[Response To Gentry's Analysis of the Full Preterist View...]

[GENTRY] Fifth, there is a serious problem with the removal of the physical resurrection from systematic theology. Christ's resurrection is expressly declared to be the paradigm of our own (1 Cor. 15:20ff). Yet we know that His was a physical, tangible resurrection (Luke 24:39), whereas ours is (supposedly) spiritual. What happens to the biblically defined analogy between Christ's resurrection and ours in the hyper-preterist system?

Fifth – Here is another misrepresentation by Gentry. He claims the full preterist view removes “the physical resurrection from systematic theology” and thereby negates “the biblically defined analogy [continuity] between Christ's resurrection and ours.” Not exactly.

Before we can reasonably discuss the amount of continuity our resurrection bodies have with Christ’s, we need to know what kind of resurrection body He had with which we are supposed to be in conformity. Once we define the nature of His resurrection body, then we can discuss the degree of our continuity with it. This is where most studies of the resurrection falter. Too many assume that Jesus’ resurrection body was nothing more than the same kind (or quality) of pure physical body that He had before the crucifixion. Is that a valid assumption? Is it possible that the nature of His resurrection body was different? Or, was it still nothing more than a mere physical body, just like the body with which Lazarus was raised?

I have asked several Reformed preachers this question: “Was Jesus’ resurrection body exactly the same in every detail (with absolutely no changes of any kind) as His pre-cross body?” Every single one of those to whom I asked this question replied, “No, it’s different in some way.” A similar admission was verbalized by one of the participants at the 1993 Covenant Eschatology Symposium. During one of the discussion periods, one of the participants argued strenuously for the idea that Christ had a physical resurrection, but admitted that Christ’s resurrection body was “...a transformed body, not completely identical with the one before....” And in that same discussion period Max King made the observation that while the Gnostics may have gone to the extreme of completely spiritualizing the nature of the resurrection body, some in the church may have gone to an equally un-biblical extreme of insisting on Christ having a completely physical resurrection body.

During another of the discussion periods, Max King suggested there may be a more biblical way of defining the nature of Christ’s resurrection body, which is somewhere between the two extremes. I believe most full preterists would agree with that. Murray Harris, in his two books, Raised Immortal and From Grave To Glory, has labored carefully to define that “third” position, which avoids both of the extremes and better harmonizes the biblical data. J. I. Packer, Gleason Archer and Peter Toon have all stated in print that they see Murray Harris’ position as Scripturally orthodox, though Norman Geisler has challenged it. Unfortunately Harris’ books are now out of print. At the time of writing this, Kingdom Publications still had a few copies of his From Grave To Glory left in stock. We would highly recommend getting this book and reading it if you can.

In view of Harris’ excellent defense of the idea that Christ was raised immortal, it would seem evident that Jesus’ resurrection body cannot be accurately or exhaustively described as nothing more than a “pure physical body.” His post-resurrection appearances reveal that He had more than just a mere physical body. He was raised immortal. All the others who had been raised from physical death before Christ were raised mortal (still subject to death). Lazarus is a case in point. After being raised by Christ, he lived out the rest of his life and died again. He was raised with a pure physical body, nothing more. When Saul coerced the witch at Endor to summon Samuel from the realm of the dead, it was not a resurrection of Samuel’s physical body. It was the disembodied “pure spirit” form of Samuel (an apparition) which appeared and frightened even the necromancer.

What we see here are two extremely different kinds of appearances: one purely physical, and the other a pure spirit. Jesus’ resurrection body exhibited characteristics of both. His resurrection body was not just purely physical. Nor was it a pure spirit as was Samuel’s reappearance. Harris has shown convincingly and in conformity with biblical orthodoxy that Christ was raised immortal, with a kind of body that no human had ever possessed. How can we say that Jesus is the “firstfruit” of the resurrection if He had the same kind of resurrection body as all the others before Him who had merely been raised physically? Jesus was the first one ever to be raised with that kind of body. He was the “firstfruit” (1 Cor. 15:20) of the resurrection harvest. His resurrection body was not “purely physical,” nor was it “pure spirit.” He was raised with an immortal body. He was the same person, but a different kind of body. He was raised bodily, but not with the same kind of body.

Note how Paul not only clarifies the nature of the resurrection body in 1 Cor. 15, but also affirms the continuity and conformity of our bodies with Christ’s resurrection body:

...it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So also it is written, “The first man, Adam, became a living soul.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. ...as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly. And just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. (1 Cor. 15:44-50)

We are supposed to get the same kind of body that Jesus has. Jesus’ and our resurrection bodies are described by Paul in this text as being “spiritual,” “glorious,” “imperishable,” “incorruptible,” “immortal” and “heavenly.” This doesn’t sound like a mere physical mortal body at all. Harris has done an excellent job of establishing this point from the Biblical teaching about the resurrection. Jesus wasn’t raised with a physical body first and then changed into a spiritual body. He wasn’t raised mortal and then changed to immortal. He was “raised immortal” and “spiritual” already. As Peter said, “For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, in order that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit...” (1 Pet. 3:18).

Jesus was raised with a body that was suited to His life in the heavenly realm. The fact that He ascended into heaven with that same body suggests that it must have been much more than just a pure physical body. Scripture affirms numerous times that mere physical bodies cannot live in the spiritual realm. Christ was able to manifest Himself in a tangible/visible form on several occasions after His resurrection and before His ascension, but He was also able to disappear and remain in an intangible, immaterial form. This is something new. No one had ever been raised with that kind of body before. It was immortal (no longer subject to physical death). When Jesus appeared, He ate with them, but not because His new body needed food to stay alive. He did so for evidence purposes. It was to prove that He truly had been raised and was not just a disembodied spirit (like Samuel’s appearance) awaiting the final resurrection like everyone else. His resurrection with an immortal body was proof that the long-awaited defeat of Death and reign of Life had begun. His appearances were signs that the eschaton had arrived and that the full and final destruction of Death and Hades was imminent. He disappeared again to prove that He was not just a mortal body like Lazarus’ resuscitated physical body. He was raised immortal. The fact that He was able to exhibit both material and immaterial qualities in His resurrection appearances was proof that He had brought true life and immortality to light. He was the firstfruit of that kind of eternal, immortal life. The fact that Christ appeared in tangible/visible form does not prove that His resurrection body was merely a physical body, nor does it prove that He even had “a physical, tangible resurrection” as Gentry suggested in his point number five. Harris (in From Grave To Glory) has shown the profound significance of these tangible manifestations as evidence that Christ had indeed overcome the power of Death and was raised with an immortal, spiritual, imperishable, incorruptible and glorious heavenly body.

Gentry is merely repeating the shallow popular view when he says, “Yet we know that His was a physical, tangible resurrection.” If Gentry is correct, Jesus’ resurrection body was nothing better than what Lazarus got when he was physically resuscitated. Murray Harris was not the first to suggest an alternative. Most of the various theories about the nature of Christ’s resurrection body and ours was discussed by the Ante-Nicene, Nicene and Post-Nicene ecclesiastics. J. N. D. Kelly, Jaroslav Pelikan, Louis Berkhof, Brian Daley, Kurt Aland and Philip Schaff all discuss the various positions taken by church fathers. Origen, Augustine and others took some similar ideas about the nature of our resurrection bodies. This is not something new conjured up by Murray Harris or the preterists.

Preterists are not removing the physical body from the Bible’s systematic theology regarding the resurrection. It was never the ultimate kind of resurrection body God had planned and revealed in Scripture in the first place. Our ultimate victory over “Death” was never intended to be the abolition of physical death. Those who say the “death” God threatened in the Garden was physical are making Satan the truth-teller and God the liar. God said they would “die” the very day they ate. Satan said they would not die. Who told the truth? If God was talking about physical death, then Satan was correct and God did not deliver on His death threat. God would not be immutable after all. But man was separated from God’s spiritual fellowship that very day. To be outside God’s fellowship and presence is Death. There was a worse kind of death than physical death from which mankind more desperately needed deliverance. There is a better kind of life and resurrection than physical resuscitation could ever give us. We were not destined to be raised with a mere physical and mortal body. There is something much better. We were destined to be raised immortal with a spiritual body like Christ’s with which to live in God’s presence forever with. All of us agree that we cannot live in God’s presence eternally with a mere physical body. Even those who believe we are raised with a pure physical body still understand that we have to be changed into a spiritual, glorious, immortal body before entering God’s presence. So, the difference between Gentry’s view and mine is not about what kind of ultimate body we will live in God’s presence with. It is merely a question of WHEN we get that new kind of body. Gentry says we are raised physically and then later changed into that ultimate spiritual body. Harris and many other orthodox Christians (including preterists) say we are raised with that kind of immortal body. No change after resurrection is needed. And Apostle Paul says it is “sown a natural body, and raised a spiritual body” (1 Cor. 15:44). Notice he doesn’t say it is sown a natural body, raised a natural body, and then later changed into a spiritual body. There are some important implications that Gentry and many others have missed. Harris has done a great job of clarifying this whole issue.

And what about Gentry’s funeral eschatology? Does he teach at the graveside that the dear departed believer is right now in heaven with Jesus? But in the classroom at Christ College and Reedy River Church, what does he teach about Hades and the waiting period until the resurrection and judgment? Which is it? Do we go immediately at death to be with God in heaven, or do we have to wait until the resurrection and judgment before we go to heaven? Does Gentry believe the saint gets to be in God’s presence before the resurrection and judgment? Then at the resurrection he is taken back out of heaven, reunited with his physical body for the judgment, then changed into some kind of immortal body after the judgment, and finally moved back into the presence of God in heaven again. How does Gentry get all that out of 1 Cor. 15 or any of the other resurrection texts? This sounds every bit as much fabricated as the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory. Harris’ view is far more Biblical, easier to understand and consistent.