Quote:
Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa
Brother Blume, yet your not taking into consideration where pneumatikos is being used to describe items that are also invisible themselves.
Romans 1:11, Romans 7:14, Romans 15:27, Eph 1:3, Col 1:9, 1st Peter 2:5, 1st Corinthians 2:13, 1Cor 9:11. In the context of the chapter of 1st Corinthians 15, the apostle is discussing the resurrection of the dead. One thing that is interesting is that you acknowledge that pneumatikos is an adjective which modifies a noun. Now, lets apply that to Paul's writings. He is describing the materials of different types of flesh. Then he comes down to the natural body, and the spiritual body, and what they are made from. What I think you are saying is, that all of a sudden he leaves the idea of what the body is made up of, and turns around and starts explaining what they are powered by? Brother Blume, is that what you are seeing? |
This is the one thing that gives me pause. I understand ikos and inos suffixes are related to the adjective type, but it is still an adjective describing a body. How would a Greek writer describe a spiritual body, opposed to a physical body, if he had to? They would have to use these same adjectives. Thus the adjectives would probably have a dual meaning much like they do in English.
On the other hand, Bro Blume makes a good point that he is backing up his position with good scholarship, and I understand the argument he is making. I don’t think you can simply accept scholar’s views uncritically, but when you have the weight of scholarship he is referencing, it is hard to ignore. It at least needs to be seriously considered. Sure scholars have biases, but who doesn’t. The good ones will explain other views and argue for their own.
Do you have any scholars that would take a spiritual resurrection view? I would be interested to read one. What other scripture would there be to support a spiritual resurrection?
Threaded Mode
