PMW 2022-008 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In this article I am concluding a three-part series on our resurrection as taught by Paul in 1 Cor 15. This continues the previous presentation outlining Paul’s second argument in his great resurrection chapter. The other two articles need to be consulted before jumping into this one. Unless you are good at back masking, and you can hum well..

(3) Paul’s parallels and contrasts show his concern is not physical v. immaterial, but perishable v. imperishable (v. 42), dishonor v. honor (v. 43a), and weakness v. power (v. 43b). Our resurrected condition is so governed by the Holy Spirit that the weaknesses of our present condition will be totally overcome by the transformational power of the Spirit. Indeed, he emphasizes the difference of glory as the key (vv. 40-41).

(4) According to scholars such as A. T. Robertson, generally adjectives ending in –inos denote compositional material, whereas those ending with –ikos signify characteristics. This fits the flow of Paul’s argument regarding the “natural”(psuchikos) and the “spiritual” (pneumatikos) body as I have presented it — and it supports the historic faith of the Church regarding the resurrection.

KEYS TO THE BOOK OF REVELATION (DVD lectures)
By Ken Gentry

These four lectures provide the necessary keys for opening Revelation to a deeper and clearer understanding. Excellent for individual or group studies.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

(5) Once again Paul brings in the parallel between Adam and Christ as illustrating the differing circumstances of our estates (vv. 45-48). In verse 45 he applies Genesis 2:7 in light of his resurrection argument, contrasting the Adamic condition (the first Adam) with the resurrected Christ (the second Adam). (He cites the LXX: “the man became a living [psuchen] soul.”) Adam’s body was a psuchen body subject to animal weaknesses (hunger, death, and so forth, Gen. 1:29; 2:17). Once again we have the distinction between the psuche (soul) and pneuma (spirit): But we know that Adam was not immaterial, nor was Christ in his resurrection. The idea here is that just as Adam is the source of our perishable bodies as the “first Adam,” so Christ is the source of our Spirit-powered bodies as the “last Adam” (the man of the last estate or condition of the redeemed). Thus, Paul is drawing the parallel between the two material bodies and their consequent conditions (cp. v. 22), then noting the superiority of the consummate state represented in Christ’s resurrection condition.

(6) In verse 47 (“the first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven”) Paul is not speaking of the origin of Adam and of Christ, but the quality of their conditions (focusing on the resurrected Christ). He is reiterating the difference between their weakness/power, inglorious/glorious conditions. Resurrected believers share the heavenly life of Christ but are not from heaven themselves. Paul contrasts the resurrection body with the Genesis 2:7 Adam (vv. 45-46). Thus, “just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly” (v. 49). We shall wear the image of the heavenly Second Adam, whatever his resurrection was like.

(7) In verse 50 he contrasts man’s fallen condition with his eternal condition in Christ: “Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.” The phrase “flesh and blood” shows the need for transformation. It highlights the weakened, sinful estate, not the material condition. In the LXX “flesh and blood” stands for human weakness as subject to and indicative of death (cf. Deut. 32:42; Isa. 49:26; Jer. 51:35; Eze. 39:17-18; Zeph. 1:17). Therefore, “flesh and blood” parallels with the decayed realm, for “this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality” (v. 53) Paul uses touto (“this”) four times: twice in 53 and twice in 54. His use of “this” demands continuity of the body (this body) even during transformation to the resurrected estate.

MATTHEW 24 DEBATE: PAST OR FUTURE?
Thomas Ice and Kenneth Gentry

Two hour formal, public debate between Ken Gentry and Thomas Ice on the Olivet Discourse. Pits orthodox preterism against revised dispensationalism.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Conclusion

When all is said and done, the historic position of orthodox Christianity is sustained. Christ was physically resurrected (though with transformed powers) and so shall we be. God created man as distinct from angels. We are designed to be physical creatures for: (1) God sovereignly and purposely created the objective, material world in which we live (Gen 1; Psa 33:6-11). (2) He lovingly and carefully formed our physical bodies for dwelling in this material world (Gen 2:7-24) which he has entrusted to man (Psa 8:1-9; 115:16). (3) He brought his objective, propositional revelation to us through the historical process of inspiration and inscripturation by means of men moved by the Spirit of God (2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Pet 1:20-21). (4) In the Second Person of the Trinity, God took upon himself a true human body and soul (which he still possesses, Col 2:9) and entered history for the purpose of redeeming men back to a right relationship with him (Rom 1:3; 9:5; Heb 2:14). (5) His elect people will inherit the eternal estate in resurrected, physical bodies (John 5:28-29; 1 Cor 15:20-28) so that we might dwell in a material New Creation order (2 Pet 3:8-13).

Tagged: bodily resurrection