The Resurrection, revisited

Hi adamjedgar,
I’m commenting that the Bible in my mother language translate it into “touch” not “cling”.

To me, it’s because Jesus want to ascend to the Father. It’s just like (A) a toddler is clinging to his mother, and the mother say “do not cling to me for I have not gone to the market yet”.

I understand that your view is something like below:
(B) The mother already wear a perfume, dressed nice and clean. Knowing that her toddler is smelly and dirty, then the mother say “do not cling to me for I have not gone to the party yet”.

Using #A: (my view)
Do not cling to me because I want to go to the market.

Using #B: (your view)
Do not cling to me because you are smelly and dirty; I want to go to the party.

Thanks.

I really think that you (and @adamjedgar ) are over thinking this. It is part of several naratives of occurrences after the resurrection. It is nothing t do with the state of Jesus or whether He is in some sort of halfway house. In other place Jesus goes out of His way to prove He is fully corporeal despite his ability to come and go at will.

The point of the resurrection is not about Jesus, it is an indication about God’s power over life and death. There was no other way to demonstrate it.

Richard

Uh, that’s more than a little overstated!

It is about Jesus, and who He is, it just isn’t about categorizing metaphysical states and status on a schedule.

On the other hand, if the resurrection is only about Jesus it loses its relevance for the rest of us

Richard

That comes under “Who He is” – the “first among many”, the firstfruits.

Thanks for the response, Richard.

yes… I admit I over thinking about that event.

I just imagined myself as Mary in that event. Then, in my mind, I raise a question: “Why did He tell me not to cling to Him?” Then, I answer myself: "Oh… maybe it’s because He wants to go to the Father.

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.