He should have said what he meant, then. I took it as a completely toothless threat. Never, ever tell someone on the BB that they "must stand trial." The syntax and semantics of that statement indicated a threat.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Poor proof that Christ has a physical body now
- Thread starter asterisktom
- Start date
- Status
Of course it was about the incarnation. Anything about the humanity of Christ is about His incarnation. That's what the incarnation is all about: Jesus becoming human.
Yes, but prophecy70 has already demonstrated he understands neither syntax nor semantics, so . . .
The OP title refers to "proof that Christ has a physical body." Of course that is about the incarnation. That is what "incarnation" means!. Embodied in flesh. Latin incarnātus, past participle of incarnāre, to make into flesh, equivalent to in- in + carn- flesh. (Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2017.)
Because he hasn't yet categorically rejected the linguistically ridiculous doctrine of preterism, as far as I can tell.Yes, but prophecy70 has already demonstrated he understands neither syntax nor semantics, so . . .
What I wrote was:
You're quick to accuse me of heresy. Now you must stand trial.
Only half that sentence was taken up for comment. This often happens. I've been accused of what I haven't said, because you folk are too quick to condemn me, so you draw unwarranted conclusions & so to refute your own deliberate misunderstandings.
What I meant was that you (John) must answer to my charge of heresy by answer P70's question. "Is Jesus limited" with "Yes."
I referred to the thread title:
So John replies:
As Paul wrote:
You're quick to accuse me of heresy. Now you must stand trial.
Only half that sentence was taken up for comment. This often happens. I've been accused of what I haven't said, because you folk are too quick to condemn me, so you draw unwarranted conclusions & so to refute your own deliberate misunderstandings.
What I meant was that you (John) must answer to my charge of heresy by answer P70's question. "Is Jesus limited" with "Yes."
John said:
I referred to the thread title:
"Poor proof that Christ has a physical body now"
Notice the word "NOW"So John replies:
"Of course it was about the incarnation. Anything about the humanity of Christ is about His incarnation. That's what the incarnation is all about: Jesus becoming human."
"you must stand trial" good grief
As Paul wrote:
1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
It's up to you folk to prove from Scripture that Jesus, in his present glorified humanity, IS limited. NOT during his time of earth in the flesh, when his limitations are recorded.prophecy70
Active Member
Once you or Tcass actually prove this, then ill reject it. So far, nothing that refutes it.
Just a bunch of "this word can mean this here, Why? because you are ignorant of the Greek".
By misquoting the title - Poor proof that Christ has a physical body now." and putting a full stop after body and omitted now you are showing deliberate misquoting.
Your etymology lesson was irrelevant.
prophecy70
Active Member
Even I understood that, and Im not a language expert
I think the more "knowledge" gained, the "plain and simple" becomes harder to spot.
No, I am not. He has a body NOW. That is what the OP is all about.
Do I have to teach you the very basics of English? Have you ever heard of Synecdoche?
Has he a physical human body NOW? Is there a proof text? Or is it inferred from Act 1:11?
And no you don't need to teach me English. Why do you ask? Synecdoche is not in my vocabulary & it certainly isn't basic English:
Late Middle English: via Latin from Greek sunekdokhē
It doesn't mean leaving out a key word when you quote.I agree. I believe the natural body of Jesus that was buried was raised physical yet of spiritual nature rather of being of natural nature.
My understanding being his physical flesh body was no longer living, because of life being in the blood but of life of the Spirit.
I will continue to study.
He has a physical, glorified, human body.
I don't proof text. To do so is folly.
It is implicit in Acts 1:11.
It means the partial is indicative of the whole.
I stand on Scripture, not "the orthodox" position. Most of the 2,000 years was dominated by the RC church & the Orthodox church. And most of it by Christians holding church-state links. Independent baptists have been a persecuted minority since Constantine.
His glorification, after his ascension:
4 I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. 5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
Oh please. I have written this many times. I have been accused so often of denying the bodily resurrection - without which our faith is in vain - that I was tempted to just make what I wrote as a footer on all my posts.
Yes, eesence is not in that passage, but it is implied.
But - never mind - you have a more explicit statement of that in 1 Cor. 15.
(This is from an earlier thread, months ago. But pertinent here)
In 1 Cor. 15:40 we come to a very important, oft-overlooked, detail. Overlooked in application, the origins of these two Adams. (Skipping v. 46 for this post):
"The first man is of the earth (ἐκ γῆς), earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven (ἐξ οὐρανοῦ) ."
This passage is a continuation of verse 40: somata epigeia and somata epourania now become "ek ges" and "ex ouranou". This preposition (ek, ex - the forms only differ because of euphonics) shows origin. Adam came from the earth, from the dust. This brings to mind the very passage from Genesis. The "Second Adam" came from heaven. Note: In both cases, the origins determine the essence of who these two are - and (v. 48) the essence of their "followers".
Verse 49 says that "we shall [or "let us"] bear the image of the heavenly man" (the Second Adam, from heaven).
Now here is the Preterist application:
We shall be like Christ.
And what is Christ like - according to this passage? He is like He was when He came to Earth. He is spiritual.
Was Christ fleshly before he came here to Earth? No. He was pure Spirit.
We - according to this passage - will also be like Him.
Pure spirit.
We cannot have part Adam's essence ("dust") and part Christ's, seeing that we could not then "enter into the Kingdom of God". "Dust" has to do with "flesh and blood", not spirit.
(end of quote)
So, John, how is it an improvement over what Christ was in eternity past to have a physical body now? What a radical change in the Godhead. The timeline of eternity (so to speak) split in half - all the time after the Incarnation Christ having now a physical body.
Last edited:
It is sad, but not surprising, that many Christians value tradition, however long, over the naked testimony of the Word. Tradition may or may not be based on truth. Often it is exactly what Christ warns of, tradition of men that makes the word of God of no effect.
Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 1330 Pacific/1930 GMT.
This thread will be closed sometime after 1330 Pacific/1930 GMT.
I'll ask again. Will we shed our resurrected bodies too?
They would say that no body to shed, as its not a physical but a spiritual resurrection!
- Status