaves taste good to us.God is not subject to the parameters of the universe OR the spiritual realm. To say that Jesus, at his very core of being, has a body must be incorrect. I dont think he has a body at his core anymore than we do. Paul thought he might have visited heaven out of his body. That alone shows it is not nessesary. We also know even from our dreams that it is our Thought that is us and not the body as we can imagine one and act in it in our dreams and we are convinced it is real.So my point is, yes, Thomas did see the real body of Jesus, with his wounds, but Jesus could have just as easily appeared without those wounds. We have to get out of our minds that anything that we see in this universe is concrete. It is not. It is sustained by God's thought. If God wanted to destroy earth he would have to crash a comet into it--all he would have to do is stop thinking about it.God is the only, truly, real being. We are sustained by his thought. When you see a body in your dreams it is no more real to you than our bodies are to God. They arent big, small, hot or cold, or even alive or dead to God. They are only those things to US. Our thought is what we are--thats is the real creation.
It appears that you are oddly combining Eastern metaphysics with biblical theology and are thus making it difficult for me to make sense of your point.For example, you seem to skirt around what the Bible actually states by imagining that it could have been otherwise. Also, according to biblical theology it is not accurate to say that God is all that there is and we, the creation, are God’s thoughts. Rather, God is the creator and we are His independent physical creations.Also, I only recall one occasion wherein Jesus was not recognized and that was because He made that happen.The only parameters to which God is subject are those which He has established for Himself. For example: God cannot lie.When you state, “We have to get out of our minds that anything that we see in this universe is concrete. It is not” does that mean that you do not look both ways before crossing the street?The bottom line is that the Bible taints a picture of a physical eternal existence—even though those physical bodies will be somehow different and able to do things that our current bodies cannot. Jesus’ resurrection was physical and the Bible makes is crystal clear time and time again.aDios,Mariano
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.