Is Jesus Sitting on a Throne in His Flesh?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by mental

I think you are reading too much into ikos vs inos.

I am just going by what the Greek scholars said on the issue. And anyone can also see that the same terms used in 1 Cor 2 and 1 Cor 10 do not mean the term PNEUMATIKOS cannot refer to something physical.

It is true that suffixes are different depending on what the adjective means/denotes/expresses. However, the suffix has to be ikos since that is the suffix for these adjectives. There are no adjectives psuchinos or pneumatinos to contrast and compare to. What is your source for this reading of 1 Cor 15 based on the suffixes ikos and inos? I would be interested to read this if it is from a legitimate source.

I already noted that Albert Barnes related this information concerning 1 Cor 2:14:

Now the “natural man” is there opposed to the spiritual man, the ψυχικὸς psuchikos to the πνευματικὸς pneumatikos, and if the latter be explained of “him who is enlightened by the Holy Spirit” - who is regenerate - the former must be explained of him who is not enlightened by that Spirit, who is still in a state of nature; and will thus embrace a class far more numerous than the merely sensual part of mankind.

Archibald Thomas Robertson wrote this in Robertson's Word Pictures:

1Co 2:14
Now the natural man (psuchikos de anthrōpos). Note absence of article here, “A natural man” (an unregenerate man). Paul does not employ modern psychological terms and he exercises variety in his use of all the terms here present as pneuma and pneumatikos, psuchē and psuchikos, sarx and sarkinos and sarkikos. A helpful discussion of the various uses of these words in the New Testament is given by Burton in his New Testament Word Studies, pp. 62-68, and in his Spirit, Soul, and Flesh. The papyri furnish so many examples of sarx, pneuma, and psuchē that Moulton and Milligan make no attempt at an exhaustive treatment, but give a few miscellaneous examples to illustrate the varied uses that parallel the New Testament. Psuchikos is a qualitative adjective from psuchē (breath of life like anima, life, soul). Here the Vulgate renders it by animalis and the German by sinnlich, the original sense of animal life as in Jud_1:19; Jam_3:15. In 1Co_15:44, 1Co_15:46 there is the same contrast between psuchikos and pneumatikos as here. The psuchikos man is the unregenerate man while the pneumatikos man is the renewed man, born again of the Spirit of God.

Receiveth not (ou dechetai). Does not accept, rejects, refuses to accept. In Rom_8:7 Paul definitely states the inability (oude gar dunatai) of the mind of the flesh to receive the things of the Spirit untouched by the Holy Spirit. Certainly the initiative comes from God whose Holy Spirit makes it possible for us to accept the things of the Spirit of God. They are no longer “foolishness” (mōria) to us as was once the case (1Co_1:23). Today one notes certain of the intelligentsia who sneer at Christ and Christianity in their own blinded ignorance.

He cannot know them (ou dunatai gnōnai). He is not able to get a knowledge (ingressive second aorist active infinitive of ginōskō). His helpless condition calls for pity in place of impatience on our part, though such an one usually poses as a paragon of wisdom and commiserates the deluded followers of Christ.

They are spiritually judged (pneumatikōs anakrinetai). Paul and Luke are fond of this verb, though nowhere else in the N.T. Paul uses it only in I Corinthians. The word means a sifting process to get at the truth by investigation as of a judge. In Act_17:11 the Beroeans scrutinized the Scriptures. These psuchikoi men are incapable of rendering a decision for they are unable to recognize the facts. They judge by the psuchē (mere animal nature) rather than by the pneuma (the renewed spirit).

In verse 16's word study of pneumatikos we read:

The pneumatikos man is superior to others who attempt even to instruct God himself.

Does that mean the man is not physical, or that he is physically motivated?

1 Cor 3:3:

For ye are yet carnal (eti gar sarkikoi este). Sarkikos, unlike sarkinos, like ikos formations, means adapted to, fitted for the flesh (sarx), one who lives according to the flesh (kata sarka)[/b][/u]. Paul by psuchikos describes the unregenerate man, by pneumatikos the regenerate man. Both classes are sarkinoi made in flesh, and both may be sarkikoi though the pneumatikoi should not be. The pneumatikoi who continue to be sarkinoi are still babes (nēpioi), not adults (teleioi), while those who are still sarkikoi (carnal) have given way to the flesh as if they were still psuchikoi (unregenerate). It is a bold and cutting figure, not without sarcasm, but necessary to reveal the Corinthians to themselves.

In Greek adjectives can act either adjectively or substantively. In 1 Cor. 2 these adjectives are acting adjectively and I think from the context your view of this passage is correct. In 1 Cor.15:46 they are acting substantively since there is no noun and they are preceded by the article.

The noun is BODY.

1Co 15:35 KJV But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?

1Co 15:44 KJV It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

I think the context also shows that Paul is talking about a thing rather than an empowering force.

Not when he uses the term spiritual. the thing is present, though, but it is the body. So the adjective pneumatikos is used in relation to the noun BODY.