The brain-teasing disputes within modern-day Christian theology rarely cross over into popular discussion. Yet, a sharp disagreement between two accomplished evangelical theologians over the nature of the resurrection body of Jesus has increasingly been played out in public, fueled in part by an escalating use of emotional and inflammatory accusations.
The so-called battle for the resurrection has become a theological street brawl of sorts in which the one side alleges “dirty tricks” and a “coverup,” while the other charges “ruthless” and “unethical” actions.
Murray J. Harris, professor of New Testament exegesis and theology at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, Illinois, in books and public statements has described the resurrection body of Jesus as “immaterial,” “nonfleshly,” and “invisible,” while it retains a fully human nature and the
ability to become “visible and fleshly” at will. Harris believes there were two modes to Jesus’ resurrection body and that there exists a “substantial and personal identity” between the crucified and risen Jesus.
In addition, Harris says he “inclines toward” the view that Christian believers will receive their resurrection bodies at death, while their physical bodies remain in the grave, and yet will experience a second resurrection at the Second Coming in which their physical bodies will be transformed from the grave into spiritual bodies like Christ’s.
Norman L. Geisler, dean of Southern Evangelical Seminary, Charlotte, North Carolina, has emerged as the principal foil to Harris’s teachings, saying that Harris has developed an unorthodox, “cultlike” ...
1
You have reached the end of this Article Preview
To continue reading, subscribe now. Subscribers have full digital access.