Theology of the Body

[…the Creator ‘made them male and female...] ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” (Mathew 19.5-6).

     Man's knowledge of good and evil gives us the power to rule the world any way we please. A God or Gods no longer have control. Once Adam, who represents the life of the human race, took a bite from the fruit of the tree of knowledge man's fate was sealed. This knowledge insured, "Man was born to rule the world" (165).

Edwards’ begins his writing by further commenting of Peter’s words on persecutions. Further explain how trials of one’s faith serve as opportunities for a Christian to achieve true virtue and to test whether one’s religion is true or false. If one’s has true religion successful response to trials further purifies, refines, and increases her religion. Edward remarks, “True religion, in great part, consists in holy affections.” (141). Edwards further defines affection as one’s ability to follow the inclination of one’s soul. The soul holds two faculties: the first facility holds the task of understanding. The second facility controls inclination. Edwards reveals the physiological connection of our body and affections stating: “from

The body is the vessel in which an individual carries out their pursuit of the good life. One's current body and their attitudes towards it can reflect their answer towards the question of this course.

The beginning of the Bible is Genesis. The Gospel of Genesis tells the story of God making heaven and earth creation and making us. Through the story of our ancestors Adam and Eve, I will talk about the creation of the majors. Jesus said that the marriage of Adam and Eve in Genesis was the right order of creation (Matthew 19: 4-5). In Genesis 18, He believed that it was essential for Adam to have a partner which motivated God to create Eve. This means that God is not designed to live alone. God created humans to be social animals, that is, to depend on each other and live in society. I think this is the man and woman order and the reason God planned for our lives. One-on-one

In terms of the Orthodox doctrine of theosis, the problem with transhumanist discourse is not that it desires to become god-like—a desire implied in Orthodox soteriology and in JPII’s “theandric humanism” (71)—it is rather that its desire involves instrumental mastery over the flesh and, thus, divinity only by “ceasing to be human” (72). Hart’s reflection also inspired a cluster of questions: is a certain human exceptionality is implied in JPII’s theology of the body—and whether such an exceptionality is contrastively related to creation? What views are opened up by theological commitments to materiality that refuse to make our creational and creaturely others instruments to our own practices of consumption? Furthermore, how far can a principle of non-instrumentality be stretched? Does killing life count as instrumentalizing life? Or, do we simply “subsist in the death” of others—as some contemporary ethicists have it? How do these considerations matter for the ethics of consumption? Finding ourselves in networks of force and violence, how might practices of (say) confession and lamentation serve as proleptic anticipations of new

Early Christian writers face the question of whether the human body is a good thing or a bad thing. Confessions of St. Augustine and St. Paul’s Epistles use the word, ‘flesh,’ to either depict the human body, man’s immaterial nature, or the nature of sin. The flesh is the obvious difference between the Lord and humans; thus, it describes the sinful nature that humans possess. Both St. Augustine and St. Paul describe the human body as something that can be contaminated; however, St. Paul distinguishes a difference between the spiritual body and the natural, physical body which is the flesh, “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body” (1 Corinthians

First, he sees that there is a disrespectful attitude to the early figures of the church (1992: 107). Second, he observes that there is a lack of faith in the means of grace. He says, “They do not speak law which reveals sin and gospel which forgive it, but they speak about God and His word in a variety of ways (1992: 108). Third, most of the current catechetical resources have a main goal to put human’s work as a centre of Christian life and this goal against the teaching of justification and the gospel (Thompson, 1992: 110). Fourth, he sees that many catechetical resources do not take the matter of God’s word and gifts seriously. Modern catechetical resources are written in the form of a ‘search for shortcuts’ that might simplify the understanding of justification (Thompson, 1992: 110). Fifth, he observes that there is ‘a confusion in ecclesiology’ in modern catechetical materials (1992: 112). He says, “We have changed the church from an article of faith to something in the visual sensorium” (1992: 112). The human’s work becomes more important in the ecclesiastical life where it should be focused on the gift of God (Thompson, 1992:

God made a meeting to find a solution for humans’ power that made problem between humans.

The essay tries to put into perspective the paradigm of wholeness or holiness in that she likens the idea of holiness to physical completeness. The writer believes that the aspect of holiness is given a physical or external expression so as a body may be seen as perfect. In some way, the essay questions the ridiculous nature of dietary rules such why would a Hare, camel, badger be unclean? Or why some locusts, not all are unclean? In the essay, she describes the sanctity of boundaries by valuing the integrity of physical forms.

After the Reformation, the Roman Catholic Church showed herself as a “perfect society”, which is visible by the profession of faith while Protestant is not. Subsequently, retrieving the biblical and patristic evidence, Pius XII’s encyclical letter introduced the image of “mystical body of Christ” for the Church. Overcoming the impersonality the image of “perfect society” has, this idea was still criticized for the exclusiveness and also a lack of historical Christ. After that, the Church began to consider the Eucharistic ecclesiology. Supported by the theology in the RCIA, which elucidates the significance and the Baptism and the Eucharist, the ecclesiology regained its dynamism.

Scripture seems to contradict itself with regard to the human body. Sometimes the body is seen as precious, for instance in 1 Cor 6:19-30, and sometimes as a hinderance to unity with Christ, 2 Cor 5:6-8. This seeming ambiguity within scripture has created distinct and conflicting schools of thought among Christian thinkers regarding the body and spirituality. Some advocate that the body is an essential part of our spirituality and should be embraced; others that the body is a hinderance to it, and should be approached with suspicion

My understanding is that some scrutiny means the third way. Early leaders rejected the grip of catholic church state control over people's lives. Their ideas and insistence on separation between church and state is an attempt for the third way. We still believe that all mankind, because of Adam's fall, has inherited a sinful nature, and all people are sinful, and any sin is exceedingly offensive to God. With sins came the gross social inequality, the wars and despotism, that curse our existence. For most of our life we supported ourselves by the belief that salvation is a gift of God’s grace through faith in Jesus Christ. Our life is a life that the masses have traditionally regarded as nasty, brutish, and short full with fears and blindness to see ourselves in unexpected places. We deceive ourselves when we think that we have to protect God standards. God is bigger than our imperfect interpretations which are based on fears. God and the people do not have the same perspectives on how to live life. There are many kinds of fears such as fears. The fear of God must become a basis for us. Another fear is the fear of shame about our bodies, our instincts, and our behaviors. My understanding is that the body of Christ like any human body performed different functions for different behaviors but there was no part who can say to another part I do not need you. When the body parts was first made, all the body parts wanted to be boss. The Brain, the Feet, the Hands, the Eye, and so it went with the Heart, the Ear, and the Lungs, then the last opening in the digestive system spoke up and demanded to be the boss. All the body parts laughed at the idea. We all know when that opening is blocked and refused to function. Soon, all body parts strive to keep just working, then every part is satisfied to let that part be the boss.

We are in the sensitive world where people do whatever they desired. Our body, according to Plato, is destructible to the soul, because it often delays the soul's vision of ideas. I think in this part many Christians will agree with him because the body allows you to do imperfections to your body in addition, the body drags with its passions. It's kind of like a prison for the soul. Society and

As a college student, there have been late nights where I have prioritized the care of my mind over my body. As I have contemplated whether it is good to compromise the health of my body for the sake of good grades, I have considered what the importance of the body really is. Studying Theology of the Body has taught me that understanding the physical body is of vital importance because it’s how we understand ourselves fully as the hylomorphic beings God created to be. As Gaudium et Spes 24:3 furthers, in knowing ourselves, we can then be sincere gifts of self, which is what God willed for us to be. JPII also further states that it’s in knowing oneself, body and soul, that one can best understand the goodness of the rest of creation. Additionally,