The problem with the "risen" Jesus.

My beliefs are wrong and so are yours. To admit this is to admit sin. 

The Ultimate Reality is what is true, and that is what God is. That is something that goes beyond anyone's belief on the matter.

It is childish to deny reality.

That's what you say, but you don't really know that.

If a truth dies, does The Truth die? Of course not.

That is the real mystery of the risen Jesus.

I don't think it is so hard to admit that The Truth exists.

The Truth

How do I join reality?

Do you see reality standing in front of you?

Yet, reality as it truly is happens to be what I call God.

It doesn't make sense to you.

No we don't. Mopac isright. Jesus was saying, "do not detain me". 

> @Mopac
Theword that gets translated in John 20:17 to "touch" is in the originalgreek "ἅπτομαι" which is closer to a clinging to rather than a simplepoking.......
So in other words, it is a problemthat arises because of translation

It is definitely a translation issue. First point.

Almost every commentator seriously misunderstands this verse because they assume that “going up to the Father” refers to Jesus’ ascension into heaven. This problem is made worse by the fact that most English versions of the Bible translate the common Greek word anabainō, which means “to go up” or “to come up,” as “ascended.” This makes it seem like the verse is referring to Jesus’ ascension into heaven, which it does not.

If Jesus told Mary not to touch him because he had not yet ascended into heaven, then why did he allow or invite others to touch him before he ascended? The same morning he told Mary not to touch him, he allowed the other women to touch him and hold on to his feet (Matt. 28:9). Then later that same day Jesus appeared to his disciples when they were behind locked doors and told them, “Look at my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Handle me, and see” (Luke 24:39). ... Then, eight days later, he told Thomas to touch him (John 20:26, 27).

... If Jesus says the reason not to touch him is that he had not gone to the Father, then once he had “gone up” to the Father, people could touch him. Of course that is exactly what happened. Once Jesus had “gone up” to his Father, which, as we will see, he did when he went “up” to the Temple and then presented himself to the Father there, he allowed people to touch him.

The Messiah was the fulfillment of the types and symbols in the Old Testament. For example, he was the true Passover Lamb; the true acceptable sacrifice; the true Sabbath rest for God’s people; and the true High Priest. He was also the true “firstfruits” to God, that is, the first of God’s true harvest (God’s true harvest is the harvest of people who get up from the dead to everlasting life, and Jesus was the first one to be raised from the dead to everlasting life). After his resurrection, Jesus was both the High Priest (Ps. 110:4; Zech. 6:13; Heb. 5:5; 8:1) and the firstfruits (1 Cor. 15:20, 23), and he had to go to the Temple and show himself in both those roles.

... After the sun came up, Jesus Christ, as the acceptable firstfruits, went up from the tomb area to the Temple on Mt. Moriah and showed himself publicly to God and was acceptable in God’s sight to represent the rest of the harvest—all the believers who will be raised from the dead. The High Priest showing the firstfruits in the Temple was something all the Apostles and disciples understood from their Jewish upbringing, and knew was supposed to happen that very day. So if they believed Mary’s testimony that Jesus had been raised from the dead, they would also understand he had to go up to the Temple and show himself to God there. Therefore, when Mary appeared to them and told them Jesus was alive, she bolstered her statement by telling them that he had to “go up to the Father,” that is, appear in the Temple...

As both the High Priest and the Offering, Jesus had to remain Leviticaly clean until after he offered himself, and he would not be Leviticaly clean if Mary touched him (Lev. 22:1-8). Mary was unclean by virtue of the fact that she had been in the tomb that morning and seen that the body of Jesus was gone. However, after Jesus had fulfilled his role as High Priest and firstfruits offering by showing himself in the Temple, he could let people touch him—and he did.

I can't help finding the whole thing rather dubious, interesting or not. Even if I'd read "go up to my Father" instead of "ascend", I still wouldn't have gotten "go up to the temple" out of that. Not that I'm any scholar on the subject. It's just you'd think it would've been spelled out more clearly if Jesus was doing such an important ritual at the temple. 

Her [Mary's] act supposed a condition which had not yet been accomplished. He had not returned to earth to abide permanently with His disciples in the presence of the Paraclete (comp. John 14:18), for He had not yet ascended to the Father. 

Nope there is no mention of “detaining” stop falsifyingthese facts.

So touch is to lay hands or at least fingers on someone.  To cling to someone is also to touch someone. 

And to "detain" someone, one has to touch them.

The point of BIBLICAL fact here is, that one persons gets favour over another.

One person is ALLOWED to "touch" "cling" or even to "detain"  but another person is refused.  

AND YOU OR Mopac cannot explain this biblical biasness  away .