If that is what is seated at the right hand of God, then so be it. But I wouldn't bet much on it.
Kirk Cameron and annihilationism
- Thread starter civic
- Start date
praise_yeshua
Active Member
So you don't have a issue with the possibility of "spaghetti monster" but YOU KNOW that it is NOT a flesh and bone human.
You do realize that this has all the characteristics of a defeated argument.
This happens when you can't defend your rejection of a possibility while having to admit you have no idea what you actually think it is.
Happens all the time. I call it the..... "I don't know, but I know" theology.
The sacrifice by the blood of Christ's death on the cross was the atonement. The resurrection is, among other things, the validation of the atonement by Christ's sacrifice, but not the atonement as such.
The human body of Christ was raised from the dead. I have never said or even suggested otherwise.
Yes, in His resurrection, not in His ascension.
No, I am not. You need to pay attention.
Your words, not mine.
Oh, groad. Grow up @praise_yeshua. I know full well that Jesus is no longer flesh, bone, and blood. Flesh and blood, i.e., human, has no part in the kingdom of God (1 Cor 15:50). Jesus is once again the Word as He was before the incarnation.
And by the way, I was just condescending in that. I guess you were correct. Sometimes one needs to be condescending to get the point across.
praise_yeshua
Active Member
Then the blood of animals was the atonement. If you think only the shedding of blood atones for sin, then you're a theologically terrible place.
1Co 15:12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
1Co 15:13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
1Co 15:14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
1Co 15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
That is my point. You're pointing to the place/event where you say the atonement was accomplished without the Resurrection of the human body of Jesus Christ. Yet. You are witnessing to the essential aspects of the human bodily resurrection AFTER the facts of what you say are the Atonement.
Why the contradiction in your position. If the Atonement/event is the only necessity of the human body of Christ then why say what you're saying about the Resurrection?
If you require such in the Resurrection, then why not require in the Ascension.
No, I am not. You need to pay attention.
I am paying attention. You're not.
praise_yeshua
Active Member
Glad you agree about condescending. Condescending "attitudes" don't bother me. I usually give it back.
You were wrong about condescending..... why not consider the possibility of being wrong about many things.
Let me know if you're being sarcastic or you literally agree.
If what you say is true about "flesh and bone", then YOU don't have part in the kingdom of God right now. I'd like to think otherwise.
There is a seed with flesh bone that will be changed. That seed changes but it still carries forward characteristics of the seed.
That "body" we receive from heaven is another story. The bodily resurrection of the Saints of God is often misunderstood.
You are not even paying attention to scripture. So I am not surprised that you are not paying attention to me.
The atonement is in the sacrifice of Jesus' death on the cross, not in the resurrection. The resurrection is the validation and verification of the fact of the sacrifice, the atonement. Without that verification, the death of Jesus would have been just another man crucified by the Romans.
praise_yeshua
Active Member
You're the one actually ignoring the Scriptures.
1Co 15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
The Atonement for sin isn't complete without the Resurrection. Also, it isn't complete without the continuing Priestly work of our GREAT HIGH PRIEST.....
Heb 7:24 But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
Heb 7:25 Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.
Do you see the word "unchanging priesthood"?
So when did the Priestly work of Christ begin?
I'm enjoying this. Is that condescending of me?
Last edited:
No, but you are wrong.
praise_yeshua
Active Member
Winning an argument isn't always an indication of being right.... but what else do we have to reason by?
You can claim to be true to God. I can claim to be true to God. Ultimately, we'll face God and He will decided between us. I'm fine with that. I can safely assume you are too.
We can disagree and leave it at that. Let me know if you want to keep arguing.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Okay @Jim,
Maybe a different view will explain.
Jesus is still human and will remain human forever. And this is because when Jesus became man, He did not temporarily “borrow” humanity and then discard it. Scripture teaches that the incarnation is permanent.
Jesus rose bodily, not spiritually only.
After His resurrection, Jesus said.....
“Touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” (Luke 24:39)
That body simply was not set aside later, it was glorified, not abandoned.
You cannot deny that Jesus ascended as a man. The disciples watched the very same Jesus ascend.
Acts 1:11 states...They also said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven.”
He went up bodily, therefore He remains bodily.
Also Jesus is still called “the man” after His ascension. Years later, Paul wrote in
1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
This was written after Jesus was glorified in heaven.
Jesus remains human forever because He is our High Priest. Scripture says:
Heb 7:24 but Jesus, on the other hand, because He continues forever, holds His priesthood permanently.
Now this is a very important fact to know......
A priest must represent humans as a human. If Jesus ceased being human, He could no longer be our mediator.
It is Our very future that proves His continued humanity. We are told:
1 John 3:2 Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.
WE will be glorified humans ....not spirits ....and Christ is the pattern, not the exception.
IMPORTANT TO KNOW.... at the (our) resurrection, the same spirit that returned to God ( on our death) will be reunited with a glorified body. Scripture presents this as a restoration and completion, not a replacement.
As to Jesus.....Jesus did not stop being human; He became glorified. If He ceased being human, He could no longer be our mediator, High Priest, or the ‘last Adam.’ Scripture repeatedly calls Him ‘the man’ even after His ascension.
This affirms the Trinity without denying the incarnation, and it avoids confusion.
So Jim, I understand what you’re saying, and I mean this with respect. Scripture never says Jesus stopped being human. What it says is that He was glorified, not that His humanity ended.
After the resurrection, Jesus went out of His way to show He still had a real body with flesh and bones. The disciples watched that same Jesus ascend into heaven, and the Bible later still calls Him ‘the man Christ Jesus.’ That was written after He was already in heaven.
Jesus remains human because He is our mediator and High Priest, and a mediator between God and men must truly share in our humanity. If He were no longer human, He could not represent us.
So I’m not saying Jesus is ‘only’ human—He is fully God and fully man—but that His becoming man was not temporary. His humanity is now glorified and eternal."
civic
Active Member
Yep all believers like Jesus will have an eternal body which is physical . The afterlife in the new heavens and earth is a physical place.
Wick Stick
Active Member
Compare Matthew's "Kingdom of Heaven..."
https://www.blueletterbible.org/search/search.cfm?Criteria=kingdom+of+heaven&t=RSV#s=s_primary_0_1
...with Mark's "Kingdom of God:"
https://www.blueletterbible.org/search/search.cfm?Criteria=kingdom+of+God&t=RSV#s=s_primary_0_1
They overlap significantly. So, which is right? Both... Matthew has substituted the word "heaven" for "God," because the Jews do not speak the word "God" and his gospel was meant to be read aloud to Jews.
Wick Stick
Active Member
His argument is strange to me.
Being absent from the body doesn't make a person no-longer-human.
praise_yeshua
Active Member
I like you. I can tell you're different. From time to time, you tend to say things that intrigue me.
"not speaking the name of God" is nonsense in the context of realty. However, it was real to many when the Gospels were written. Matthew is a complicated construct. It would seem you probably know more about this than most.
Jerome said that Matthew was first written in Hebrew. (in a "round about" way.) Who exactly produced the current Greek origins is unknown. I don't even know if Jerome was correct. I made a choice a long time ago to anchor my understanding in the book of Luke and the Gospel of John.
If you do this, I don't think you can go wrong in discussing the subject of the "Kingdom of God" and the "Kingdom of heaven".
Thank you for answering!
praise_yeshua
Active Member
There is also a "human spirit".
There is also a "heavenly body"....
2Co 5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2Co 5:2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
2Co 5:3 If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
2Co 5:4 For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.
Many people conflate the Physical Resurrection with these words I posted above.
I do not. I see a distinct difference. To us that are born again, we "tabernacle" in this life. We have a "tabernacle" from heaven that we will gain when we leave this world. We will be joined to our human bodies in the Physical Resurrection from the dead.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Side note.... Why do you suppose that so many do not believe in a new heavens and earth or some will say that is only spiritual?
civic
Active Member
That has its roots in Gnosticism- Gnostic belief is that the afterlife is not physical but spiritual, viewing the material world and body as flawed or evil, with salvation being the spirit's escape from matter to reunite with the divine, often described as a spiritual awakening or resurrection, not a bodily one. Gnostics saw the resurrection as a spiritual event, a present-life awakening to true divine identity, rather than a future physical event, emphasizing liberation from the "tomb of the material body" through gnosis (knowledge)
Wick Stick
Active Member
Spiritual or figurative?
The new heavens/earth in Isaiah 65 seem to be a figurative way of referring to Israel. Post #277 on the previous page
civic
Active Member
This is a good read take a look .
Raised a Spiritual Body (Gnosticism & Evangelicalism 3) - Robin Mark Phillips
This article was originally published in my column at the Colson Center. It is republished here with permission. For a complete directory of all my Colson Center articles, click here. “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual...
robinmarkphillips.com
here is a summary
The early church, which spoke Greek as its native tongue, understood these distinctions. In fact, the distinction between physical resurrection and a purely ‘spiritual’ nonphysical resurrection was absolutely central in dividing the true Christians from heretics like the ancient Gnostics. It was the early Christian’s understanding of physical resurrection which, perhaps more than any other doctrine, served to polarize the church of the canonical tradition from the anti-creational orientation of the Gnostics.
Not only Irenaeus, but Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, the writers of the Didache, Justin Martyr, Tertullian and many other early Christian writers went to great lengths to make clear that the bodies of departed Christians will be raised in a way comparative to the resurrection of our Blessed Lord. This doctrine found expression in the Nicene Creed and was reaffirmed in frequent Christian polemics against the Gnostics.
Far from matter and spirit being in competition with one another, the Christian doctrine of resurrection points towards the grand consecration of creation. It points to a time when our physical bodies will be taken up and transformed by God’s spirit to be everything they were meant to be (and more) before sin entered the picture. While the resurrection body will be many things that we cannot even now imagine (1 Cor. 2:9), we can be sure of this: it will be physical.
Similar threads
