ScholarlySeeker
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 229
- Reaction score
- 126
- Points
- 43
Thomas
"Because the creature (Gk ktisis 'creature' but also 'creation') also itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption, into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation (ktisis) groans and travails in pain (figurative: labour pains), even till now. And not only it, but ourselves also, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit (pneuma), even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption of the sons of God, the redemption of our body (soma)." Romans 8:21-23.
Soma is interesting, as it infers the totality of the body, whereas sarx means the flesh. But if it was just our souls that would be, in effect, transfigured, then it would not correctly be soma.
So I hold that it is not the case that Created Nature is a disposable vehicle – like some stage of a rocket that becomes redundant – of the soul on its journey, rather, the body is the material form of the soul in the physical realm, and by extension, an interpretation of the above text is that the whole creation is reborn, changed, as Revelations says: "Behold, I make all things new." Revelations 21:5.
I think this is quite interesting. I'm not Catholic and don't know a lot about them, but having been studying the Jewish esoteric materials for a bit, this appears to me to be close to some version of Jewish spirituality actually. The interpretation given concerning the esoteric doctrine of the Jewish Kabbalah by Leonora Leet is that the embodied human will also be conjoined and immortalized with the spirit, not as spirit, but as a united finiteness with infiniteness. I honestly don't have any idea HOW that is going to work, but it is a theme she works on. I found it quite remarkable actually. Yes, our bodies are not supposedly understood as a mere stage, but of a necessity. I mean Paul did contend that our bodies are temples. How literal was he in that assertion? The Kabbalah in some interpretations, would entirely agree with that being literal.
"Because the creature (Gk ktisis 'creature' but also 'creation') also itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption, into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation (ktisis) groans and travails in pain (figurative: labour pains), even till now. And not only it, but ourselves also, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit (pneuma), even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption of the sons of God, the redemption of our body (soma)." Romans 8:21-23.
Soma is interesting, as it infers the totality of the body, whereas sarx means the flesh. But if it was just our souls that would be, in effect, transfigured, then it would not correctly be soma.
So I hold that it is not the case that Created Nature is a disposable vehicle – like some stage of a rocket that becomes redundant – of the soul on its journey, rather, the body is the material form of the soul in the physical realm, and by extension, an interpretation of the above text is that the whole creation is reborn, changed, as Revelations says: "Behold, I make all things new." Revelations 21:5.
I think this is quite interesting. I'm not Catholic and don't know a lot about them, but having been studying the Jewish esoteric materials for a bit, this appears to me to be close to some version of Jewish spirituality actually. The interpretation given concerning the esoteric doctrine of the Jewish Kabbalah by Leonora Leet is that the embodied human will also be conjoined and immortalized with the spirit, not as spirit, but as a united finiteness with infiniteness. I honestly don't have any idea HOW that is going to work, but it is a theme she works on. I found it quite remarkable actually. Yes, our bodies are not supposedly understood as a mere stage, but of a necessity. I mean Paul did contend that our bodies are temples. How literal was he in that assertion? The Kabbalah in some interpretations, would entirely agree with that being literal.