The Nature of the Resurrection Body

For nearly two thousand years Christians have debated the nature of the resurrection body–whether to be material or immaterial. While both positions are held by many, recent times have seen an increase in the number of those who see the nature of the resurrection body as a material entity as opposed to immaterial. Some have responded to this by arguing along both scriptural and theological-philosophical lines that the immaterial nature of the resurrection is more tenable. One such recent work is that of Joshua Farris in his An Introduction to Theological Anthropology: Humans, Both Creaturely and Divine (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2020). This paper will examine both sides of the issue and, in particular, the recent work of Farris by considering the scriptural as well as the theological and philosophical evidence. In the end, while admitting that there are still significant difficulties with the material resurrection view, this paper will argue that it is the material resurrection view that best comports with the Scriptural witness. It is hoped that this paper will advance the field of theological anthropology with specific regard to the post-resurrection state and that the Christian might come away better informed of what his own nature will be like.

2 thoughts on “The Nature of the Resurrection Body”

  1. Nature of Resurrection Body
    Merely an examination of two sides of an old argument. No evidence for claims in the proposal – “the material resurrection view best comports with the Scriptural witness.”


Leave a Comment