It’s a Bird, It’s a Plane…It’s Superman!
Identifying the Resurrection Body of Jesus

- by Brian Lawson

The testimony of the gospels, Acts, and Pauline statements offer some cause for confusion regarding the resurrected body of Jesus. Much like the title of this article (a borrowed quote from the Superman comics) the New Testament details may cause readers to think one thing or another about what form Jesus’ body took in any of the resurrection appearances. What kind of body did these sources attempt to describe? Did they claim anything or merely describe what they experienced? By such testimony, do they describe anything that we are familiar with, or something different, perhaps superior, to any human form that we know? With these questions in mind, let us examine the combined details of the New Testament claims to see if they help us identify what is essentially claimed regarding Jesus’ resurrected body. I'm not going to attempt to provide all the answers (as I often say), but I will provide the data and what I believe as a result of examining the various testimonies.

Before examining the data, I should mention that this article attempts to identify that which is posed by accepting all of the New Testament as a unified claim regarding what sort of body Jesus had at His resurrection. Another way to examine this data is to consider what each individual New Testament writer says about Jesus’ resurrection body. This presentation is intended to demonstrate what I believe to be the harmonious New Testament claim when combining all of the testimonies.

 The Moving Body…

The gospel resurrection stories begin with their reports of the empty tomb as follows: Matthew 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-8; John 20:1 [Those interested may read these together by clicking the link on the referenced verses in this article]. The most that can be said from these passages is that the body of Jesus that died was not in the tomb (or "grave" according to Matthew in NASU). The synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) identify someone there (one or two oddly clothed beings) to say to the women, "He is not here. He is risen." So in this, there were no "sightings" or "physical encounters" with Jesus’ body - only an indication that the body that died was not there, and according to the white-clothed-beings, Jesus was moving again and even heading for Galilee (Matt/Mark).

Another experience that was not exactly an encounter with the presence of Jesus in any form is found in Luke 24:9-12; John 20:2-10. The two gospels in parallel identify a common thread of tradition that the linen wrappings, which had been placed on Jesus during burial, were in the tomb without the body. Jesus was not there, He was moving again, and He didn't need the grave-clothes.

…Which Was Seen and Heard…The first report of an appearance of Jesus to anyone in the gospel accounts is of an appearance to Mary Magdalene. This is found in Mark 16:9-11; John 20:11-18. Readers should certainly note that the authenticity of this portion of Mark is in question among scholars. Beside the point, I am including it here as testimony without asserting one way or the other that it is, or is not, authentic to Mark's original gospel. I’m simply taking it as early Christian testimony made a part of Mark’s gospel. Nevertheless, what we find in the testimony is that Jesus "appeared" to Mary. In Mark, it could be said that this indicates only a visual encounter. However, John describes the encounter as being more than visual. After mentioning the two white-clothed angels hanging out at the tomb (still), John’s gospel describes an appearance of Jesus and what may be interpreted as an incident where Mary held on to Jesus' resurrected form. But, it is also possible that Jesus' statement (in John 20:17) is a reference to her own emotional "clinging", especially since there is no prior statement that she latched onto Him physically. But John indicates clearly that Mary's encounter included hearing Jesus speak to her. Along with that detail is that in John's gospel, the report to the disciples is merely that she had "seen the Lord" even though John also clearly claims that Jesus said some things and that Mary heard Him. This suggests that whatever was called an "appearance" may not be limited only to a visual encounter.

The first report of an appearance of Jesus to anyone in the gospel accounts is of an appearance to Mary Magdalene. This is found in . Readers should certainly note that the authenticity of this portion of Mark is in question among scholars. Beside the point, I am including it here as testimony without asserting one way or the other that it is, or is not, authentic to Mark's original gospel. I’m simply taking it as early Christian testimony made a part of Mark’s gospel. Nevertheless, what we find in the testimony is that Jesus "appeared" to Mary. In Mark, it could be said that this indicates only a visual encounter. However, John describes the encounter as being more than visual. After mentioning the two white-clothed angels hanging out at the tomb (still), John’s gospel describes an appearance of Jesus and what may be interpreted as an incident where Mary Jesus' resurrected form. But, it is also possible that Jesus' statement (in John 20:17) is a reference to her own emotional "clinging", especially since there is no prior statement that she latched onto Him physically. But John indicates clearly that Mary's encounter included hearing Jesus speak to her. Along with that detail is that in John's gospel, the report to the disciples is merely that she had "seen the Lord" even though John also clearly claims that Jesus said some things and that Mary heard Him. This suggests that whatever was called an "appearance" may not be limited only to a visual encounter.

 …and Touched…

Another report, found in Matthew 28:8-10, is one that might be different, or might be the same as the one just above, except that another woman was there with Mary Magdalene ("the other Mary" – 28:1). In the case of Matthew’s account being different, the appearance described by Mark and John was to Mary Magdalene alone. I'm not sure about this one, but the chronological chart, by R.C. Foster, that I reference and  use in the ITW Gospel Synopses suggests Matthew’s account as separate from the previous event described in Mark and John. Nevertheless, at this point in the synopses, I held to Foster's outline. Matthew's account is as follows:

Another report, found in Matthew 28:8-10, is one that might be different, or might be the same as the one just above, except that another woman was there with Mary Magdalene ("the other Mary" – 28:1). In the case of Matthew’s account being different, the appearance described by Mark and John was to Mary Magdalene . I'm not sure about this one, but the chronological chart, by R.C. Foster, that I reference and  use in the suggests Matthew’s account as separate from the previous event described in Mark and John. Nevertheless, at this point in the synopses, I held to Foster's outline. Matthew's account is as follows:

Matthew 28:8-10
8 And they left the tomb quickly with fear and great joy and ran to report it to His disciples.
9 And behold, Jesus met them and greeted them. And they came up and took hold of His feet and worshiped Him.
10 Then Jesus said to them, "Do not be afraid; go and take word to My brethren to leave for Galilee, and there they will see Me." (NASU)

The encounter in these verses is described as being visual, clearly physical (in that the women "took hold of His feet"), and audible.

…Showed Up Both Unrecognizable and Recognizable, and Disappeared Again…Then, we have the account of Jesus' appearance to two disciples paralleled in Mark 16:12,13; Luke 24:13-32.  Again, the authenticity of this portion of Mark disputed by some. The Markan passage describes Jesus appearing to these two in a strange, or different, form. Then they reported to the others that they had encountered Jesus. I suppose that we are to assume (by Mark) that they were able to recognize Jesus at some point. Only Luke describes the whole experience, and we see that "their eyes were prevented from recognizing Him". In Luke’s account, we read that the two disciples experienced Jesus visually without recognizing Him at first, but then recognized Him later. They saw a form of Jesus who "vanished from their sight" which indicates that whatever visual form He took, He could make that form invisible or unrecognizable. In a visible form, He was able to pick up a material object (bread), alter it (break it), and hand it out to others. Also, we find that these disciples heard Jesus speak - to the degree that they experienced the same inner effect as hearing Jesus' teachings prior to His death.

Then, we have the account of Jesus' appearance to two disciples paralleled in .  Again, the authenticity of this portion of Mark disputed by some. The Markan passage describes Jesus appearing to these two in a strange, or different, form. Then they reported to the others that they had encountered Jesus. I suppose that we are to assume (by Mark) that they were able to recognize Jesus at some point. Only Luke describes the whole experience, and we see that "their eyes were prevented from recognizing Him". In Luke’s account, we read that the two disciples experienced Jesus visually without recognizing Him at first, but then recognized Him later. They saw a form of Jesus who "vanished from their sight" which indicates that whatever visual form He took, He could make that form invisible or unrecognizable. In a visible form, He was able to pick up a material object (bread), alter it (break it), and hand it out to others. Also, we find that these disciples heard Jesus speak - to the degree that they experienced the same inner effect as hearing Jesus' teachings prior to His death.

…Appearing to Cephas as Well as Others…

Luke continues his focus on these two disciples giving a report to others as found in Luke 24:33-55. In that, we read that the eleven and others were gathered and reporting back to these two that Jesus had appeared to Simon. This compares with 1 Corinthians 15:5 (the appearance to "Cephas" which is Paul's aramaic name for Simon Peter - (1)). Of note, neither account describes the type of appearance to Simon Peter. One might assume only a visual experience, but in comparison with other "appearances", one could be justified in assuming more than visual. As for being certain what Peter experienced in this first appearance to him, there is not enough stated to be sure.

…Performing Unusual Feats as Well as Normal Human Stuff…

To keep this from getting too long, let me abbreviate enough to bring out the important points from the remaining appearances claimed in the gospels. Jesus is reported as appearing to at least 10 of the disciples in Mark 16:14; Luke 24:36-43; John 20:19-25. Here the body experienced is able to make its entrance either through closed doors (or walls), or appear on the spot (see John's account). Once present, Jesus' form can be visually observed, make audible statements, and even be touched in a human "flesh & bone" form. As in the earlier encounter, Jesus is able to pick up and alter material objects, and even internalize (eat) them.

We don't find anything different in the remaining appearances: (hyperlinks to synopses available for double & triple references for comparison)
- Appearance to the eleven: John 20:26-31; I Corinthians 15:5
- Appearance to seven by the sea of Galilee: John 21:1-23
- Appearance to five hundred / The Great Commission: Matthew 28:16-20; 1 Corinthians 15:6
- Appearance in Jerusalem: The Great Commission repeated: Mark 16:15-18
- The appearance to James: 1 Corinthians 15:7
- The appearance to the disciples with further commission: Luke 24:44-49; Acts 1:3-8
- The ascension: Mark 16:19,20; Luke 24:50-53; Acts 1:9-12

 …Sometimes Looking Like a Bird or a Plane…

O.K….in the last event of that list, the ascension, Jesus' body flies upwards. After all we’ve just read, one may not think that Jesus was a bird or a plane, but it is difficult to understand the exact nature of Jesus’ resurrected body - especially when it is said to be flying. Certainly, the sum total of claims do not allow one to think that what was raised from the dead was merely human again. This is important. Some of the gospel testimony demonstrates that the body was more than a "spirit" or mere phantom. And yet all of the testimony reveals that the forms that were experienced could appear, be touched, be heard, disappear, and even among those who knew Him, Jesus could be present in such a way that He could not be recognized.

O.K….in the last event of that list, the ascension, Jesus' body flies upwards. After all we’ve just read, one may not think that Jesus was a bird or a plane, but it is difficult to understand the exact nature of Jesus’ resurrected body - especially when it is said to be flying. . This is important. Some of the gospel testimony demonstrates that the body was more than a "spirit" or mere phantom. And yet all of the testimony reveals that the forms that were experienced could appear, be touched, be heard, disappear, and even among those who knew Him, Jesus could be present in such a way that He could not be recognized.

…Was the Changed and Living Body of Jesus Christ, a "Superman" of Sorts…

What can be said after all this? Taking the sum total of all these testimonies (from the gospels only) one could say that Jesus’ body changed to something that we are not familiar with. Acts 1:3 makes one statement that identifies purpose in all of the resurrection appearances described as various experiences. It says, "To these He also presented Himself alive after His suffering, by many convincing proofs, appearing to them over a period of forty days and speaking of the things concerning the kingdom of God" (Acts 1:3, NASU). Jesus was alive, and certainly His body had changed. But in all this, we find that what He became could be manifest in forms that a particular group of humans could experience as proof that He had been raised and that He is alive (read also Acts 10:39-41). That is what I believe about the resurrected body of Jesus as He (as it is claimed) appeared to these early Christians.

…Who Also Appeared to Paul as to "One Untimely Born"…

A comparison between the resurrection appearances described in the gospels and the appearance to Paul poses no problem or contradiction - at least in my opinion. At best, we can see that what is described in the book of Acts as Jesus' appearance to Paul is unique in two general ways:

1) Just as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:8, Jesus appeared to him "last of all, as to one untimely born". Paul indicates that as far as any of the appearances that he just mentioned (in previous verses), and as far as any of those who would be considered an apostle, that for him Jesus made a sort of "encore". The timing of this appearance is unique in comparison with the appearances recorded in the gospels. As mentioned above, Acts 1:3 sums up the timing of all other visual appearances. Between the day when an empty tomb had been discovered until 40 days later, Jesus is said to have appeared several times and in several ways. Both Paul and Acts place his own experience several years later. Based on what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:9 and Galatians 1:13-17, I assume that there was some period of time between the appearances summed up in Acts 1:3 and the conversion of Paul based on Jesus’ appearance to him. The book of Acts reinforces this, and for various reasons, scholars believe that this appearance (and Paul's conversion) is dated no earlier than a couple of years after the appearances to the other apostles as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15. But in summary of this point, the timing of the appearance to Paul is unique in comparison with those recorded in the gospels.

2) The book of Acts provides the only descriptive record of what is claimed to be the appearance of Jesus to Paul. However, Acts provides this three times: Acts 9:3-9; 22:4-11; 26:12-18. A side-by-side comparison can be viewed at [An Appearance to Paul]. The common wording (shown in magenta on the web-page) reveals that Paul didn't see anything but a light from heaven which was so bright that it blinded him. It seems that this light affected him and those around him in such a way that he and his companions fell to the ground. Paul and his companions heard a voice that only Paul understood (perhaps the companions were unfamiliar with the Hebrew dialect mentioned in Acts 26). The claim is that the voice identified the presence of Jesus in the bright light. It seems that none of these passages suggests that Paul saw (with eyes) anything more than a light, but heard only a voice speaking a verbal message from one claiming to be Jesus. I suppose that a verbal claim is the only way that Paul could believe that the one speaking was Jesus (whereas the blinding and healing miracle(s) would demonstrate what kind of power Jesus had). Acts 9:7 could imply that Paul saw something that the companions did not, or it could simply indicate that no one saw a bodily form - not the companions who weren't blinded by the light, and certainly not Paul who was. However, the claim is that they all experienced something, and Paul experienced the most from his group. But in summary, the kind of "appearance" of Jesus is unique in comparison with those claimed in the gospels.

When reading 1 Corinthians 15:8 all by itself, it is hard to tell what kind of "appearance" Paul experienced. We can’t see in that passage if his experience is any different from the "appearances" that he mentions for those who had their experiences prior to his. What we find is that it takes the gospels and the book of Acts to find out what sorts of "appearances" are claimed, and we find differences, but not contradictions. Of additional note, between Acts 1:3 and Acts 26:16-18 one can identify a purpose in the appearances of Jesus to these few.

…All of which Amounts to Some Essential Conclusions:

I say, and believe, that Jesus’ body was made alive and changed to something "supernatural" or "spiritual". (Now would be a good place to stop and read Paul’s teaching about the "spiritual body" found throughout 1 Corinthians 15.) Perhaps "spiritual" is the "Biblical" word that would best describe Jesus’ resurrected body. But sometimes that term is taken by non-Christian readers to mean something almost, if not completely, non-existent. When talking with Christians, it might be reasonable to use that term, but I'll try to use it here with a varied audience in the understanding that "spiritual" is as equally real as "material". Concerning the resurrection of Jesus Christ, essentially the proposition is that Jesus is alive. The confirmation of such, from earliest the Christians who claimed this, came about in appearances (and other experiences like the empty tomb) for the sake of demonstrating the spiritual truth that Jesus is alive for the highest degree of confirmation. A manifestation of the spiritual reality for those of us in the material realm (mere humans) must be demonstrated in some fashion in the material world in order for such things to be known and/or believed. That is what seems to be achieved by the resurrection appearances to the greatest degree for those earliest Christians who claimed to experience Jesus as alive. I believe that manifestations of the reality that Jesus is alive are provided to other Christians as well, but they are of a different kind or perhaps of a "lesser" degree than what was afforded to those who claim to have experienced the resurrected body of Jesus. I don't like the word "lesser", but it makes sense in light of my contention that only a few Christians have ever been justified in believing with 100% certainty that Jesus was raised from the dead and is alive. There is a little more faith involved for the rest of us who believe.

Nevertheless, the appearances of Jesus claimed in the gospels (and Acts) propose the essential idea that Jesus is alive. But I don't believe the appearances (and related experiences) tell us more than what I've already said (that Jesus body was raised and changed, and that He is alive). Saying more than that seems to be the same as trying to explain what kind of bodies showed up in the Transfiguration (see Matthew 17:1-8; Mark 9:2-8; Luke 9:28-36). Perhaps it would also be like trying to explain just exactly what allowed Jesus to walk on water, or what kind of body He had the moment that He was able to do so (see Matthew 14:22-33; Mark 6:45-52; John 6:15-21). I might consider any Biblically recorded appearance of an angelic or spiritual-being, and try to explain (after finding out) how these things happened and what form was taken by the beings that were encountered. But in all of this, there is a bit of a mystery (to me) exactly how such beings could ever reveal or make themselves known, so as to understand how certain miracles took place, etc. So, how did Jesus appear and disappear, appear unrecognizable and recognizable, materialize in such a way as to be touched and show wounds from His death experience, appear in a closed room, etc. How does all of this identify the kind of body that Jesus had after His resurrection? The best I can tell is that the apostles and a few other early Christians experienced Jesus as alive and believed so because of many convincing proofs. Whatever His body was as merely human flesh at Jesus' death and burial seems to have changed. Anything beyond that is more than I know or understand from the New Testament claims.

Note: (1) "Cephas" is "Kepha" in Greek.  The aramaic term "keph" = "rock", as the greek term "petros" = "rock".  See also John 1:42.

For additional study, see: Paul's Belief in a Bodily Resurrection by Chris Price, at http://www.christianorigins.com/resbody.html