eight bits
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,580
JaysonR
It seems to me that the "solution" to the many known problems of the pneuma-body was to combine features attributed by earlier sources to demons with features observed in carnal bodies, to create a new synthesis. Combinations of things into units with attributes of both aren't rare in artistic or literary thinking. Centuars, harpies, Medusa, Pan ... Robocop... and we might even include "conceptual" grotesques, like "virgin mother."
I am not saying that study of antecedents is empty. No doubt cultural attitudes towards both persistent adult virginity and also girlish unwed motherhood inform the new entity's attributes, but the combination cannot be completely inferred from the antecedents Once in play, you then have derivative entities (like Thecla, virgin lion-tamer) whose properties cannot be derived from earlier antecedents unless the once-novelty (the "virgin mother") is included in the analysis.
That car is also, since this has come up with another poster, fairly described as "the same car," except with different parts.
If we are going to go all cultural on this problem, then cultures change as to notions of what physicalness is, and what identicalness means. In our culture, we have the "Star Trek transporter" problem: isn't it just an elaborate way to commit suicide? "Your" body is destroyed. And yet, to the evident satisfaction of many viewers, the "same body" emerges, in part because we can accept that "livining identity" may lie not in a collection of specific molecules, but in the information about how molecules of their kinds are arranged in space.
No doubt a First Century person would simply be baffled, although that wouldn't stop a Talmudic rabbi from offering an opinion about it.
Or. let me be plainer. I am unaware of any teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that is incompatible with their displaying Jesus' bones on the main altar of Saint Peter's, and charging an admission fee to view them.
But the basis of what we today call "the Gospel account" is Paul. Later authors, not necessarily Jews nor writing for a Jewish audience, may have their own ideas or their own takes on issues for which we lack Paul's teaching (does the spirit-body retain scars from wounds inflicted on the meat-body, as a proto-Beetlejuice myth? or is it 'glorified,' as Moses and Elijah - and meat-Jesus, for that matter - appear to be in the transfiguration episode?)
It seems to me that the "solution" to the many known problems of the pneuma-body was to combine features attributed by earlier sources to demons with features observed in carnal bodies, to create a new synthesis. Combinations of things into units with attributes of both aren't rare in artistic or literary thinking. Centuars, harpies, Medusa, Pan ... Robocop... and we might even include "conceptual" grotesques, like "virgin mother."
I am not saying that study of antecedents is empty. No doubt cultural attitudes towards both persistent adult virginity and also girlish unwed motherhood inform the new entity's attributes, but the combination cannot be completely inferred from the antecedents Once in play, you then have derivative entities (like Thecla, virgin lion-tamer) whose properties cannot be derived from earlier antecedents unless the once-novelty (the "virgin mother") is included in the analysis.
This is not in dispute. The discussion concerns the character of the resurrection process. The councils are silent on whether or not the process leaves junked parts. My car is no less physical because I change worn-out tires for new ones. The old tires don't vanish, but they are not part of the car anymore.
That car is also, since this has come up with another poster, fairly described as "the same car," except with different parts.
All new information is "problematic," since it must be integrated into a coherent body of beliefs. Effort to update belief does not imply abandonment of core beliefs which do not contradict new facts. Junking parts is compatible with the physicality of the refubished entitty.
If we are going to go all cultural on this problem, then cultures change as to notions of what physicalness is, and what identicalness means. In our culture, we have the "Star Trek transporter" problem: isn't it just an elaborate way to commit suicide? "Your" body is destroyed. And yet, to the evident satisfaction of many viewers, the "same body" emerges, in part because we can accept that "livining identity" may lie not in a collection of specific molecules, but in the information about how molecules of their kinds are arranged in space.
No doubt a First Century person would simply be baffled, although that wouldn't stop a Talmudic rabbi from offering an opinion about it.
Great. So, all you need to do is to show me the paragraph in the Catechism that states or implies: "Although there is no limit whatsoever to Almighty God's powers, he cannot possibly have created a resurrection body using any new parts and must have completely used up any old parts." Sorry to put you to the trouble, but I just can't remember ever reading that.
Or. let me be plainer. I am unaware of any teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that is incompatible with their displaying Jesus' bones on the main altar of Saint Peter's, and charging an admission fee to view them.
Last edited:
