The Flesh Body is NOT "Glorified."
- Thread starter ScottA
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Behold
Well-Known Member
You need to compare scripture with scripture, Scott.
First, Let me show you 2 verses.
"God is A Spirit"
"No man has SEEN GOD at any TIME"
So, are those verses lying?
Then, if no man has seen God, and God is A Spirit, and not a body.........
See how it can be?
And what you did, is what most people do, who create their own theology and start some cult.
They take ONE VERSE< and run with it.
Listen, God takes many forms..
He is in the "cloud" over Mt Siani, that led the Jews into the 40 yrs of wilderness after they left Egypt.
He is the voice talking to Moses from the Burning Bush.
God is the " small still voice".
God is Christ who is Melchizedek...
God is "A" Spirit, the Holy Spirit.
God is Jesus manifested in the Flesh.
But in Heaven, God, the Father. has no body.
So, this "walking" that God did in the Garden, .... thats a mystery, debated by Scholars, and it will remain a mystery.
Not really, but how would you know? Have you achieved spiritual omniscience? Walked on water yet, Scott?
I have not taken away nor added to what is written, but you have taken away what I have quoted of it. And you underline doing so with the error of cults, you being guilty where I have not errored, but you yourself have by taking away.
As for the many forms and the mystery, I have explained it already--it is no more a mystery, but should be understood that God can and has manifest in many ways at His own will--even in the flesh. As for Heaven being a place where He does not manifest as such--He is God, and nothing should be considered impossible for Him.
NEW ADVENT
Home Encyclopedia Summa Fathers Bible Library
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Home > Fathers of the Church > On the Resurrection of the Flesh (Tertullian)
On the Resurrection of the Flesh
Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99...
The heretics against whom this work is directed, were the same who maintained that the demiurge, or the god who created this world and gave the Mosaic dispensation, was opposed to the supreme God. Hence they attached an idea of inherent corruption and worthlessness to all his works — among the rest, to the flesh or body of man; affirming that it could not rise again, and that the soul alone was capable of inheriting immortality.
Home Encyclopedia Summa Fathers Bible Library
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Home > Fathers of the Church > On the Resurrection of the Flesh (Tertullian)
On the Resurrection of the Flesh
Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99...
The heretics against whom this work is directed, were the same who maintained that the demiurge, or the god who created this world and gave the Mosaic dispensation, was opposed to the supreme God. Hence they attached an idea of inherent corruption and worthlessness to all his works — among the rest, to the flesh or body of man; affirming that it could not rise again, and that the soul alone was capable of inheriting immortality.
Above is the introduction of the article you posted a link to--which begins with an error as a foundation upon which the entire rest of the article is written. Admittedly, for this reason I did not read the rest of the article--nor would I recommend following error into error.
The error in the above introduction is that of not reckoning with the biblical fact that "this world" is not perfect but fallen for the very reason of being "opposed to the supreme God." In fact this world is not even that same place of the original creation at all, but was cast out of that place into this world ("east of Eden").
And it is in this fallen context that the man of flesh seeks his own glory, rather than seeking the glory of God whom is spirit and not flesh and blood. Thus, the resurrection is not a glorification of the flesh, but the resurrection of both good and evil "some to everlasting life, and some to everlasting condemnation." As the scriptures say, the flesh is not glorified but is returned to the dust to be dissolved by fire--that fire of condemnation. This is the truth of what is written.
Which is to say, the above article is not at all the truth according to the scriptures, but false doctrine according to the teachings of men.
Last edited:
The link is to Tertullian’s work titled “On the Resurrection of the Flesh”, not to an article. You rejected his arguments without taking the time to read them.
I agree with much of what he wrote on the subject, but not all of it. I came to that conclusion after reading his arguments, not before or without.
Yes, on purpose.
For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?
Me: Read widely. Read deeply. Read thoughtfully. Read critically.
You: Nah.
I’ve read some of your writings. I wouldn’t have known what you believed and why you believe it if I had taken your approach.
I wouldn’t have known if I agreed with you, and to what extent, or disagreed with you, and to what extent, if I hadn’t taken the time to read and consider your teaching.
You’ve read some of my writings.
You’ve treated Tertullian differently than you’ve treated me.
Similar threads
