Pauline Resurrection Paper
Pauline Resurrection Paper
Pauline Resurrection Paper
INTRODUCTION
“20
But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21
For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22 For as
in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits;
then, when he comes, those who belong to him. (1 Cor. 15: 20-23) 1
Death begins its destructive work in people long before they physically die whenever they
allow the fear of it to cripple their zest for life. Death does not wait until the end of life before
discharging its devastation upon it. It should not surprise us then that man often attempts to cheat
death in some way with hopes of either extended longevity or some expression of immortality after
death. Hope for non-Christians is normally little more than wishful thinking because they cannot be
certain of attaining what they hope for. They anxiously cling to imaginative speculations, particularly
in their struggles with the inevitability of their mortality. Their ideas of immortality, or even of its
possibility, range from the fanciful to its utter denial. The fear of death grips them tenaciously.
It is utterly untenable that Christians should suffer from this sort of fear and uncertainty
because the scriptures give assurance of eternal life. The faith of Christian rebirth is faith in the hope
that salvation is unto eternal life (1 John 5: 10-12) through the resurrection of the body. It is sadly
ironic that so many Christians who affirm their hope in the resurrection from the dead remain vague
and confused concerning what is actually going to happen to them when they die. Heller calls it a
“strange anomaly” that can even be seen in the controversy and doubt found in the New Testament
church as well.2 This uncertainty has the potential for defiling the life of faith, misshaping its image
of God as the Creator and Sustainer of life and robbing the saints of peace as they await the
This paper is a general overview of the Apostle Paul’s presentation to the early Church of his
doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. By examining Paul’s explanations of the issues related to the
resurrection, we hope to see what it is he wanted the early Church to understand concerning their
hope for eternal life. Limited in scope, this paper is not a detailed systematic examination of the
doctrine of the resurrection or of its history, but a survey of Paul’s teachings and how they impact
“Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not the result of my
work in the Lord?” (1 Cor. 9:1)4
Background for Paul’s belief in the resurrection would have come first from his having been
a Pharisee (Acts 23: 6-8). While it is known that the Pharisees believed in the idea of a resurrection,
it cannot be established exactly what Paul, when he was still Saul, would have inherited as a
resurrection doctrine because opinions on this subject varied widely among Paul’s contemporaries. 5
It is apparent, however, that whatever Paul’s early thoughts on the resurrection were, they were
significantly modified by his conversion experience on the road to Damascus when he was
Paul rightfully claimed authority as an apostle to the church of Jesus Christ on par with the
other apostles, for like them, he too was an eyewitness of the risen Lord (1 Cor. 9:1) and chosen by
the Lord to “carry my name” to the Gentiles.7 His conversion experience on the road to Damascus
2
3
made him both a follower of Jesus and one of His apostles. Before his conversion to Christianity,
Paul’s sources for his ideas on the resurrection from the dead may have been limited to his classic
Judaic rearing, possibly affected by Hellenistic philosophical influences. However, afterward Paul
may have revised his Old Testament traditions through his exposure to fellow believers, including
the other apostles. Foremost among his sources, however, Paul claimed special revelation received
directly from risen Lord through the Holy Spirit (Gal. 1: 11-12) making him unquestionably
“16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been
raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ
are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.” (1 Cor.
15:16-19) 9
Paul’s past Pharisaical theology and his life-changing encounter with the resurrected Lord on
his way to Damascus worked to cement his hope in the eventuality of his own resurrection and that
of his fellow believers as well. As the apostle to the Gentiles, people who had no background for a
belief in a resurrection, Paul set out to preach that the hope for which sinners are saved is indeed
nothing less than the redemption of their bodies through the resurrection from the dead at Christ’s
return. Murray calls the advent of Christ the “focal point of the Christian hope.” 10 Echoing this,
Ridderbos states that the “expectation of the coming of the Lord and what accompanies it is one the
3
4
But, Paul knew that hope in the resurrection from the dead had to be grounded in the
historical raising of the slain Christ Himself; therefore, before instructing the Church (specifically,
the Corinthian believers) concerning any hope they could have in their own resurrection, he needed
to remind them that the Gospel he preached would be mere vanity if Christ had not been bodily
raised from the grave Himself (1 Cor. 15: 14, 17-18). To authenticate the factual certainty of Christ’s
resurrection, Paul reminds the Corinthians of the already established historicity of Christ’s
resurrection with his “broad appeal to authoritative witnesses (1 Cor. 15: 4-8).”12 Thus, Paul grounds
the believers’ hope in the resurrection in the fact that Christ died, was buried and was raised.
But, mere belief in the historicity of Christ’s death, burial and resurrection is insufficient
without its appropriation to the Church itself. Ridderbos sees Paul establishing this necessary
connection between the crucified Lord and the Church as having been crucified with Him in 2
Corinthians 5:14 (and consequently in Col. 3:3 and Rom. 6: 2) where Paul appeals to the Church’s
inclusion in the death of Christ rather than to their conversion as the ground for their exaltation in
heaven at His Parousia.13 In this, Paul is saying that solidarity exists between Christ and His Church
because when He died, those who are His also died with Him and when He was raised, likewise,
Gaffin also asserts that Paul identified the union that exists between the crucified and risen
Christ and all Christians as the “central theme” for the hope believers have for their resurrection
from the dead.14 Through his exegesis of several Pauline passages (I Cor. 15:12-20ff; Col. 1:18; 2
Cor. 4: 14), Gaffin demonstrates that Paul makes an organic connection between the past
resurrection of Christ and the future resurrection of the Christian using the agricultural metaphor of
the “firstfruits” (1 Cor. 15: 20) and of Christ as the “firstborn from among the dead” (Col. 1:18).15
4
5
Paul’s also illustrates this central theme of the solidarity between Christ and His Church in
his comparison of the first man, Adam, to Christ as the second man and the last Adam. Just as all
humanity suffers death through their solidarity with Adam, all who are in Christ stand in solidarity
Paul explicitly ties the conversion of believers to their hope for the redemption of their
bodies through their resurrection from the dead. He sets out to demonstrate that the surety of this
resurrection lies in the inexorable union that exists between Christ and those who are His. Christians
are baptized into Christ and therefore, into his death being buried with him through that baptism.
Likewise, just as Christ was raised from the dead, they will also be raised to a new life. Believers,
according to Paul, have been united to Christ in his death, burial and resurrection and therefore, can
look forward with confident hope to their resurrection from the dead. Just as surely as they know
they will some day die because of their union with the first Adam whose disobedience brought them
death, Christians are assured of their resurrection because of their union with Christ, the Second
Adam, whose obedience brought them eternal life through the redemption of their bodies. This
union with the risen Lord is the ground for their hope for eternal life. They will be raised because He
was raised (Eph.2: 6; Col. 3: 1). In fact, Gaffin points out that Paul considered the past resurrection
of Christ and future resurrection of the Christians as “two episodes of the same event.”17
5
6
THE RESURRECTION : DUALISM
“8 We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord.
9
So we make it our goal to please him, whether we are at home in the body or away from
it.” (2 Cor. 8-9)18
Classical Christianity contends that man is comprised of both physical (the body) and
spiritual (the soul) elements. The physical dies and suffers decay while the spiritual continues to live
in a sort of immortality as it awaits its reunion with the resurrected body. Taken for granted is the
metaphysical duality of two separable elements, a body (material) and a soul (immaterial) 19. In his
Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin, that bulwark of Reformed theology, confidently
posits: “1.15.2. Moreover, there can be no question that man consists of a body and a soul; meaning by soul, an
Traditional Christianity accepts Paul’s ideas of the resurrection of the dead that presupposes
this dualistic nature of man. In 2 Corinthians 5: 1-10, Paul directs our thoughts primarily to the
separability of the two human elements of body and soul explaining that being alive means being in
the body and being dead means leaving the body (the soul’s temporal home) and going to be with the
Lord. When we die our bodies are no longer the homes for our soul, thus, for Paul death is described
as a departure of the soul from the physical body (the earthly tent). This idea of death as departure of
the soul from the body is further seen in Philippians 1: 20-23 where Paul tells the believers in
Philippi that while he prefers to depart (in death) so that he can be with the Lord, he knows that for
their sake he will remain (in life). For Paul physical death obviously does not mean the extinction of
the person since he talks of the continued existence of the soul elsewhere, in the case of a believer,
with Christ.
7
Modern critics reject this traditional view that dichotomizes man into two separate and
distinct elements, one material, the other immaterial, holding to a scientific psychosomatic unity of
existence21. The immortality of the immaterial component of human existence (the soul), is not seen
as detachable from the material (the body), and is therefore denied and considered unbiblical. Thus,
traditional Christianity and Paul are accused of embracing the philosophy of Platonic dualism.
Guthrie accuses those who believe in a distinct and separable immortal soul of being “falsely
optimistic” by not taking death seriously enough and of basing their hope for the future, not in God’s
power to raise the dead, but in their confidence in the intrinsic capacity of the soul to survive death
through its own immortality. For him, death comes to the whole man who is utterly “dead and gone”
Heller, uses an epistemological syncretism of modern science and recent biblical research to
resolve controversial issues concerning the resurrection of man.23 Regarding the immortality of the
human soul, he claims the Bible essentially agrees with science that, “finds no evidence of a
separable nonphysical entity in man which has such an inalienable connection with life that it can
survive the dissolution of man’s physical being at death.”24 Heller states the ground for the hope of
eternal life for the Christian is not the immortality of the human soul itself, but the immortality of
God as Savior thus defending his view of the New Testament emphasis on man’s dependence upon
Hannah also argues against the immortality of the human soul, consistently referring to it as
fundamental dualism, defining resurrection as “the reuniting of the ‘never-dying soul’ with a newly-
created body,” a definition he ascribes to the traditional Christian view.25 He claims that death has
8
been redefined as “continued existence in separation from God” by ascribing death only to the
body26
Davis makes a distinction between what he calls “classical dualism” (Platonic) and biblical
dualism (traditional Christian view) to answer the modern critics who fail to make this distinction
themselves when reproving the traditional Christian view for holding to a belief in the immortality of
the human soul, a view they label unbiblical.27 Davis’ definition clears the traditional view of any
inclusion of unbiblical notions such as; (1) the soul as the essence of a person that is temporarily
imprisoned in the body, (2) the body as essentially evil and (3) that the soul enjoys immortality as a
natural property apart from God’s miraculous intervention.28 If the assumption by modern critics
that the traditional Christian view objectionably embraces these notions in its conception of dualism
is what poses the problem for acceptance of the soul of man as capable of existence after death, then
the clarifications made by Davis should open the way for dismantling such objections.
“Now we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an
eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands. 2 Meanwhile we groan, longing to be clothed
with our heavenly dwelling, 3 because when we are clothed, we will not be found naked.”
(2 Cor.5: 1-3)29
If the removal of these objections brings acceptance that a human soul can survive death
independent of the deceased body, then what must follow is a discussion of the state of the surviving
disembodied soul existing between death and the resurrection, or what Davis calls the theory of
“temporary disembodiment.”30 Naturally, the modern philosophers deny the possibility of the
9
existence of a state of temporary disembodiment having rejected the likelihood that the soul has
case for a disembodied state of existence for the surviving soul of the deceased body. The following
Paul’s reference to the destruction of the earthly tent (v.1) at this point, implies his
expectation of death before the Parousia with the building from God representing the resurrection
body. At death the soul is stripped “naked”, a state of existence Paul considers undesirable; therefore,
the soul groans longing to be clothed with the resurrection body (vv. 2-4). That Paul finds
disembodiment undesirable stands in conflict with the accusations made by modern critics that
traditional Christianity favors Platonic dualism (which saw escape from the material body as
desirable) as the basis for their belief in an immortal soul. Paul’s dread of temporary disembodiment
argues against immediate and individual resurrections and argues for a form of conscious awareness
during the intermediate state. Although Paul clearly preferred to avoid disembodiment (avoidable
only if the Parousia preceded his death), he is confident God will fulfill His promise of resurrection
because of the pledge of the Holy Spirit. Because his absence from his mortal body means being
present with the Lord, this disembodied state, as unnatural and undesirable as it is to Paul, is still
preferable to living in the body, a state that precludes this intimate communion with the Lord (v. 6).
Although Paul expects to experience joy during this intermediate state (being present with the Lord),
he expects his joy to be complete only at the Parousia when he is reunited with his resurrection
body.32
10
resurrection to reunite with its body at the Parousia. Because the soul has survived death (though
exactly how is not known to us), and enjoys an uninterrupted presence with the Lord, personal
identity is guaranteed. That is to say, the person who died will be the same who is raised. He will be
recognizable as his ante-mortem self and not someone else. Cooper is careful here to mention that
while it will be the same person, there will be necessary changes in personal attributes.33
The critical modern, or monistic, view is a bit more troublesome due to its denial of the
soul’s existential continuity. Resurrection for them is immediate and individual since there must not
be an unbreakable connection between persons and their bodies.34 Thus, they argue against a future
personality with a subsequent resurrection which Cooper calls re-creation. Because this alternative
involves a re-creation from nonexistence, there is the possibility of the loss of personal identity.35
Davis calls this the “temporal gap theory” agreeing with Cooper that this interruption of
continuity of the existence of the person introduces serious difficulties regarding the retention of
personal identity.36 He offers some rather intricate and complex formulas to accommodate both the
traditional and modern views on the intermediate state, but ultimately remains vague in his
conclusion regarding the effects a temporal gap would have on the retention of personal identity
ending by claiming there is no way to know for sure what happens to a person when he dies.
and his resurrection implies biblical dualism and allows for a delayed general resurrection of the
corporate body of Christ rather than the immediate individual resurrection endorsed by those who
disavow separability of body and soul and the consequent intermediate state. Paul’s sees
11
disembodied believers as fully conscious, despite 1 Corinthians 15: 18 and 1 Thessalonians 4: 13-15
referring to them as having fallen asleep, because they are enjoying a closer communion with the
Lord 37. At the same time, they are groaning as they long for the end of their “nakedness” by being
clothed with their resurrected heavenly bodies. Therefore, although their joy is not complete, being
with the Lord in death is still preferable to life apart from Him in this “earthly tent.” Beyond this,
however, Paul gives no other detailed instruction concerning the nature of the intermediate state.
20
But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus
Christ, 21 who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform
our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body. (Phil.3: 21)38
Paul calls the mortal, ante-mortem body of the believer “lowly” and speaks of its
transformation to a state of gloriousness that will be like that of the resurrected Lord (Phil3: 21). In
1 Corinthians 15: 35-54, Paul describes the nature of the believers’ resurrection body, the heavenly
body, contrasting it to the one left behind in death, the earthly body. The former is perishable,
dishonorable, weak and natural in its relation to Adam who was made of dust of the earth. The latter
is imperishable, glorious, powerful and spiritual having been fashioned after the heavenly body of
The Gospels record the disciples’ encounters with the risen Lord and give some insight into
the nature of His glorious resurrection body through the accounts of these appearances (Lk. 24: 13-
43; Jn. 20: 17-30; 21: 1-14). The appearance of the risen Lord to Paul on the road to Damascus (Acts
9: 3-7; 1 Cor. 9:1) served to accredit him both as an apostle equal to the other apostles and as an
12
eyewitness who could attest to the nature of Christ’s resurrection because of a personal encounter
with Him. Without diminishing this point, it is understood that Paul also drew upon those believers
who preceded him in the faith, such as the other disciples themselves, as additional sources for his
teachings,39 therefore, it is not entirely outside this examination of Paul’s teachings on the
resurrection to take a brief look at what the Gospel records say about the Lord’s resurrection body ,
That resurrected persons will retain their recognizable personal identities is demonstrated by
the Lord’s appearance to the two men on the road to Emmaus. At first, they were actively prevented
from recognizing Him until later when, at last, they were permitted to recognize that He was the
risen Lord (Lk. 24: 13-35). Afterwards, Jesus appeared to the disciples inviting them to touch Him
in order to demonstrate that He was not a ghost, but a “flesh and bones” physical body (v. 39). He
also ate fish with them as an additional indication to them that He was corporeal (v. 43).
That the resurrected Lord was still recognizable as Jesus is again confirmed in John’s account
of His appearance to the Disciples. In John 20, the risen Jesus invites Thomas to feel the wounds He
had received at His crucifixion indicating both corporeality and retention of physical features
retained from his ante-mortem life (v.27). John 21: 12 explicitly states that the disciples knew it was
the Lord who was with them. They had no apparent difficulty recognizing Him.
These accounts show the risen Christ as the same Jesus the disciples knew prior to His
passion and resurrection, yet there were differences, too. Paul refers to the resurrection body as
heavenly and spiritual (though also physical, as just illustrated above) differentiating it from the
earthly ante-mortem body. The spiritual quality of the resurrection body is demonstrated in John’s
13
narrative where he is careful to tell us of risen Lord’s apparent capacity to pass through solid objects,
in this case a locked door (Jn. 20: 19, 26), a phenomenon previously not seen by them.
In summary, Paul was sufficiently aware of the nature of the resurrection body to stress that it
will be similar enough to the ante-mortem body of the believer that the one who is raised will be the
same person who died, yet it will also have the qualitative differences necessary for eternal life with
the Lord in Heaven.41 Thus, Paul speaks of the old, natural bodies of believers as being transformed
at the resurrection into the glorious likeness of the new heavenly body exhibited by the risen Lord
Jesus Christ. What was sown as perishable, is made imperishable (1 Cor. 15: 42).
Some wonder curiously how this transformation can significantly change the body without,
at the same time, affecting retention of personal identity. Others are troubled because they do not
understand how a body having undergone complete dissolution after death by decay, burning by fire
or even consumption by wild beasts can be raised essentially the same person. That Paul does not
give us a more detailed characterization of the nature of the resurrection body is problematic to those
who want to know more. Paul calls these questions “foolishness” (1 Cor. 15: 35, 36) concluding that
believers in Christ simply need to stand firm in their faith in the power of God.42
14
CONCLUSION: THE PAROUSIA
16
For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the
archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we
who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord
in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. 18 Therefore encourage each other with these
words. (1 Thess. 4: 16-18) 43
With utmost confidence, Paul consoles the bereaved Thessalonians (1 Thess. 4: 13-5: 11)
with straight forward instruction concerning the fates of those Christians who died before the Lord’s
promised return to take them to the place He had prepared for them (Jn. 14: 3; Acts 1: 11). He
assures them that what Christ, as the “firstfruits,” inaugurated with His own resurrection, He will
consummate on the day of His return when He first raises the Christians who have died, and then
take with Him, those who have remained alive. None who trusted in Him will be lost.
Paul asserts this will occur one day as a singular event (1 Thess. 5: 4) which argues against
belief in immediate resurrection of individuals upon their deaths throughout history. On that day,
“there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked” (John 5: 28,29; Acts 24: 15). He
mentions a resurrection (a singular event) not multiple resurrections. Paul maintains it is the last
day, immediately followed by the last judgment and leaves no room for speculation concerning
multiple resurrections with temporal gaps between them of one thousand years or of any other
duration.44
Murray calls the Lord’s return, or His Second Advent, “the pivotal event of collective
eschatology and characterizes it as bodily, public, visible, powerful and glorious. It is “the blessed
affirms a resurrection for the unregenerate sector of humanity as well as for the righteous
in Christ.46 The unregenerate will not be left behind following a “rapture” of the risen
Church. The Day of the Lord is for them too, but for the non-Christian it is a terrible day
of destruction and final judgment unto condemnation as Christ repays them for their
disobedience and unbelief in the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ (2 Thess. 1: 6-10). This
is a far cry from the event popularly called “the rapture” in which the Lord secretly spirits
away the Church leaving behind an unbelieving world that wonders what happened.47
speculation as the second coming of Christ, or the Parousia, and its attendant resurrection.
For Paul the eschatological event that he simply calls “the day of our Lord Jesus Christ”
explanation due to the proliferation of books and preachers espousing end times
Though currently accepted by the vast majority of Christians, the popular “end times”
dogmas of today cannot stand intact under the careful scrutiny of the Pauline doctrine of
resurrection. This paper, in its constrained scope, cannot even begin to serve as mediator
between the two, having presented only a cursory outline of the main controversial points
It ends as merely an introduction to a topic about which much more needs to be said.
Selected Bibliography
Berkhof, L. Systematic Theology. 4th rev., ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1941
Bruce, F. F. Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1977. reprint,
1996.
Calvin, John . Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge, Esq. [CD-
ROM] Available: Logos Library System.
Carson, D. A. Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris. An Introduction of the New Testament.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan.1992.
Cooper, John W. “ The Identity of Resurrected Persons: Fatal Flaw of Monistic
Anthropology”. Calvin Theological Journal. 23 (Ap 1988): 19-36.
Davis, Stephen T. Risen Indeed: Making Sense of the Resurrection. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans. 1993.
________. “Is Personal Identity Retained in the Resurrection?”. Modern Theology. 2 No
4 (1986): 329-340.
________. “Was Jesus Raised Bodily?”. Christian Scholar Review. 14 (1985): 140-152.
Gaffin, Richard B. Resurrection and Redemption: A Study in Paul’s Soteriology, 2nd ed.,
formerly, Centrality of the Resurrection. 1978. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.
1987.
Gooch, Paul W. “On Disembodied Resurrected Persons: A Study in the Logic of Christian
Eschatology [reply, B. R. Reichenbach, 18,225-229 Je 82; rejoiner]. Religious
Studies. 17 (Je 1981):199-213.
Guthrie, Shirley C. Christian Doctrine, Rev. Ed. (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox
Press). 1994.
Hannah, Vern A. “Death, Immortality and Resurrection: A Response to John Yates, ‘The
Origin of the Soul’”. Evangelical Quarterly. 62 (Ja 1990): 241-251.
Heller, James J. “The Resurrection of Man”. Theology Today. 15 (1958): 217-229.
Hodge, A. A. The Confession of Faith. Banner of Truth Ed. Avon, UK. 1992.
Ladd, George E. A Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. 1996.
Morris, Leon. New Testament Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. 1986; pap. ed..
1990.
Murray, John. Collected Writings of John Murray. vol. 1. Select Lectures in Systematic
Theology. Banner of Truth Trust Ed. Bath, UK: The Bath Press. 1976; reprint,
1989.
________. Collected Writings of John Murray. vol. 2. Select Lectures in Systematic
Theology. Banner of Truth Trust Ed. Bath, UK: The Bath Press.1977; reprint,
1996.
Nash, Ronald. Great Divides: Understanding the Controversies That Come Between
Christians. Colorado Springs, CO: Navpress. 1993.
Osei-Bonsu, Joseph. “Does 2 Cor 5:1-10 Teach the Reception of the Resurrection Body at
the Moment of Death?”. Journal for the Study of the New Testament. 28 (O
1986): 81-101.
Ridderbos, Herman. Paul: An Outline of His Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
1975.
________. When the Time Had Fully Come. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. 1957.
Schep, J. A. The Nature of the Resurrection Body: A Study of the Biblical Data. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans. 1964.
Schroeder, Edward H. “Encountering the Last Enemy”. Dialog. 11 (Summer 1972): 190-
194.
Sloan, Robert. “Resurrection in 1 Corinthians”. Southwestern Journal of Theology. 26
(Fall 1983): 69-91.
The New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan 1984. [CD-ROM]
Available: Logos Library System.
ENDNOTES
1The New International Version, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House) 1984, [CD-ROM]
Available: Logos Library System.
2James J. Heller, “The Resurrection of Man,” Theology Today 15 (Jl 1958) : 217.
3Edward H. Schroeder, “Encountering the Last Enemy”,Dialog,11(Summer 1972): 190-4.
4The New International Version, [Online] Available: Logos Library System.
5F. F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdman’s, 1977, reprint, 1996),
300.
6Ibid., 304.
7D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris, An Introduction of the New Testament, (Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992), 219.
8Ibid., 220.
9The New International Version, [CD-ROM] Available: Logos Library System.
11Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology, (Grand Rapids : 1975), 487.
313Herman Ridderbos, When the Time Had Fully Come, (Grand Rapids : Eerdman’s, 1957), 55.
414Richard B. Gaffin, Resurrection and Redemption: A Study in Paul’s Soteriology, 2nd ed., formerly,
Centrality of the Resurrection, 1978, (Grand Rapids : Baker Books, 1987), 33.
515Ibid., 34-41.
616George E. Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 362.
717Ibid., 35.
818The New International Version, [CD-ROM] Available: Logos Library System.
020John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge, Esq, [CD-ROM] Available:
Logos Library System.
121James J. Heller, “The Resurrection of Man,” Theology Today, 15 (Jl 1958): 222.
22Shirley C. Guthrie, Christian Doctrine, Rev. Ed., (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press,
1994), 373-99.
525Vern A. Hannah, “Death, Immortality and Resurrection: A Response to John Yates, ‘The Origin of
the Soul,’” Evangelical Quarterly, 62 (Ja 1989): 242.
626Ibid., 244.
727Stephen T. Davis, Risen Indeed: Making Sense of the Resurrection, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993),
86.
828Ibid., 86-87.
929The New International Version, [CD-ROM] Available: Logos Library System.
030Ibid., 87.
131Joseph Osei-Bonsu, “Does 2 Cor 5:1-10 teach the reception of the resurrection at the moment of
death?”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, No 28 (O 1986): 81-95.
232Ibid., 94.
33Ibid., 26.
535Ibid.
636Davis, Risen Indeed: Making Sense of the Resurrection, 335.
737John Murray, Collected Writings of John Murray, vol. 2, Select Lectures in Systematic Theology,
Banner of Truth Trust Ed., (Bath, UK: The Bath Press, 1977; reprint, 1996), 402-3.
838The New International Version, [CD-ROM] Available: Logos Library System.
939Carson, Moo, and Morris, An Introduction to the New Testament, 220.
040J. A. Schep, The Nature of the Resurrection Body,(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964),182.
141Ibid., 204.
343The New International Version, [CD-ROM] Available: Logos Library System.
44L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 4th Rev. Ed., (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 727.
545John Murray, Collected Writings of John Murray, vol. 2, 403.
646Ibid. , 410.
747RonaldNash, Great Divides: Understanding the Controversies That Come Between Christians,
(Colorado Springs, CO: Navpress, 1993), 199.
848Leon Morris, New Testament Theology, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986; pap. ed. 1990), 87.