Hello again dear listeners! Today’s broadcast is titled “The Christian Calling and the Resurrection of the Deceased” and it is the continuation of the topic under recent examination – that is, the debunking of cacodoxies and the presentation of the Orthodox positions of the One, Holy, Catholic (universal) and Apostolic Church, on the matter of the Christian Calling and especially on the kind of resurrection that Christians are anticipating.

1.   Summary of previous talks

As detailed in the previous talks, there are many who maliciously claim and preach that of the deceased of the human race, some will not be resurrected at all, some will be resurrected with incorruptible and immortal (angelic) bodies, and the rest will be resurrected with human but corruptible and mortal bodies.

And while most heretical beliefs accept some of the above claims as their main tenets regarding the resurrection of the dead, some do not hesitate to accept a combination of them, or even worse, to adopt all three, thus dividing people into categories, dividing Christians into castes, and talking about numerous Christian callings, numerous Christian baptisms, etc. Among such examples are the Jehovah's Witnesses.

On the contrary, the only genuine Christian teaching on the resurrection of the dead, which has always been expressed unaltered from within the written and oral tradition of the Church, (including the Holy Bible of course), states that at the Second Coming prior to the End, when the Lord Jesus Christ will be revealed in order to judge both the living and the dead, all the dead of the human race will be resurrected as incorruptible and immortal, while the (still) living will be transformed, towards incorruption and immortality.

Of course, this resurrection does not pertain to the souls of the deceased people, but their human bodies, which they bore in this lifetime (which will naturally be devoid of all biological matter and no longer subject to material deterioration and death), thus becoming “according to the likeness” of the Resurrected human body of the Lord Jesus Christ, Who is also the “Ultimate Adam” - the new progenitor of the human race, and 'Father of the Future Age' (Isaiah 9: 6).

2. False assertions about what the Church believes

So, while our Church remains unmoving and steadfast on this teaching regarding the resurrection of the dead, She is nevertheless subjected to fierce and slanderous attacks by heretics, who accuse Her of supposedly not honoring human bodies, because She apparently claims that bodies will not be resurrected, and that the resurrection pertains only to people’s souls.

As you can perceive, they strive to unjustly accuse the Church for something that has never been Her teaching, when in fact this is their own doctrine!  So, instead of checking and accusing themselves for cacodoxy, they turn unjustly and slanderously against the Church, most of the time with no knowledge of what She actually teaches. Of course, many of them have two mitigating factors:

The first is that they have fallen victim to the misinformation and slanderous propaganda that their religious leadership artfully and methodically promotes against all other confessions - and especially against the true Christian Church.

The second mitigating factor for them is an incriminating element for believers, who most of the time lack knowledge – or, even worse and even more often – have complete ignorance of the fundamental tenets of our Faith, which we usually replace with personal views or philosophical theories of unknown origin.

Especially on this last matter let us pay close attention, dear listeners, because it is extremely serious. What will we say to the righteous Judge, after displaying so much indifference to learning the content of the Faith which we have inherited without toiling? We are ignorant and indifferent towards such an immense treasure that was found inside our home thanks to the Grace of God and the labours of our fathers... And not only that: we also quite frequently exchange this treasure for cheap and detrimental philosophical opinions, and with our own personal perceptions, we also darken and scandalize those around us.

3. Why analyze the topic of resurrection?

But let us return to the object of our study, which is the resurrection of the dead, and in particular 'with what bodies the dead will be resurrected'.

Having conclusively established (by examining in detail the 15th chapter of Paul’s first Epistle to the Corinthians, as well as other passages of the Holy Bible), that the general resurrection pertains to the mortal bodies of the deceased, which will be raised incorruptible and immortal, we began to study the Bible’s data on the resurrected body of the Lord. And we did this for two reasons:

1. As the new progenitor of the human race, 'the beginning of those who have fallen asleep (the deceased)' and 'the firstborn of the dead', whatever body the Lord received at His Resurrection, this is the kind of body that He will bequeath to His resurrected descendants.

2. Given that many have erroneously preached that Christ was resurrected with an angelic body, because (they say) He left His human body behind, inside the tomb, completely and irrevocably as if it were a sacrifice, and as such, impossible for Him to re-acquire it.

So far, we have seen very important and clear passages of the Bible, which completely negate this cacodoxy. However, in order to thoroughly exhaust the subject, we will examine the other references of the Holy Bible on this subject.

In order to systematize our study - and after having first examined some fundamental, clear and characteristic passages – we had divided the Bible references to the Body of the resurrected Christ into three major categories, based on the criterion of Time:

-the period before His death on the Cross

-the period after His Resurrection and before His Ascension

-the period after His Ascension to the heavens

4. Providential appearance of Christ’s resurrected   body

Today we will continue with verses from the second period, that is, with incidents and references pertaining to Jesus Christ, during the 40 days after His Resurrection.

Let’s first read from the Gospel of John, 20: 19-20, where our Evangelist describes one of Christ’s first appearances to His disciples:

“Being late on that day (=in the evening) - the One of the Sabbaths, (=implying the first Christian Sunday, on which Christ was resurrected – pursuant to the previous, Jewish Sabbath) - and with doors closed where the disciples were gathered together for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and He stood in their midst, and He said to them,’ Peace be to you’.  And having said this, He showed them His hands and His side. Therefore the disciples rejoiced, on seeing the Lord.'

We notice, that the evidence the Lord offers for His resurrection, is His own Body – that same, human body that was nailed to the cross, that same body that was resurrected. Let’s hear what a Father of the Church, Saint Cyril of Alexandria, says about this:

“Also, by baring the side of the body and showing the imprints of the nails, He visibly informed them that He had raised a temple – the One hanged upon that very cross - and that the body which He had worn, that same one He had raised again.”

The holy Father is saying that what the Lord did - that is, by baring the side of His body and showing the wounds from the nails on His hands - He has given us in this very tangible manner the following information, i.e., that indeed, what was resurrected, was the very same Body which He had worn. It was that same Body (which He referred to as a temple), that had been hung on the cross. Hence, the Lord had not risen from the dead with another, angelic body, as claimed by heretics; He specifically resurrected His own physical, tortured Body which had finally been crucified - and that was the proof of His resurrection, which He brought before His disciples.

Of course, so that we would not be left with the impression that the resurrection of Christ is absolutely the same as the resurrections that He had personally performed or those performed by the prophets - such as the resurrection of Lazarus – is why He appeared before the disciples in a miraculous manner, “with doors closed”.  This event was also highlighted in a special manner by the Evangelist John.

So, the Lord was resurrected in an unprecedented manner, that is, of course with the human body that He had before He was crucified – except that now this body did not have the exact same properties as before, as It had not been subjected to decay and death - like the body of the resurrected Lazarus for example, or the others who had been resurrected up to that time (and later on had died biologically).  As such, His Body no longer functioned under any known biological laws. His Body now functioned in accordance with the Holy Spirit - which explains why It was no longer hindered by the walls and door of the room that the disciples had sequestered themselves (for fear of the Jews)...

With this supernatural manner of appearing, He raises their thoughts to a higher level; also, by showing the puncture marks of the spear and the nails, He was proving to them that He was also still human and not something else.

But let's listen to the continuation by Cyril of Alexandria, who gives us very precisely the dimension of the event:

 “And now He is visibly thus, so that when the time came, by reconfiguring His own Body into an ineffable and sublime glory so that it will appear again the way that it formerly was. This He had providentially done, lest it be thought that He has another (body) than that same one, with which He was put to death on the cross.

That our eyes would not endure the appearance of the glorified Body - which Christ had willed to display outwardly, even before ascending to the Father – you can understand easily, by remembering the reconfiguring on the mount (of the Transfiguration), which He had evidenced to the holy disciples...

Most providentially therefore, our Lord Jesus Christ (not for the glory owed and appropriate to Him), had transfigured His temple (=Body) so that it again appears in its previously seen forms.”

Thus, for reasons of providence, the Lord did not want to appear before the disciples with His Body in full glory, because then they would not have been able to bear the sight. He simply limited Himself to prove (to them) the resurrection of His Body, while simultaneously giving them a “small” sample of the glorified qualities of His resurrected Body.

Besides, He had shown them this aspect even before the Passion, when He had revealed His Body to them in its glorified state, during the Transfiguration on Mount Tabor. Even before the Passion and the Resurrection, when the Lord was willingly – and providentially - “bearing” a perishable and mortal human body, it was already partaking of the glory of God. This glory became evident during the Transfiguration, but it is also repeatedly confirmed in the lives of the Saints of our Church. Nevertheless, the human body’s final and complete partaking in the glory of God will be taking place during the general resurrection, when it will have become “according to the image” of Christ’s resurrected Body.

The fullness of this glory was to be kept unknown and secret to them, and that was what He was implying when he said to Mary: '…for I have not yet ascended to the Father' - as we shall see in more detail further along.

The perishable and mortal human body that we now wear cannot endure the full sight of this divine glory and remain alive. This glory - which Christ had revealed with His human (material) body at the Transfiguration – will be with that same body following the Resurrection, and will be manifest and visible to everyone from His Second Coming and thereafter - continuously.

It is therefore necessary, for the correct interpretation of matters, to be able to distinguish what is done by Providence and what is done for necessity.  For example, we eat out of necessity, whereas after His Resurrection, the Lord ate, for the sake of Providence.  Out of necessity we must walk to go from one place to another, whereas the Lord appeared at will wherever and whenever He wanted, but for the sake of Providence, He physically (bodily) accompanied the disciples on the road to Emmaus.

5. The meeting of the resurrected Christ with Mary Magdalene

But let us move on now, and examine one more incident, which took place a little earlier than the one we examined previously, and is in fact mentioned by the Evangelist himself in the immediately preceding verses, that is, in the 20th chapter of the Gospel according to John, verses 1-18.

To summarize, very early on Sunday morning - the day the Lord rose, and while it was still half-dark before sunrise –Mary Magdalene arrives at the tomb and discovers that the huge stone that blocked its entrance had been rolled away. When she saw that the tomb was open, she ran hurriedly and anxiously told Peter and John that the Lord’s Body had been removed from the tomb. As soon as they heard this, they immediately rushed to the place, and to their great surprise, they discovered that the tomb was indeed empty – but also that the funeral shroud and head cover were neatly folded and were still there and not missing - which was an extremely unnatural thing, if the dead body had indeed been stolen.

They also noticed that the cloth, with which they had covered the head of Jesus, was not carelessly thrown aside, bundled together with the shroud; it was in fact folded separately and neatly  – a detail that certainly did not betray any haste - or that the supposed robbers were pressed for time!

The two of them then truly believed that Jesus was resurrected, and they also understood the prophecies of the Holy Bible about the resurrection of Christ. So, after having examined the tomb, and now convinced that all further investigation was redundant, they returned home.

However, Mary, who had stood outside the tomb crying, had not at all imagined that the Lord was risen from the dead. And for a brief moment - as she had again leaned into the tomb to look for the body of Jesus - she saw two angels in brilliant white robes nearby, who, as guards of the tomb and glorious servants of the resurrected Lord, said to her:

“Why are you crying woman?” And she replied: “Because they have taken my Lord from the tomb, and I don't know where they have put Him.”

Then she suddenly turned around – most probably because the angels had turned their attention in that direction – and she saw Jesus Himself, but did not recognize Him. The reason she did not recognize Him immediately - possibly because the darkness of the night had not yet completely dissipated, or because (for reasons of Providence), the Lord intentionally appeared in a different form, so as not to impose a sudden and major surprise on her from the very first moment - or possibly even for other, justifiable reasons.

So Jesus asks her: “Woman, why are you crying? Who are you looking for?”   She thought it was the gardener, and therefore said to him: “Sir, if you took Him, please tell me where you placed Him, and I will remove Him (=from your garden and place Him somewhere else).”

But let's continue the narration as it appears in the original text. We are at verse 16 of the 20th chapter of the Gospel of John:

“Jesus said to her:  ‘Miriam!’ Turning around, she said to Him (in Hebrew): ‘Rabbouni!’ – which affectionately means 'Teacher!'.  Jesus said to her: ‘Do not touch Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father.  Go now to my brothers and say to them: ‘I am ascending to my Father, and your (plural) Father, and my God and your (plural) God.  Mary Magdalene came (to them), to announce to the disciples: that she saw the Lord, and these are the things He said to her.’

6. Misconstruing Christ's words to Mary

Those who do not believe in the resurrection of Christ’s human body resort to this passage, saying that, on the one hand, because Jesus was not immediately recognized by Mary, and on the other hand, because He did not allow her to touch Him - with the excuse that He had not yet ascended to His Father – His Body must not have been a human one. In fact, they claim that He was in an intermediate state, because He supposedly hadn’t received any body yet, due to the fact that He was waiting to go to His Father first, in order to receive His new body.

At first glance, this view sounds logical and able to convince even a relatively clueless Orthodox Christian. But let's see in detail if this is really the case:

In principle, when it comes to interpreting any part of the Bible, no matter how difficult or easy it seems to be, we must always keep in mind one of the most basic interpretive rules, which is the following:

We should not accept any interpretation as correct, if a passage (no matter how correct and logical it may seem to us) comes into direct conflict with other, corresponding passages of the Holy Bible.  

Of course so far, we have repeatedly and clearly established that the Lord was resurrected as a human - and not as an angelic creature - with His human body - which had been nailed to the Cross, and not with another, angelic body - nor was there any period when He had no body at all. So, from this alone, we should reject this interpretation as being incorrect, and try with the help of the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete (the Summoned One, the Consoler) Who guides and illuminates the Church, in order to understand the passage that we examined.

In addition, the heretical claim that during His dialogue with Mary, Jesus was… bodiless, which was the reason He said: 'Don't touch me' to her –is completely incorrect and absurd. We would then have to surmise that the Jesus who spoke to Mary was a 'ghost' - that is, a figment of her imagination – in which case, she must have mistakenly believed that He had risen… as would have the apostles Peter and John, before her.

A view such as that, however, not only completely contradicts the Holy Bible, (Luke 24:39,40), but rather constitutes blasphemy as well.  And of course, one could –jokingly- ask heretics:  Was the road to heaven such a long one (where Jesus had to go… to receive His new body), that He didn't get there in time? Or perhaps His heavenly Father didn’t have time to prepare it for Him, which is why Jesus lingered here on earth, talking with Mary?

7. The real reasons behind the words that Christ had said

Let's read the parallel narrative by the evangelist Matthew, chapter 28:1-9, which will shed abundant light on the mystery, and at the same time literally dispel the paradoxical theories by heretics:

“And, at late night of the Sabbaths – the one that dawned on the Sunday – Myriam of Magdala (=Mary Magdalene) came – along with the other Myriam - to examine the tomb.  And behold, a great earthquake occurred. For an angel of God, having descended from heaven and approaching there, rolled away the (tomb’s) stone and was seated upon it.  His countenance was like lightning, and his garment white as snow. And in fear of him, the onlookers (=the garrison) were shaken and became as if dead. Responding, the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here, for He is risen, as He had said. Come, look at the place where He was laid. Now, go quickly and tell His disciples that He has risen from the dead and behold, He is going ahead of you to Galilee; you will see Him there. Behold, I have told you.”  So, departing quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, they ran to inform His disciples.  And behold, Jesus met them, saying, “Rejoice!” So they came and hugged His feet and venerated Him.”

What do the heretics have to say, to this very specific description by Matthew, where it is clearly seen, that Mary Magdalene, together with the other Mary, not only touched Jesus, but had also ‘hugged His feet'?

It is obvious, therefore, that heretics tend to build bold theories based on incorrect data. We have therefore established that their claims are equally baseless in this case also.  With this opportunity, we might repeat once more how easy it is to fall victim to malicious and heretical teachings, which are in fact presented as seemingly logical and well-founded.  It goes without saying, that, if heretical teachings were demonstrably illogical and mistaken, then all sects would be left with almost no followers.

But then, what is the correct interpretation of John 20:14-17? What does our Church say?

Due to insufficient time required for a detailed analysis of the entire passage, which is extremely educative and at the same time very touching, we will limit ourselves only to the passages in question.

In verse 16 we read: “Jesus said to her:  ‘Miriam!’ Turning around, she replied to Him in Hebrew: ‘Rabbouni!’ – which affectionately means 'Teacher!'.  

So, while Mary thought the resurrected Lord was the Gardener, Jesus says to her: 'Miriam!'… He calls her by her name. And it was from His voice that addressed her and not from His appearance, that Mary understood it was the Lord.

This strongly reminds us of the parable of the Good Shepherd, mentioned in the 10th chapter of the same Gospel. There the Lord said:

“The sheep hear His voice. And those same sheep He calls by name. And the sheep follow Him, because they know His voice.” (John 10: 3,4).

As soon as she realizes from the voice that it is not the Gardener, but Jesus, she then turns towards Him. Why is that; Wasn't she talking to Him before? Wasn't she looking at Him? It appears she was saying these things to the presumed Gardener while looking at the angels and honouring them. But when she realized that it was Jesus, she turned towards Him. It is only natural, when the Despot and Creator is present, to turn towards Him, and withdraw our gaze from any other creations, however glorious and wonderful they may be.

And of course what followed is logical and to be expected. As also evident in Matthew's narrative, she not only touched Jesus, but also fell down before His feet, and held onto them, not wanting to let go of Him anymore. Then Jesus says to her: 'Do not touch Me', in the sense of 'Do not hold Me here', and not 'Do not place your hands on Me'.  One wonders, why did He say that?  Well, He obviously knew Miriam’s feelings and innermost thoughts (being the reader of our hearts), that she had not understood out of her great joy and astonishment, the great and sublime thing that was taking place; she must have thought that Jesus had been raised from the dead like Lazarus and the others who were deceased until then and had likewise been resurrected. She must have thought, therefore, that things would continue as they were before He died, and that all their interactions would again be terrestrial. That is why it seems as though she was trying to keep him “grounded” forever.

It was this incorrect, humble opinion that Mary had about the risen Lord, which is also confirmed by the outspokenness she shows Him, that Jesus wanted to correct, by saying: 'Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to my Father”. Or in other words, 'Don't try to keep Me here'. And He explains to her that He is in a hurry to ascend to His Father, an event that clearly took place on the Day of His Ascension to heaven. It stands to reason therefore, that one who is in a hurry and wants to depart urgently, we should not want to keep him with us. At the same time, by telling her that 'he is going to ascend to His Father', he was elevating her thoughts from the earthly and tangible to the heavenly and noetic.

He therefore corrects her misconception (and wishful thinking) that He was going to continue being there as beforeand, associating with His disciples on earth, thus making her understand that henceforth, they will be connected through a new relationship and fellowship, which will commence when He ascends (on the Day of His Ascension) to His Father.

8. Why did Christ treat Thomas differently?

It is worth noting that this difference in the reactions of Jesus towards Mary and towards Thomas and the rest of the disciples, (in the former He avoided her hugging, while in the latter, He invited Thomas to physically examine His wounds), can be logically justified, only if we understand the others’ needs. Mary, on the other hand, was certain that He had risen from the dead, and wanted to keep Him permanently on earth, whereas “doubting Thomas” could not believe Jesus had risen from the dead.

He thus corrected Mary's idea, by preventing her from “keeping” Him there and emphasizing to her that He is physically hastening to depart from His circle to sit at the right hand of His Father. At the same time, He corrected Thomas's idea, by providing him with palpable evidence of His resurrected body.

After the Lord had said to Mary: 'Do not touch Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father', He continues, instructing her: 'Go to my brothers and tell them...'. We notice how, after strictly correcting Mary's misapprehension, He immediately softens His words again, by referring to the disciples, 'His brothers'. In fact, it was the first time that He had done that.

Earlier on, He had told her that He was going to ascend to His Father; in order for Mary to not be left with the impression that Jesus was abandoning them, He revealed to her that He has a close familial relationship with His disciples.  Shortly before the Passion, He had called them His 'friends': “No one has greater love than this, when one lays down his life for his friends. You are my friends, if you do that which I instruct you.  I no longer call you ‘servants’, because a servant does not know what the Lord does for him. I have called you ‘friends’, for whatever I heard from my Father, I made known to you”. (John 15: 13-15).

But now He no longer calls them friends, but brothers. He thus makes manifest a foretaste of their future communion, and also reveals the uninterrupted love that will unite the disciples with Him, in the glorious state into which He is already entering.

It is worth noting that Christ “is not ashamed to call them brothers” (Hebrews 2: 11), even though they fled and denied him during His passion. He is not overcome by arrogance and pride, after his glorious Ascent; on the contrary, He does not forget His friends, and calls them to be partakers of the divine adoption. “And to those who received Him, He gave them authority to become children of God, for believing in His name”. (John 1: 12).

So, what does He instruct Mary to go and say to His brothers?

“Say to them: I am ascending to my Father and your (plural) Father, and my God, and your (plural) God.”

When does He ascend?  Certain heretics maintain that He ascended immediately after the dialogue with Mary - to receive His… new body, as we mentioned earlier on. But this is completely wrong. Here, His ascension into heaven is clearly understood to have taken place 40 days after the Resurrection.  

Then was when Jesus “ascended into heaven, received by the disciples” (Acts 1: 10, 11).

That was when He “sat at the right hand of the Father in heaven” (Ephesians 1:20).  

From then on, He is “at the right hand of God – having proceeded to heaven” (1 Peter 3: 22).

But instead, He said to her: 'I am ascending' and not 'I will ascend', in order to elevate her intellect, and to convince her that His bodily presence on earth is entirely temporary, and that the moment of His Ascension to heaven is very near. And He ascended into the heavens, not to “receive His new body”, as some maliciously assert, but to 'captivate mankind, and give them charismas”, as the Psalmist says, and as the apostle Paul repeats:

“Ascending to a height, He captivated by captivity. He gave rooms to people. And what does “ascended” imply, if not that He had also “descended” to the lowermost parts of the earth? He who had descended was the same One who had ascended, above all the heavens, so that He might fulfill all things” (Ephesians 4: 8-10).

After all, that He is ascending to His Father is not something completely unheard of for the disciples, given that He had mentioned it to them shortly before the Passion, and had directly linked it to the descent of the Holy Spirit, which took place 10 days after His Ascension into the heavens.

Due to shortage of time, we will not further analyse this incident now, but if you want, you can read it from the 16th chapter of the gospel of John, verses 5-11.

9. Differences between the filial status and the relationship of His brothers with God

So, after the Lord previously named the disciples as 'His brothers', He says to them: 'I am ascending to my Father and your (plural) Father.  This was His way of declaring to them, that His Father will also become their Father. Let us notice, however, that he does not say: 'to my Father and OUR father', but 'to My Father and YOUR (plural) Father.'

And He does this in order to clarify that He is not literally the Father of everyone, in the common, familiar sense, but that He is literally the Father of Christ, but Father of the disciples in a different sense.

To Christ, He is the natural Father – His Father by nature, whereas for Christians, He is their Father by Grace.

To Christ, He is the natural genitor (who begat the Son), whereas to the disciples, He is their Father through the act of adoption.

And when we say that Christ is the Father’s Son by nature, we mean literally and clearly, that they are of the same essence.

Thus, having previously called the disciples 'His brothers', He then made the distinction by saying 'My Father' and 'Your Father' - and not 'Our Father', lest they imagine that they are absolutely equal to Him.

And he continues the distinction by saying: 'and my God, and your God'.   Christ differs from the rest of mankind, not only in terms of His Divine Nature, a fact which He declared in His previous words, but also in terms of His human nature. For, while Christians, through Grace and Philanthropy, become 'Partakers of the Divine Nature',  Christ, as the Son and Logos of God, is by His nature God, just as the natural son of a human cannot be anything other than a human and have all the natural qualities of humans, and specifically of his natural father.

In parallel, while for mankind God is their Maker and Creator but also their Judge, given that Jesus - Who is joined to the Godhead and at the same time is sinless - these concepts are not fully represented. That is why he makes the second distinction.

But more on the matter of the Incarnation of the Son and Logos of God, His relationship with God the Father, and the inescapable, unconfused and indivisible union of the Divine and human nature in one hypostasis in the person of Christ, we will tackle – Lord permitting - when we examine the matter of the Godhead, especially of the second Person of the Holy Trinity.

In the meantime, to conclude the analysis of this beautiful passage, it would be remiss of me if we did not mention that in these words of our Lord to Mary Magdalene, the entire Divine Economy is summed up. 'I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God'.   I am going to My Father, so that as God, but joined to human nature, I will make him your Father also. And as a human, but joined to Divine nature, to make my God, the true God, from Whom you have apostatized, your God also.

After all, this is the role of Christ as Mediator. And that is why the mediator between God and men needed to be both God and a human, aka “God-man”.

This necessity was also discerned by Job, when he said to God: 'There is no mediator between us, (that is, between God and mankind), that can place his hand on both of us' (Job 9: 33) .

But in order for this Mediator to be tangible to people, he must be human. And to be tangible to touch God, he must be God – in other words, God-man.

Unfortunately, however, we again used up the time of the broadcast today, without having managed to completely cover the subject of the body with which Christ was resurrected.

Consequently - the Lord willing - we will continue in the next broadcast, with the analysis of the verses related to this topic.

Thank you for following us. We also thank Costas Giotzios, who edited the audio. Rejoice, and God be with us!

Translation:  A.N.