Indeed, Paul is defending resurrection but the resurrection that Paul taught is not what we are taught today. Paul defended and taught continuous resurrection and was against the idea of a one time future resurrection and rebuked the idea that resurrection had already happened in the past as some were teaching then.
Paul's choice of words in 1 Cor 15 shows a present continuous activity. He doesn't ask, "..if there will be no resurrection..." which would exclusively mean future. He asks, "...if there is no resurrection..." which implies present continuous.
IMO, Paul uses the analogy of baptizing for the dead to back up his idea of present continuous resurrection because of the underlying belief that those who practiced it had, of being one with the dead and risen saints (like Abraham) who would influence their lives positively. Paul doesn't have a problem with that idea.
Paul's choice of words in 1 Cor 15 shows a present continuous activity. He doesn't ask, "..if there will be no resurrection..." which would exclusively mean future. He asks, "...if there is no resurrection..." which implies present continuous.
IMO, Paul uses the analogy of baptizing for the dead to back up his idea of present continuous resurrection because of the underlying belief that those who practiced it had, of being one with the dead and risen saints (like Abraham) who would influence their lives positively. Paul doesn't have a problem with that idea.
The same place any believer goes and waits when a person spirit returns to the father who gave it and flesh returns to the lifeless spiritless dust it was formed of. We look back to the rising of those souls from the graves. When one gives up his spirit today it enters that continuous resurrection .To be absent of these bodies of death is to be present with the Lord.
- 1
- Show all