Opposition To Doctrine of Resurrection of the Flesh

See, to show you that he was dealing with people who didn't accept this idea of resurrection of the flesh, they who maintain the wrong opinion say that there is no resurrection of the flesh, giving as their reason that it is impossible that what is corrupted and dissolved should be restored to the same as it had been. And besides the impossibility, they say that the salvation of the flesh is disadvantageous. And they abuse the flesh, inducing its infirmities and declare that it is only the cause of our sins so that if the flesh say they rise again, our infirmities also rise with it. Now, I don't know who these people are. I'm not saying they were they held the same views that I hold. I'm simply pointing out that not everybody in that era held to a bodily resurrection. And the way Justin Martyr addressed them was to say, God's going to do away with sexual relationships in the age to come in the new heavens and the new earth. And yet we saw in the new heavens and new earth, they were still bringing forth children and they were still producing offspring. So how are they doing it? Are they doing it outside of marriage? Are they doing it through illicit sexual relationships? Well, they can't because God does away with I think. Did he say God did away with those organs? Maybe not. But he certainly said that he did away with with sexual intercourse. Now, that's very interesting for the people who believe that they're going to live on this earth forever. How are they going to and at the same time, no sexual intercourse, but they want the resurrection of the flesh. I'm just telling you what Justin Martyr said.