Kirk Cameron and annihilationism

[FreeInChrist]

@Jim,

There has been much talk on whether we will eat in heaven and of course, if spiritual the answer would seemingly be no....

But remember... Jesus himself said...Matt 26:29 “But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom.”

If He does not have a body. If none of them do.... When they drink of that fruit of the vine...... boy what a mess.

 

[civic]

I don't see any difference between the disdain you're showing toward "your flesh" and the theology you have concerning the current state of Jesus Christ in heaven.

You're not going to "ascend" to some "Non-corporeal spiritual life".

Non-corporeal is a reference to lacking "substance". Which is really crazy if you stop and think about it for a little while.

You may question that "substance" is.... but there is no context where there isn't "substance" here. You will be tangible even before the physical resurrection.

You're not going to be some "ghost" floating around.

Even Spirt is tangible (clear and definitive, real)

Don't get hung up in the descriptions of our existence as defined in the English language.

The Word became flesh is their stumbling block. They must redefine flesh and give it a different meaning with Jesus.

 

[Jim]

I don't see any difference between the disdain you're showing toward "your flesh" and the theology you have concerning the current state of Jesus Christ in heaven.

That is not disdain for flesh, it is just a simple acknowledgement of fact. Jesus was not flesh before incarnation and his not flesh after ascension.

You're not going to "ascend" to some "Non-corporeal spiritual life".

You disagree with Solomon who declared, speaking of death, "the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it".

Non-corporeal is a reference to lacking "substance". Which is really crazy if you stop and think about it for a little while.

The only substance that you, or anyone else, can think of or even imagine is composed of atoms, molecules, chemicals, etc,., all entities associated with this physical universe.

You may question that "substance" is.... but there is no context where there isn't "substance" here. You will be tangible even before the physical resurrection.

God is not "substance". Jesus was not substance before coming to earth. Your spirit is not substance.

You're not going to be some "ghost" floating around.

Silly man, floating requires a substance. Of course we won't be floating. There is no indication in all of Scripture that there exists "substance" in heaven.

Even Spirt is tangible (clear and definitive, real)

But it is not of a substance. God is clear, definitive, real. But He is Spirit, not substance.

Don't get hung up in the descriptions of our existence as defined in the English language.

You are the one hung up in the realities of this physical universe and feel the intense need to anthropomorphize God , the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and all the rest of the heavenly beings.

 

[Jim]

The Word became flesh is their stumbling block. They must redefine flesh and give it a different meaning with Jesus.

Not true. The entire spirit world is your stumbling block. You have to redefine spirit to be a thing of substance.

 

[praise_yeshua]

The Word became flesh is their stumbling block. They must redefine flesh and give it a different meaning with Jesus.

Exactly!

 

[praise_yeshua]

Not true. The entire spirit world is your stumbling block. You have to redefine spirit to be a thing of substance.

Okay. Provide your definitions.

When I use the word "tangible". I am saying (clear and definitive, real)

Is Spirit. "(clear and definitive, real)"?

 

[civic]

Okay. Provide your definitions.

When I use the word "tangible". I am saying (clear and definitive, real)

Is Spirit. "(clear and definitive, real)"?

We can see the trickle down effect when one’s theology about God is incorrect regarding the Trinity and 2 natures in Christ

 

[praise_yeshua]

That is not disdain for flesh, it is just a simple acknowledgement of fact. Jesus was not flesh before incarnation and his not flesh after ascension.

You said you would trade your flesh. That is disdain for the flesh. YOU WANT to give it away.

You can't ignore this. You said it.

Jesus felt it absolutely necessary to become flesh. Not to just "wear" flesh. BECOME flesh.

One the first studies I did when I began to declare Jesus Christ myself was

Heb 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
Heb 2:18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

I love that word "behoved". It is one of the most accurate English word that has every existed that describe the desire of Jesus Christ to become flesh.

If you studied the varied usage of the Greek source here you will find a very deep and profound necessity placed upon the Incarnation.

I find it crazy at times how Unitarians claim that Trinitarians don't want to believe Jesus is human. When it is Trinitarianism that actually deeply engages with the necessity of the fleshly experience of God in humanity.

 

[praise_yeshua]

You disagree with Solomon who declared, speaking of death, "the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it".

That will happen to you. It will happen to me.

That isn't what happened to Jesus Christ. He didn't see corruption.

Do you really believe Jesus's body returned to the ground from where it came from?

 

[Jim]

You said you would trade your flesh. That is disdain for the flesh. YOU WANT to give it away.

Only in giving it up while receiving eternal life. Trading a valued thing for a much more valued thing.

 

[Jim]

That will happen to you. It will happen to me.

That isn't what happened to Jesus Christ. He didn't see corruption.

His body of flesh didn't see corruption; it merely ceased to exist.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Only in giving it up while receiving eternal life. Trading a valued thing for a much more valued thing.

You don't have to give it up. Why not both? If you're born from above. You already have Eternal Life.

 

[praise_yeshua]

His body of flesh didn't see corruption; it merely ceased to exist.

That is corruption.... in so many ways.

1. It is what you expect your own corruption to be. Yet, deny it to same experience of Jesus Christ.

2. It is the abandonment of Mary's son. You have an odd understanding of the obligation of love toward others you claim to care about.

 

[Jim]

That is corruption.... in so many ways.

1. It is what you expect your own corruption to be. Yet, deny it to same experience of Jesus Christ.

2. It is the abandonment of Mary's son. You have an odd understanding of the obligation of love toward others you claim to care about.

And you have an odd understanding of all things heavenly. They all seem to be grudgingly held onto as earthly.

I'll bet you even expect to see your dog in heaven.

 

[Jim]

You don't have to give it up. Why not both? If you're born from above. You already have Eternal Life.

And that life is spiritual not physical.

 

[praise_yeshua]

And you have an odd understanding of all things heavenly. They all seem to be grudgingly held onto as earthly.

I expect earthly things to transition to heavenly things. I don't believe in abandonment for/of the faithful.

 

[praise_yeshua]

And that life is spiritual not physical.

It is both. Just like Christ. You can't deny that now. You have it now... right?

 

[civic]

It is both. Just like Christ. You can't deny that now. You have it now... right?

It’s first century Gnosticism

 

[Wick Stick]

What changed. He had no need of change.

Remember, He is God Incarnate. We are not. We shall be changed.

I don't see any evidence that He changed in bodily form. He didn't see corruption. None of his bones were broken.

What needed to change? I'll listen.

I don't have all the answers to those questions. I suspect they aren't answerable.

I simply note that the Bible puts a difference between Jesus' form before and after His ascension:

1John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as he is.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I don't have all the answers to those questions. I suspect they aren't answerable.

I simply note that the Bible puts a difference between Jesus' form before and after His ascension:

1John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as he is.

That speaks of how we will change. Not how Christ supposedly "changed".

I don't have all the answers either but I am willing to recognize facts that are uncomfortable to recognize. Facts that are essential to our understanding.

In the Incarnation, He was like us but we were not exactly like Him. This is the basic misunderstanding that Unitarians use to deny the Divinity of Christ. 'Like" never means "IDENTICAL". It just means "similar". Just like synonyms are similar but very seldom identical in meaning. Which is part of the reason why other words exist at all.

Unitarians insist that Christ must be exactly like us. He was never exactly like us. He was similar. Never exactly like us. There are many reason why I say this and make distinctions that must be recognized. Examples

1. Christ did not know what it was to sin personally. I know what it is to sin personally and to be personally responsible for my sin. Christ experiencing the results of my sin is enough. He didn't have to personally sin to experience my own guilt.
2. Christ did not see corruption when He died like I will see corruption when I die. The change you reference in 1 John 3:2 is a reference to how I need to change. Not how Christ needed to change.

As much as Unitarians want Christ to be just like them, He wasn't. I refuse to bring Christ fully down to my rank/level when He was so much better than I am. God Incarnate is such a meaningful aspect of my theology.

I believe I have a mature understanding of these topics. I'm not a novice or unlearned in this.

There is no context wherein the Person of Jesus Christ isn't superior to us in all ways. Even in the Incarnation.

Mat 23:10 Neither be you called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.

There is no lack of a context of merit when it comes to the work of Jesus Christ. He in all ways merited His position. Such requires Divinity in all things.