"resurrection"

[Parson]

Hi Bro Blume

It looks like the AFP brethren are not anxious to clear up the following problem.

So it would be interesting for them to tell us whether or not Jesus got His own invisible, Spiritual body after He ascended -- like we are supposed to get when we die -- or has no personal body at all now.

One can ONLY assume that the AFP feels that Christ HAS NO PERSONAL BODY based on TK Burk's point regarding the apostle Paul seeing ONLY A LIGHT and not a physical body. (Perhaps I misunderstood his point--but that is what it sounded like to me.)

If then it is true that Christ has NO physical body, I am most curious as to what John saw in Revelation.

Rev 1:12 When I turned to see who was speaking to me, I saw seven gold lampstands.
Rev 1:13 There with the lampstands was someone who seemed to be the Son of Man. He was wearing a robe that reached down to his feet, and a gold cloth was wrapped around his chest.
Rev 1:14 His head and his hair were white as wool or snow, and his eyes looked like flames of fire.
Rev 1:15 His feet were glowing like bronze being heated in a furnace, and his voice sounded like the roar of a waterfall.
Rev 1:16 He held seven stars in his right hand, and a sharp double-edged sword was coming from his mouth. His face was shining as bright as the sun at noon.
Rev 1:17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet like a dead person. But he put his right hand on me and said: Don't be afraid! I am the first, the last,
Rev 1:18 and the living one. I died, but now I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys to death and the world of the dead.
Rev 1:19 Write what you have seen and what is and what will happen after these things.
Rev 1:20 I will explain the mystery of the seven stars that you saw at my right side and the seven gold lampstands. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the lampstands are the seven churches.

Despite the misclaims of others, futurists do not employ WOODEN LITERALISM into every passage of scripture.


This of course was a vision that John saw.

But I do find it interesting that that within this vision, John saw PHYSICAL FEATURES. John described most every physical feature from the hair on the head to the feet.

And this creature that John saw wore clothes. I would not think that LIGHT as Bro Burk described Jesus would have need of clothes.

The body does more than just hold our bag of bones together...it gives us identity....and the ability to interact and to communicate with the environment around us.

Throughout the Revelation, you find within heaven's realm--a throne.

If all we have in heaven is an ethereal body--: lacking material substance--then what purpose is the throne? How does one interact if he lacks material substance that gives him form or shape

Furthermore, Christ stated in Revelation 1, that He was dead--nekros--(actually the phrase is kai egenomēn nekros). one that has breathed his last, lifeless--but now is alive--zaō--(zōn eimi)to live, breathe, be among the living (not lifeless, not dead).

There is nothing in this claim of Christ that suggests an ABANDONMENT of the Physical Mortal Body that He possessed before and after the resurrection.

Then Christ adds the word FOREVERMORE-- (eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn).

Again, there is NOTHING in this to suggest that Christ was forced to DIE the second time to shed His Physical Mortal Body in order to assume an ethereal existence...one without form or substance.


It would go A LONG WAY to prove that what AFPs claim if they could provide a scripture that states that Christ died the second time to shed His Physical Mortal Body.

Perhaps they will oblige us.


Parson

[shawndell]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

Here is something to consider and perhaps someone has the answer if a resurrected body is a invisible ethreal body then what is heaven just a invisble place in the atmosphere ?

Brother Scott heres what I think;We cant see anything spirit with flesh for eyes because our eyes of flesh were made only for this state of being unless God opens them for us to see like he did John and Paul in the bible.Now when we step out of this tent we call a body we will see with the eyes God created us to have that are blind inside this flesh because we dont need them because we walk and live in this realm we call earth.Thats why John did not know if he was in or out of his flesh or tent if you will.When I died for that short period of time from carbon monoxide and sepperated from my tent,I looked down at myself and saw that I still had hands and feet,everything that I had in that body that I hadand it was solid to me,but I dont know that it was glorified.Idont think it was.Sorry for sounding like im crazy,but that thing did happen and thats why I think this plus what the scripture says about some of this.

[Parson]

Posted By TK Burk--JPF Bro. Wiltcher (Parson) followed us to AFF to also show where AFP is in error. He did not last long (6-4-08 to 7-24-08). Once he ran out of answers, and could not substanciate his claims, he disappeared.

Notice, Shag, Bro Burk already said he felt Jesus had a mortal body before and after the resurrection UNTIL THE FINAL ASCENSION.

Has anyone seen Bro Burk's explanation as to whether Jesus' MORTAL PHYSICAL BODY had to die a second time????













just wondering





Parson


Mike Wiltcher

[Parson]

Posted By TK Burk--JPF[saved without understanding] Bro. Wiltcher (Parson) followed us to AFF to also show where AFP is in error. He did not last long (6-4-08 to 7-24-08). Once he ran out of answers, and could not substanciate his claims, he disappeared.

Notice, Shag, Bro Burk already said he felt Jesus had a mortal body before and after the resurrection UNTIL THE FINAL ASCENSION.

Has anyone seen Bro Burk's explanation as to whether Jesus' MORTAL PHYSICAL BODY had to die a second time????













just wondering





Parson


Mike Wiltcher

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Parson

Hi Bro Blume

It looks like the AFP brethren are not anxious to clear up the following problem.

One can ONLY assume that the AFP feels that Christ HAS NO PERSONAL BODY based on TK Burk's point regarding the apostle Paul seeing ONLY A LIGHT and not a physical body. (Perhaps I misunderstood his point--but that is what it sounded like to me.)

They said He has no PHYSICAL body. But I recall them contrasting the NATURAL body from the SPIRITUAL one by claiming NATURAL means physical and SPIRITUAL means non-physical, which is incorrect. Anyway, just because He has no PHYSICAL body does not mean He does not have a SPIRITUAL body, using their definitions. So, I am wondering if they believe He has a SPIRITUAL BODY like we shall get when we die.

I would assume they do not think so, because a spiritual body, even in their definition, is a body (although technically a body is not a body unless it is physical - a body HOUSES something. And if the soul and spirit are presently housed in a BODY, how is it that spirit can house spirit? - our spirits and souls are NAKED without a HOUSE - 2 Cor 5. And Paul noted this nakedness is not permanent, since we shall receive a HOUSE from heaven).

Bro Benincasa said something about a spiritual body implies a SPIRIT BEING, as though Jesus was contrasting His resurrected flesh and bone with a spiritual body. That is not true. Jesus' resurrected body was a spiritual body. Spiritual bodies are not spirit beings, like spirits and ghosts. Spirits are disembodied. You cannot call a spiritual body something that is disembodied, as fp is trying to do as in the case of Benincasa's contrast of Jesus' flesh and bones.

Jesus' flesh and bones was a CHANGED BODY that was formerly mortal and rendered immortal. It could not resurrect if it was still mortal, unless the wounds were healed, as in the cases of whatever killed Lazarus and the widow woman's son who were raised to mortality only to die again. But since the body of Jesus retained the SAME WOUNDS THAT KILLED IT, He was immortal in body. He experienced the SAME CHANGE IN BODY that allows our flesh and blood to ALTER and become immortal so as to be able to inherit the Kingdom. The all-important note of the reason Paul said flesh and blood cannot inherit in the kingdom was to introduce the subject of how our mortal bodies SHALL CHANGE or ALTER. THE BODY ALONE CHANGES to rectify this inheritance issue.

Here is your strongest point.

Furthermore, Christ stated in Revelation 1, that He was dead--nekros--(actually the phrase is kai egenomēn nekros). one that has breathed his last, lifeless--but now is alive--zaō--(zōn eimi)to live, breathe, be among the living (not lifeless, not dead).

There is nothing in this claim of Christ that suggests an ABANDONMENT of the Physical Mortal Body that He possessed before and after the resurrection.

Amen. What died with Jesus is still alive. Did His soul die? Did His eternal Spirit die? No. Only His body died. And when He said he died and is still alive, His body was the subject that was in view.

That is the same argument I used in asking FP's how Jesus could have died to sin and now be alive unto God forevermore:

Romans 6:9-10 KJV Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. (10) For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.

Got no reply.

Some say DEATH means separation from the body. Well, if death is separation from the body, then resurrection is reunion to the body and seeing that body live again in the process.

God bless.

[Michael The Disciple]

Mblume

Spiritual bodies are not spirit beings, like spirits and ghosts. Spirits are disembodied. You cannot call a spiritual body something that is disembodied, as fp is trying to do as in the case of Benincasa's contrast of Jesus' flesh and bones.

Wrong Mike. Angels have heavenly bodies. They themselves are spirits. Of course some Apostolics apparently believe angels have no body.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Wrong Mike. Angels have heavenly bodies. They themselves are spirits. Of course some Apostolics apparently believe angels have no body.

I was not clear. Amen, bro. I agree. But when I said spirits are disembodied, I was speaking about what people think are ghosts. I believe angels have SPIRITUAL BODIES. They can be seen and touched. And they are the kind of bodies we shall have.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Parson

Has anyone seen Bro Burk's explanation as to whether Jesus' MORTAL PHYSICAL BODY had to die a second time????

Maybe FP thinks Christ's body was in the situation where it was as with the sons of the prophets who told Elisha they were going to look for Elijah's body. They thought it was discarded upon some mountain, or something.

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I asked this in the fellowship section where everything under the sun is discussed, and felt to move it here so we can dig deeper into the issue from the folks who usually post here who enjoy going deeper with an issue.

When it comes to RESURRECTION, if something did not have to live at one time, and then die to exist without life, and then live a second time in order to be "resurrected", then the doctrine of full preterism (fp) teaching is not against a resurrection of the church.

My hesitance with FP "resurrection" is as follows. "Resurrection" means to come to life again. It teaches that there is a "resurrection" when a saint dies since the date of AD70. If I died today and was saved, it teaches my spirit and soul leave the physical body. It teaches my physical body will never live again, but turn to dust and be gone forever. In fact, it is claimed I will never again have a physical body ever.

Not only that, but Fp teaches that an invisible and non-physical body is obtained at the moment of our deaths. It did not live before and died, only to come to life again. So it did not "resurrect". Some claim it came out of the physical body like a plant comes out of a seed shell when the seed is germinated.

Now, if I died today, my physical body is the only thing that dies between the time of natural life and after-life (for lack of a better term). The soul and spirit continues to live whether the body dies or not. Neither of the soul and spirit die, necessitating them to be resurged with life again.

So, if the soul and spirit continue living when the body dies, what comes back to life? What resurrects?

The person? The person's body died, but the physical body is not said to ever be an issue again in FP.

So, why is the word, resurrection, defined as "to COME BACK TO LIFE AGAIN" used according to full preterism? The soul and spirit did not die when the physical body died, necessitating them to come to life again. Only the physical brain died.

The moment when the FP "resurrection" occurs, they claim, is when we physically die and leave our physical bodies. The soul and spirit do not stop living but pass through this experience without having to come to life again. They never stopped living. So how is there a resurrection when the body dies to never again be given life, and the soul and spirit do not die anyway, but continue to go on and be with the Lord? If the body were to be revived, then i can see resurrection. Something has come to life again. But since the soul and spirit do not come to life again, because they continued on through death in a very living state all the while, what is it that is "back from the dead"? What is it that "comes to life again"? Does the Greek term used for resurrection NOT MEAN back to life again? It would have to not mean that in order for fp's to claim there is a "resurrection" in view when we die and experience what they claim we experience.

The soul and spirit leaves a body as soon as it physically dies. They are not carried into the grave when the body is dead, three days after death, and then leave the body. They go straight to glory as soon as the body dies. "How is that a resurrection?"

Jesus Christ's body died and stayed dead for three days. Did His human soul and His Spirit die and stay in the grave for three days? Where was His SON OF GOD consciousness? Sleeping? We know the BODY alone died. And Jesus resurrected when that body came to life again. His human soul and His Spirit did not die to be made alive again when the third day arrived. So, we see a resurrection in Jesus.

And if there is no SOUL SLEEP NOW, whereas there allegedly was before AD70 in FP teaching, our souls and spirits leave the body when it dies, and do not pause in any manner to sleep or die in any form. They carry on. The old chorus goes, "We do not die, we just move on high, to live with Christ the king." We leave our mortal bodies, when they die, and carry on very much alive in spirit and soul. SO how does "come back to life", the definition of "resurrection", fit according to fp?

Well Blumes at it again.

He quoted:

Originally Posted by STRONG'S LEXICON
RESURRECTION G386
ἀνάστασις -anastasis - an-as'-tas-is
From G450; a standing up again, that is, (literally) a resurrection from death (individual, general or by implication (its author)), or (figuratively) a (moral) recovery (of spiritual truth): -translated in the KJV as raised to life again, resurrection, rise from the dead, that should rise, rising again.

Bro Blume.

What about this do you disagree with?

or (figuratively) a (moral) recovery (of spiritual truth):

Strongs backs up the FP mindset also.

That is not dealing with physical death but obviously a moral, thus a spiritual death.

What is to disagree here!

Somehow you are stuck, like the heretical dispensationalists, that everything is physical! Obviously the firstfruits of the resurrection have to be the new birth. Do you disagree?

[Parson]

What about this do you disagree with?

or (figuratively) a (moral) recovery (of spiritual truth):

Strongs backs up the FP mindset also.

That is not dealing with physical death but obviously a moral, thus a spiritual death.

How in the world can you equate A MORAL with PHYSICAL DEATH?????????????????

MOR'AL, a. [L. moralis, from mos, moris, manner.]

1. Relating to the practice, manners or conduct of men as social beings in relation to each other, and with reference to right and wrong. The word moral is applicable to actions that are good or evil, virtuous or vicious, and has reference to the law of God as the standard by which their character is to be determined. The word however may be applied to actions which affect only, or primarily and principally, a person's own happiness.

I have seen some that stretch the meaning of a word before.........but mercy me!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A moral and physical/spiritual death have no relationship with each other in definitions....other than when a TRUTH--A VALID PRINCIPLE--(NOT A PERSON OR BODY) is abandoned and REVIVED AT SOME FUTURE POINT....such as Jesus Name Baptism.


Most English words have a PRIMARY definition and SECONDARY definitions.

It is important that the reader determine which of the meanings was the author's intent as he wrote the passage.


Let's see YOUR definition of MORAL RECOVERY applied in meaning to the passages of the Bible.


When the Sadducees came to Christ regarding the resurrection, they asked regarding 7 brothers who each had married the same woman.

Mat 22:23 The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no moral recovery of truth, and asked him,
Mat 22:28 Therefore in the moral recovery of truth whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.


I am sure (ahem) that this is EXACTLY what John had in mind.


What about Christ????

He replied:

Mat 22:30 For in the moral recovery of truth they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Does THAT make sense??? The answer is NO.

One MUST use the HISTORICAL-GRAMMATICAL approach keeping within the CONTEXT of the passage to ensure ERROR-FREE interpretations.

The ONLY way RECOVERY OF TRUTH would be used in RESURRECTION would be the RESURRECTION of a doctrine that had been abandoned...hence RECOVERY OF TRUTH--not the recovery of a BODY.


Here is ANOTHER Greek word found in Matthew

Mat 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

The Greek word here is--egersis

1) a rousing, excitation
2) a rising up
3) resurrection from the dead

Since the passage has to do with COMING OUT OF GRAVES--which of the three definitions do you suppose that Matthew had in mind??????????


Excitation is defined as the act of exciting or putting in motion; the act of rousing or awakening.

Does THAT sound like the abandonment of a body or the act of rousing the body out of deep sleep???????????????

Strong's Concordance defines egersis as a resurgence (from death):

Resurgence is defined as a rising again into life, activity, or prominence <a resurgence of interest

Please realize that resurgence is the rising again into life that which was---
THE SAME BODY--and not another.

Do you not remember that Christ stated this??????????

John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

Fortunately--we are not left to wonder WHAT CHRIST MEANT BY THE WORD TEMPLE.

John 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

So---did what did Christ raise up from the dead....BUT HIS BODY????????

Can you say that Christ was ONLY involved in a MORAL RECOVERY OF TRUTH????



No.


Here is another question.

Why was it important that the body of Christ be raised BEFORE IT SEEN CORRUPTION????

Act 2:27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
Act 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

If Christ was ONLY going to have a SPIRITUAL BODY--one that did not involve His former flesh---WHAT WOULD IT MATTER IF THE PHYSICAL BODY BEGAN TO DECAY??????????????


What was the deal about raising from the dead before corruption set in????



Parson