I recently posted some shocking statistics about the denial of future bodily resurrection among professing Christians. One of the best resources for understanding why this denial is so radically unbiblical is Tom Wright’s refreshing book Surprised by Hope. For those who don’t have time to read Wright’s book, however, the following words from Jonathan Edwards serve as a timely reminder of just how wrong-headed this crypto-gnosticism is:
Redemption is not complete till the resurrection, not only with respect to the positive good and happiness that is obtained, but also with respect to what they are redeemed and delivered from. So long as the separation between soul and body remains, one of those evils remains that is part of the penalty of the law; one of our enemies remains. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. Death and hades, or a state of separation, are two evils that shall be at the last day cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14). To be without the body is in itself an evil, because 'tis a want of that which the soul of man naturally inclines to and desires. And though it causes no uneasiness in the departed spirits of the saints, it is not because they don't want it, but because their certain hope and clear prospect of it, and apprehension how much it will be best for them, and most for their happiness to receive it in the time that God's wisdom determines, satisfies them till that time and is a full remedy against all uneasiness; and they perfectly rest in the hope and prospect and trust in God that they have. There is something that they still want, and their rest and satisfaction is not a rest of enjoyment, but a rest of perfect and glorious trust and hope.
2 comments:
Thanks for that Robin.
A good defence of the important doctrine of bodily resurrection. I must admit, in the past I didn't really think much of this doctrine, and at some point thought we were just spirits in heaven after death. However, when I read through 1 Corinthians while at university I realised Paul considers it a crucial aspect of our hope.
If we aren't to rise from the dead then why did Jesus?
We looked at John 11 last Tuesday, which is also very useful on this subject.
Robin, I wonder if you have an opinion on how the dogmatic belief in the physical resurrection plays out in the life of a Reformed Christian. Here Edwards affirms the very anti-gnostic belief that Christ rose bodily. Yet in another post you demonstrate that Edwards himself had very gnostic tendancies. I wonder how these seemingly contradictory positions fit together.
From what i've seen of current Reformed zealots, belief in Christian dogmas such as the Trinity and the resurrection function, almost exclusively, as a checklist of beliefs that one should hold. This is often done without regard for the actual meaning of these doctrines. What is the theological significance of the resurrection? We often don't hear much about this in Reformed circles nowadays. Tom Wright has dealt extensively with the meaning of the resurrection, particularly with its Kingdom of God/Lordship-of-Christ-over-the-world agenda. Perhaps the political consequences of this are too much for American Reformed Christians to bear.... you know it's all that social gospel stuff, they might say. And it strikes me that the penal substitutionary dogma held to by the Reformed is also quite gnostic. So perhaps it's a case of affirming anti-gnostic doctrine on the surface, but actually practising a faith that is quasi-gnostic. I'm not sure, but that's what it seems like to me.
Post a Comment