A new biblical approach to the resurrection of Jesus

Well, it's not really a new approach. It's actually very old.

Nor is it Biblical.

If the apparitions of Jesus were a proof of a resurrection on this plan, then the ascension would have put and end to them, but it didn't, he appeared afterward to Paul (see Acts 23: 11) and to John to whom he gave the message of the Revelation..

The second point is the verb "to appear" which "in the Bible comes from the Greek: Phaino. It means: to make manifest or visible or known what has been hidden or unknown; to become manifest, be made known; expose to view; make manifest, to show one's self, appear". From Genesis to Revelation, when applied to a raised person this verb alludes to supernatural beings.

I recently did read a book by Mbungu a Nini : « the Enigma of the resurrection of Jesus » (EDIT: MODERATOR: LINK REMOVED), that shows many current presumptions on the resurrection of Jesus are false.

Who is Mbungu a Nini?

At the core of the resurrection of Jesus there is the issue of the definition of the resurrection itself. Mbungu a Nini shows in his book that there are two kinds of resurrection:

o the resurrection in this plan
o the resurrection in the beyond;

The later is the key to the understanding of the resurrection of the Master.

In Luke 20:37 Jesus shows that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are alive, because "the dead are raised". But if the patriarchs are raised it can be only in the beyond. Paul alludes to this resurrection in I Cor. 15: 42-44. The resurrection in the beyond was a big theological theme in Jesus time. In Luke 20:37 Jesus is answering the Sadducees questioning of this resurrection.

38 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive." 39 Some of the teachers of the law responded, "Well said, teacher!" 40 And no one dared to ask him any more questions.

You took one particular verse out of a story and twisted it to back up your assertion. That dog just don't hunt.

The second point is the verb "to appear" which "in the Bible comes from the Greek: Phaino. It means: to make manifest or visible or known what has been hidden or unknown; to become manifest, be made known; expose to view; make manifest, to show one's self, appear". From Genesis to Revelation, when applied to a raised person this verb alludes to supernatural beings. Since Jesus was appearing, his was in the beyond. He was not the first to appear in this way after the resurrection in the beyond; since he himself said the dead are raised, thus Moses and Elias was appeared to him were also raised from the dead in the beyond. One should note that after is resurrection on the plan of existence (which was not the case for Jesus) Lazarus wasn't appearing, because people could decide, go and see him. Nobody could do the same for Jesus; he was the one who did determine to whom he would appear.

Kate4Christ seemed to have handled this very well.

The point therefore is the resurrection of Lazarus and the resurrection of Jesus happened in two different plans of existence. The first came back to live here, while the second resumed living but in the beyond so he could only appear to the living.

Fact: The Bible says that Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead. It says nothing about a different plan (do you mean plane?) of existence. He rose from the dead. He was dead then he wasn't. PERIOD.

John 11: [38] Jesus therefore again groaning in himself cometh to the grave. It was a cave, and a stone lay upon it.

[39] Jesus said, Take ye away the stone. Martha, the sister of him that was dead, saith unto him, Lord, by this time he stinketh: for he hath been dead four days.

[40] Jesus saith unto her, Said I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God?

[41] Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me.

[42] And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me.

[43] And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth.

[44] And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.


On of the other issues Mbungu a Nini tackles is the issue of the physical appearances of Jesus. And he shows that they are not an argument that Jesus' resurrection happened in this plan because: The angels can appear with physical bodies (see Gen19:1-3)

Again, so what? What does an angel appearing with a physical body have to do with the resurrection of Christ?

Even the appearance with wounds to Thomas doesn't disprove the resurrection in the beyond, because, after his death Jesus became able to change his form (Marc 16:12) so he chose to appear to Thomas in a form he could accept.

If the apparitions of Jesus were a proof of a resurrection on this plan, then the ascension would have put and end to them, but it didn't, he appeared afterward to Paul (see Acts 23: 11) and to John.

What? Do you not understand the concept of God? Through God all things are possible. You are trying to apply man's logic to the spiritual. You can't do it. He could have appeared as a snowman if He had chosen to. It has nothing to do with the fact that He died and was resurrected.

Jesus said to one of the malefactors with whom he was crucified: "To day shalt thou be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43) in conformity to his other saying "the dead are raised" (Luke 20:37) (note the perfect tense of the verb RAISE). So the resurrection of Jesus happened the same day.

Well, here again, you need to do some more research. Do you know what paradise meant in that context? So, because Jesus said that, you think his resurrection happened the same day but wait, I thought you didn't think he was really resurrected at all or you think He was resurrected in some other plan of existence or something? To be absent from the body is to be with the Lord.

This raises another enigma about the disappearance of the body. The Bible says clearly the Moses died, the Lord "... buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor: but no man knoweth of his sepulcher unto this day. (Deut. 34:6) We know that the body of Moses disappeared. Mbungu a Nini writes: "Jude (1:9) informs us a little bit on this subject, He affirms that the corpse was disputed between the archangel Michel and the devil. The archangel thus had taken possession of the body of Moses, because the devil could not have had the capacity to overcome God. We can thus conclude that nobody saw the dead-body of Moses because the archangel had made it disappear, for the glory of God, whereas the devil wanted to prevent him." So we have here a hint that the corps of Jesus disappeared in the same way.

Uh, no we have no such thing. The fact that Moses body hasn't been discovered is clearly explained. It isn't meant to be found.

The fact that Jesus' body isn't locatable is because He isn't dead! He rose from the grave and ascended to Heaven.

When Jesus said he will raise his body in three days, "John translated this thought by using the Greek verb Egeiro of which one of the meanings is "cause to appear; bring before the public."" This shows that Jesus was speaking of his apparitions.

What? Where do you get this stuff? Who said He is speaking of His appartion? He said he would raise up again in three days PERIOD.

The resurrection of Jesus happened the last day in the beyond, while his apparitions begun the third day.

Ok, you totally lost me here. I haven't a clue as to what this means. May I ask you, what religion are you?