Whose Son is YHVH, the Christ?

[The Biblicist]

lol...If Jesus has the same body then why does the scriptures say we SHALL see him as he is.

Think a little bit! We shall see him as he is because 99.9% of all Christians have never seen Christ either before or after his resurrection. Second, because that is HOW HE IS -just as he showed himself to the Apostles and over 500 witnesses.

If he has flesh and looks just like us, then why does the scriptures say what we will be like is not yet known?

Because WE ARE STILL UNGLORIFIED and SIN STILL DOMINATES US and our resurrection body all that will be changed and WE HAVE NOT YET SEEN THAT CHANGE.

 

[The Biblicist]

1 John 3:2 Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.

If we will still have flesh, then we DO know what we will be, but John say what we will be has not yet been made know, and that we shall be like Jesus. That means we do not even know what Jesus looks like.

John is writing to those who have NEVER SEEN CHRIST in the flesh as he had (1 Jn. 1:1-3). Second, "what we will be" has not yet occurred or he would not say "will be." Third, But John had seen the resurrected Christ and knew he would be "LIKE HIM" and that will be proven when "we shall see him."

No amount of scripture, no amount of logic will change your possessed unregenerated mind. You need to be born again.

 

[DHK]

You are like the dangerous men that had Paul and the other apostles killed.

I am not the one denying the resurrection.
You first asked me quite some time ago, to give you Scripture showing you that Christ was in the flesh.
I then proceeded to give you plenty of verses that demonstrate that.
The only verse you have provided is that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God," a verse you don't understand, and are obviously taking out of its context.

Look, you are not very meek (I can tell), thus you will not inherit the earth, where the kingdom will be. The meek will inherit the earth. (The humble)
It is not just "flesh and blood," it is also all those who are not meek who will not "inherit the earth" (kingdom of God). You are on the losing side.

Since then both Biblicist and I have given you plenty more Scripture how Jesus is in the flesh right now. He has a resurrected body. He ate fish with it. He appeared before locked doors to his disciples and showed his wounds to Thomas. He sits on the right hand of throne of God. A spirit does not sit.
He ascended in his body and shall so come again in his body.

Yet you denied a physical resurrection for you denied that he is in his flesh in heaven. That is a denial of the resurrection of Christ.

 

[Moriah]

Think a little bit! We shall see him as he is because 99.9% of all Christians have never seen Christ either before or after his resurrection. Second, because that is HOW HE IS -just as he showed himself to the Apostles and over 500 witnesses.



Because WE ARE STILL UNGLORIFIED and SIN STILL DOMINATES US and our resurrection body all that will be changed and WE HAVE NOT YET SEEN THAT CHANGE.

You just deny the Truth.

Try again with your answer.

If Jesus is still flesh and looks exactly as himself when he was on earth, then why does John say what we will be has not yet been made known? Why doesn’t John say we will look as we do now with flesh, except our flesh will not get old or sick? Answer it Biblicist.
If Jesus is flesh and looks the same as when he was on earth, why does Paul say we shall see him as he is? What is so mysterious about how a man in the flesh looks?

 

[The Biblicist]

If Jesus is still flesh and looks exactly as himself when he was on earth, then why does John say what we will be has not yet been made known?

The same reason that John had to tell his readers that he saw and handled Christ on earth BECAUSE THEY DID NOT! He could tell them that we shall be like him BECAUSE HE SAW HIM at his ascension into heaven and HIS READERS DID NOT!

You have admitted that the Jesus they saw after the resurrection was the same body that went into the grave because he said to them touch, handle, poke your fingers into the wounds of his "FLESH." That is the body they saw ascend into heaven and the angels told them just as they seen him go away so he would in like manner return and what they saw was the same body of "flesh and bone."

Why doesn’t John say we will look as we do now with flesh, except our flesh will not get old or sick? Answer it Biblicist

That is precisely what Paul does say in 1 Cor. 15:42-44.

Old people will not be old and decrepid and crippled but they will have a body like Christs free from sin, free from corruption, free from weakness, free from dishonor.

Christ said "THIS temple" he would raise from the dead but you call him a liar! Jesus said his resurrection body was "FLESH and BONE" but you call him a liar.

 

[Moriah]

The same reason that John had to tell his readers that he saw and handled Christ on earth BECAUSE THEY DID NOT!

That makes no sense whatsoever. lol

He could tell them that we shall be like him BECAUSE HE SAW HIM at his ascension into heaven and HIS READERS DID NOT!

What we will be is not known but we shall be like him. If what we will be is not known, then how can we have flesh and look the same like Jesus? lol

You have admitted that the Jesus they saw after the resurrection was the same body that went into the grave because he said to them touch, handle, poke your fingers into the wounds of his "FLESH."

What is the matter, did you forget you lied and said I said there was no resurrection?

That is precisely what Paul does say in 1 Cor. 15:42-44.

Old people will not be old and decrepid and crippled but they will have a body like Christs free from sin, free from corruption, free from weakness, free from dishonor.

Ha ha ha John says we do not know what we will be, BUT YOU HAVE A DESCRIPTION. Lol Biblicists knows what we will be but the Apostle John does not know.

This is you…

However, you are a spiritually blinded person who needs to be born again and until you are you wouldn't even believe Jesus if he stood and front of you and told you are wrong and you are wrong!

You described yourself exactly.

 

[Moriah]

The same reason that John had to tell his readers that he saw and handled Christ on earth BECAUSE THEY DID NOT! He could tell them that we shall be like him BECAUSE HE SAW HIM at his ascension into heaven and HIS READERS DID NOT!

John saw him and KNOWS, so that is why he is telling them that? Ha ha ha ha

John says what "we" will be has NOT YET BEEN MADE KNOWN. HOWEVER, YOU say John saw him and knows! You are caught in your craftiness.



1 John 3:2 Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.

 

[The Biblicist]

That makes no sense whatsoever. lol

You mean to you! I don't think anyone else on the forum would have any problems with understanding it.

What we will be is not known but we shall be like him. If what we will be is not known, then how can we have flesh and look the same like Jesus? lol

Have you ever gone to heaven? Have you ever died and rose again? You don't know experientially how it will be do you? John saw Christ but his readers did not. Neither John or his readers had died and been raised again. None of them had experienced translation or resurrection.

When the corruption principle is removed, when the dishonor is removed. When the mortal principle is removed. When the weakness is removed from your present body it will be something you have never expereinced.

However, the Bible is not the problem here. The Bible is very clear. The problem is inside you. You are obviously a spiritually blinded person that no amount of Biblical evidence could ever satisfy.

The root of sin is pride and that is your problem. You are blinded to the scriptures by your pride. No amount of discussion, no amount of evidence will convince you of the truth because the truth is not in you - that is your problem and unless God has mercy on you things are going to get much worse for you.

 

[Moriah]

Again, you have described yourself exactly.

However, the Bible is not the problem here. The Bible is very clear. The problem is inside you. You are obviously a spiritually blinded person that no amount of Biblical evidence could ever satisfy.

The root of sin is pride and that is your problem. You are blinded to the scriptures by your pride. No amount of discussion, no amount of evidence will convince you of the truth because the truth is not in you - that is your problem and unless God has mercy on you things are going to get much worse for you.

 

[The Biblicist]

John saw him and KNOWS, so that is why he is telling them that? Ha ha ha ha

That is the only reason he can say "we shall see him as he is" because He has seen him as He is and as he left he will return. His readers never saw him.

J

ohn says what "we" will be has NOT YET BEEN MADE KNOWN. HOWEVER, YOU say John saw him and knows! You are caught in your craftiness.

No, you are caught in your own ignorance. Of course it is not yet made known because they are still yet in their corruption and its consequences and have NEVER KNOWN what it is to be without it - that is yet future.

1 John 3:2 Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.

So you are interpreting this passage to contradict Paul's passage in 1 Cor. 15:42-44 where he tells us what kind of change we can expect.

Paul says the corruption, weakness, dishonor, mortal consequences will be REPLACED by incorruption, power, honor, and immortality. So, they will not know exactly how their resurrection body will look until the resurrection but they do know they will be LIKE HIM - without corruption, without weakness, without dishonor, without mortality - it is just that simple - so simply you must trip over it to miss it!

 

[The Biblicist]

Again, you have described yourself exactly.

You deny the God of the Bible, You teach another Christ, another gospel, deny the resurrection of Jesus Christ, deny....deny...deny. I honestly do not know why they allow you to remain on this forum. You cannot be taught, you are without any ability to be reasonable or rational. Why are you here? Do you really think that the heresies you are embracing and trying to teach will be received by anyone who has 2 ounzes of the Spirit of God indwelling in them???? I think not.

 

[annsni]

Wow. I just read a few posts in the last few pages. To say what has been said here about the resurrection by Moriah is shocking. Biblicist, you have done a great job but he is not listening. I don't know why he insists on this completely anti-Scriptural teaching but we know that he denies the truth. The Spirit will have to teach him.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

You cannot be a Christian and believe that Jesus only spiritualy rose from the dead not physically. Nor can you believe that our resurrections are just spiritual. We all will raise physically from the dead. As the resurrection is a real thing and a very physical thing. That has been the consistent teaching from the begining of Christianity. To believe otherwise is to hold to a gnostic interpretation. If Jesus did not physically raise from the dead what hope then is there for any of us? As Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:12-24

12 Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. 15 We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.

20 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. 24 Then comes the end

 

[Thinkingstuff]

For 2200 years The Church has confessed The Apostle's Creed. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles'_Creed for several English translations.


Text in Latin

Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, Creatorem caeli et terrae,
et in Iesum Christum, Filium Eius unicum, Dominum nostrum,
qui conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria Virgine,
passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus,
descendit ad inferos, tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,
ascendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris omnipotentis,
inde venturus est iudicare vivos et mortuos.
Credo in Spiritum Sanctum,
sanctam Ecclesiam catholicam, sanctorum communionem,
remissionem peccatorum,
carnis resurrectionem,
vitam aeternam.
Amen.[14]

An FYI. we can find traces of the creed going back to 250 AD in Irenaeus works. And we first find the title of Apostles Creed from a council in Milan around 390 AD ie Symbolum Apostolicum. The current form of the Apostles creed dates back to around 710 AD (the shorter form of the creed). The longer Creed has its origin in Nicea in 325 AD but was further adapted in Spain to which the Orthodox have a problem with the Filioque.

 

[Seve]

Dear Independent Readers,

Moriah is correct on the specifics / contentions below.

Christ was NOT in the FLESH after his resurrection but Glorified Body.... the same Glorified body he had when he apppeared in person (physically) unto Abraham, Isaac among many others in the old testament....... in fact, even during the time when he wrestled with Jacob. Rememeber, the Son was the Great I AM of old... the only God physically formed for us to see and witness.

Moriah is also correct to say that NO flesh and blood can "enter" (paraphasing) or "inherit" the kindom of God...

If you didn't inherit the Kingdom of God to begin with.... then you have no right to be there.... you can NOT enter the place since it is strictly the place for those who have uncorruptable or Glorified bodies (Holy) only.

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

Don't be deceived!!! Pray for more wisdom and understanding.

:godisgood:

 

[The Biblicist]

Don't be deceived!!! Pray for more wisdom and understanding.

:godisgood:

The only two people on this thread who are deceived are you and Moriah. Study the phrase "flesh and blood" as used in the scripture and you will see it is merely a summary expression that is synonomous with "the natural state of man." Look at the Biblical context in which this phrase is used.

For example, look at its use in Matthew 16:17; Galatians 1:16 and 1 Corinthians 15:50.

If this phrase is interpreted to mean only LITERAL "flesh" and LITERAL "blood" and nothing more, then how does one conferr, communicate, with merely flesh and blood. A dead body has mere flesh and blood.

When Jesus said that "flesh and blood" had not communicated the truth of whom Christ is unto Peter, he did not mean mere flesh and mere blood had the capactity to communicate anything.

When Paul denied that he conferred with "flesh and blood" he was making a contrast between being taught by Christ versus earthy man or man in his natural state.

However, 1 Corinthians is the most revealing. Paul actually delineates the difference between the body as it was "sown" versus the very same body when it is raised.

1. Corruptible VS incorruption
2. dishonorable VS honorable
3. Weak VS power
4. Mortal VS deathless

This contrasted state is then summaried in two phrases "the natural man" vesus "the spiritual man" OR the "earthly man" versus the "heavenly man."

The primary distinction is CORRUPTIBILITY versus INCORRUPTION. The text in question - 1 Cor. 15:50 - reflects the current state of the human body as CORRUPTIBLE or "flesh and blood".

The resurrection of Jesus was in a body of "FLESH" as he challenges the apostles to touch him and denies that a spirit has "flesh" and bone as he has.

Your position denies the resurrection of Jesus Christ as your interpretation denies the very meaning of the term "raised" and "resurrection" and thus denies that the body placed in the grave which did not see corruption actually was brought back to life.

Of course, this denial is par for the course as you also deny the true God of the Bible.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Dear Independent Readers,

Moriah is correct on the specifics / contentions below.

Christ was NOT in the FLESH after his resurrection but Glorified Body.... the same Glorified body he had when he apppeared in person (physically) unto Abraham, Isaac among many others in the old testament....... in fact, even during the time when he wrestled with Jacob. Rememeber, the Son was the Great I AM of old... the only God physically formed for us to see and witness.

Moriah is also correct to say that NO flesh and blood can "enter" (paraphasing) or "inherit" the kindom of God...

If you didn't inherit the Kingdom of God to begin with.... then you have no right to be there.... you can NOT enter the place since it is strictly the place for those who have uncorruptable or Glorified bodies (Holy) only.

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

Don't be deceived!!! Pray for more wisdom and understanding.

:godisgood:

Moriah and you are incorrect. A Glorified body is a physical body with Glorified attributes. Its not just a spiritual body. We are redeemed. Redeemed implies restoration restoration of what a spiritual body? No because God didn't create us just spiritual beings but the totality of man includes a physical body. If Jesus didn't raise physically from the dead we have no hope and should be pitied just as Paul says.

It is clear that you Seve are a gnostic. You hold gnostic believes such as polytheism that is unified in council Valentius would have been proud. You also hold. You also hold in a soley spiritual resurrection of the body which is also a gnostic point of view. Gnostics generally heald that the Matter of which the universe was made is inherently evil and that only the spirit was good. Therefore Jesus wasn't in actuality a human being but divine and seemed to be human just as he seemed to suffer but not in reality. You say you get this from scripture alone and from that you have lead yourself in error. However, I don't see how you believe Jesus rose only spiritually from the dead from scripture alone as it shows Jesus actually ate food, Thomas actually felt the holes in Jesus hands and side. If you really want to be gnostic there is a group of writings just for you found in Egypt. Why do you even believe that the bible has the correct books in it? Certainly there is no inspired table of Contents and since you don't believe what the current text themselves actually say on the matter but have convinced yourself that there are three gods and Jesus rose spiritually from the dead you might as well seek other authorities other than the canon of scripture. Certainly you can change the canon to meet your own needs.

 

[The Biblicist]

The only two people on this thread who are deceived are you and Moriah. Study the phrase "flesh and blood" as used in the scripture and you will see it is merely a summary expression that is synonomous with "the natural state of man." Look at the Biblical context in which this phrase is used.

For example, look at its use in Matthew 16:17; Galatians 1:16 and 1 Corinthians 15:50.

If this phrase is interpreted to mean only LITERAL "flesh" and LITERAL "blood" and nothing more, then how does one conferr, communicate, with merely flesh and blood. A dead body has mere flesh and blood.

When Jesus said that "flesh and blood" had not communicated the truth of whom Christ is unto Peter, he did not mean mere flesh and mere blood had the capactity to communicate anything.

When Paul denied that he conferred with "flesh and blood" he was making a contrast between being taught by Christ versus earthy man or man in his natural state.

However, 1 Corinthians is the most revealing. Paul actually delineates the difference between the body as it was "sown" versus the very same body when it is raised.

1. Corruptible VS incorruption
2. dishonorable VS honorable
3. Weak VS power
4. Mortal VS deathless

This contrasted state is then summaried in two phrases "the natural man" vesus "the spiritual man" OR the "earthly man" versus the "heavenly man."

The primary distinction is CORRUPTIBILITY versus INCORRUPTION. The text in question - 1 Cor. 15:50 - reflects the current state of the human body as CORRUPTIBLE or "flesh and blood".

The resurrection of Jesus was in a body of "FLESH" as he challenges the apostles to touch him and denies that a spirit has "flesh" and bone as he has.

Your position denies the resurrection of Jesus Christ as your interpretation denies the very meaning of the term "raised" and "resurrection" and thus denies that the body placed in the grave which did not see corruption actually was brought back to life.

Of course, this denial is par for the course as you also deny the true God of the Bible.

Both Seve and Moriah interpret the phrase "flesh and blood" in its most literal sense. They do not interpret it to mean a "human being" but actual literal flesh and blood elements found in the physiological condition of humans.

However, consider how silly THAT INTERPRETATION is when applied to how it is used by those in scripture:

Gal 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

They would have Paul mean by "flesh and blood" that he did not attempt to confer with mere "flesh" and mere "blood" as though mere "flesh" can communicated or mere "blood" can communicate.

A corpse is made of mere flesh and mere blood. But who would attempt to confer with it. A severed limb is "flesh and blood" but who would attempt to confer with it?

Paul is making an obvious contrast between whom He did confer with versus who he did not confer with. He did not confer with anyone in the NATURAL CONDITION OR STATE of existence but with One who is HEAVENLY.


The same is true of its use by Christ in Matthew 16:17;

Mt. 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Who would ever imagine that literal and mere "flesh" or literal and mere "blood" could convey anything? This is a summary expression for man in his NATURAL STATE or CONDITION versus the Father in heaven or a HEAVENLY source of information.

Of course, I realize that my interpretation requires common sense and objectivity and so for either Seve or Moriah to embrace it would be not possible.

 

[The Biblicist]

Both Seve and Moriah interpret the phrase "flesh and blood" in its most literal sense. They do not interpret it to mean a "human being" but actual literal flesh and blood elements found in the physiological condition of humans.

However, consider how silly THAT INTERPRETATION is when applied to how it is used by those in scripture:

Gal 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

They would have Paul mean by "flesh and blood" that he did not attempt to confer with mere "flesh" and mere "blood" as though mere "flesh" can communicated or mere "blood" can communicate.

A corpse is made of mere flesh and mere blood. But who would attempt to confer with it. A severed limb is "flesh and blood" but who would attempt to confer with it?

Paul is making an obvious contrast between whom He did confer with versus who he did not confer with. He did not confer with anyone in the NATURAL CONDITION OR STATE of existence but with One who is HEAVENLY.


The same is true of its use by Christ in Matthew 16:17;

Mt. 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Who would ever imagine that literal and mere "flesh" or literal and mere "blood" could convey anything? This is a summary expression for man in his NATURAL STATE or CONDITION versus the Father in heaven or a HEAVENLY source of information.

Of course, I realize that my interpretation requires common sense and objectivity and so for either Seve or Moriah to embrace it would be not possible.

The "spiritual" or "heavenly" body Paul speaks of in 1 Corinthians 15:42-48 is not a phantom body or a body that is not physical but is composed of spiritual substance as angels.

Paul uses the term "spiritual" in contrast to that which is dominated by sin and is therefore corruptible, mortal, weak, dishonorable and mortal.

Paul uses the term "spiritual" as he does in contrast to walking according to the Spirit versus walking after "the flesh" or the unregenerated state/condition.

The "spiritual" body is the same physical body that was placed in the grave but "IT" is raised up without the element of sin and its consequences. The grammatical proof is that in 1 Corithians 15:42-44 the same pronoun "it" describes the preresurrected and post-resurrected body.

Furthermore, the term "raised" makes no sense unless it has reference to that body placed "down" in the ground. The term resurrection" means to "rise up" and you cannot bring up what never went down.

The view of Seve and Moriah simply deny the resurrection of Jesus Christ and deny our resurrection to come and are called "false witnesses" by Paul:

13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.

 

[The Biblicist]

You say you get this from scripture alone and from that you have lead yourself in error.

None of that nonsense. The doctrine of sola scriptura is not the source of their error. I have demonstrated from the scripture alone that their view is not even taught in scripture.