To insist on the bodily resurrection, even though (as Sells admits) “we all know that the event is impossible,” demands the logic of Lewis Carroll’s white queen, who prided herself on believing “as many as six impossible things before breakfast.” It is not sustainable, leading not just to a “crisis of conscience” but to all-out cognitive dissonance. Mostly this is resolved either in a fundamentalist insistence on biblical inerrancy in preference to reason and evidence; or the privatised, dualist, Gnostic spirituality Sells so despises.

Maybe there is a third possibility, an understanding of resurrection that is neither scientifically risible nor completely spiritualised and disembodied. St Paul perhaps hints at that when he says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,” and “there are both heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is one thing, and that of the earthly is another.”

If Sells is pointing to such a possibility, though, he does not explain it. The “imaginary number” analogy is interesting and could be developed further, for though these do not have the qualities of ordinary numbers, mathematicians argue that imaginary numbers are real and important nonetheless.

So to my mind Sells’ article begs the main questions– HOW can a modern person, with the scientific knowledge and respect for reason and evidence of the 21st century, hold to belief in a bodily resurrection? And in what way is that resurrection “bodily”?

Then again... shock horror.. we could actually look at the evidence.

I find plenty to chew on in this thread. Sells included. (bite ? :)

HoHum said :

And quoting church "fathers" who were essentially misogynists and helped create the body negative and body hating cultural script of puritan Christianity. This entirely body negative script being the root cause of ALL of our seemingly intractable social problems.

You forgot Global Warming mate !

Now.. even I would not make such wild claims about Islam, and you KNOW how I feel about that.
Body hating ? why not just go directly to JESUS.."I came that they might have LIFE, and have it abundantly". Now that's a big ask isn't it ? As I read the New Testament I find no reason to 'hate' my body, but I DO recognize a struggle between what my body wants to do at times, and my heart tells me is wrong. No need to illustrate. But that is no reason for self hate.

Brushy.. I take issue with one thing you said, suggesting the Muslims didn't have this dualistic deal about the hereafter ? Unless I misunderstood you. Check this out from one of Mohammeds military commanders under the direction of `Umar ibn al-Khattab who was the 2nd Caliph after Mohammeds father in Law Abu Bakar.

Bhukari Volume 4, Book 53, Number 386
The speaker is Al Mughara.

["Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:-- "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen"]

Here.... fighting ..there...luxury in paradise. Sounds like dualism to me.

Sells.... Jesus said "I am the resurrection and the Life, he who believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live" John 11:25

Anytime you can give sight to the blind, calm the storm, raise the dead and heal the cripple... get back to me and I'll consider your version :)

David, please read "jesus the man" it will surprise you.

Sells, I take it you believe in bodily resurrection? Presumably that means at judgement day?

Some of my Christian friends also believe in bodily resurrection. They take a literal stance on the apocalypse and wait with bated breath for the end times. Mind you, they disagree violently with each other on the rapture, location of hell (on earth or elsewhere) and myriad other points too abstruse to discuss here.

While the fate of unbelievers such as myself is clear (strait to hell in case you're wondering), there is disagreement over the Jews. Some argue that the New Covenant replaced the Old, others that the New Covenant is specifically for Gentiles and the Old Covenant still applies for Jews (spurious if you ask me).

In your last article, Sells, you suggested that post-Enlightenment thought was of limited value. Looks as though post-Medieval thought is now out as well....

Whatever happened to faith? The Creed readily sums up my beliefs and is recited each Sunday, and very strongly in my Church, which is Anglo-Catholic.

While I have sufficient academic qualifications in social science, they cannot explain everything in Heaven and Earth. The presumption of the "Enlightment project" is preposterous. Mere man (gender neutral ladies) cannot explain everything despite tremendous gains in knowledge and science and the plonkers on the ABC!

Many years ago, the eminent sociologist Peter Berger refuted critics who claimed that he was anti-Christian by writing a neat little work - A Rumor of Angels. Basically, he argues that we have lost our ability to look for the divine - blinded perhaps by our own arrogance. Nothing more demonstrates this point than the furtive scuttling of modern churches for "relevance."

What is needed spiritually is all there in the liturgy, escpecially the Creed and the Lord's Supper. We only need the gift of discernment.

Here I stand, I can do no other (apologies to Martin Luther).

Dear Perikles, nice to hear such wise faith oriented words from you, in contrast to your namesake who uses a 'c' rather than a k in his nick.

The Liturgy is indeed rich in symbolism. I attend a very free evangelical church -Open Brethren, (as opposed to the recently publicized 'exclusive' brand) and while our first service which I don't attend is more traditional, I do miss some of the symbolism and focus on the creed in our less formal service later. Too much casualness can breed a less pure and less respectful attitude to the Father.

One of our problems as Christians is that liturgy is meaningful to some but not to others, so its definitely not one size fits all.

JohnJ... I do hope you will reconsider your present status as 'unbeliever'.. and perhaps delve into the Gospel of Mark (The 'Action Movie' gospel) or look at the vital historical links to the contemporary world in Luke, or the Hebrew style full of Christs teaching in Matthew. I believe contemplation and an open heart would reveal that there is a living Christ to be known, and experienced.
"I am...the resurrection and the life" said Jesus. Maybe do a survey of all the 'I am' passages in John ?

Seldom in the affairs of man can so little effort result in an eternally enduring transaction. Coming to Christ is just that. It is not coming to 'The Church', but in fellowship with brethren and sisters is what the Church really is. "Where 2 or 3 are gathered in my name, there I am in the midst of them", said Jesus.

John, the various views of rapture, last days etc, are not a reason to feel the Faith is unclear, some people just like to tie up all things neatly, but God has not given His truth to us in that way, apart from the message of repentance and forgiveness and fellowship.
Matthew 25 is quite clear about the final judgement.
regards.