With So Many Denominations...

[amadeus]

Aren't we present with the Lord now? After all, it is written, For He has promised, I will never leave you nor forsake you.

So you suppose there is some way to be absent from the body, and that would then make you present with the Lord in a way we aren't already?

That is... to move from 2nd to 3rd heaven now! Impossible for man alone, but for God?

 

[amadeus]

The other question I have is on this part:

6 Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:

Similar sort of statement, except that he adds "knowing that". Is your thinking the same here? That his intended audience is being confident in something though it's the wrong way of thinking about it?

Much love!

"...at home in the body..."! That is more comfortable in the flesh and the ways of the flesh than in God and the Way of God! We are of necessity then "absent from the Lord". Our foolish choice and are there not many who walk that way... while regularly sitting in pews even?

 

[marks]

"...at home in the body..."! That is more comfortable in the flesh and the ways of the flesh than in God and the Way of God! We are of necessity then "absent from the Lord". Our foolish choice and are there not many who walk that way... while regularly sitting in pews even?

Not to change the subject . . . does this mean that you, as do I, see the "flesh" being "our body of flesh", that is, our physical body?

Much love!

 

[marks]

"...at home in the body..."! That is more comfortable in the flesh and the ways of the flesh than in God and the Way of God! We are of necessity then "absent from the Lord". Our foolish choice and are there not many who walk that way... while regularly sitting in pews even?

And also then, that the later statement,

We are confident, [I say],
and willing rather to be absent
from the body, and to be
present with the Lord.

that this isn't like a sarcastic, "You're so sure that you'd rather be dead and partying with Jesus", as @bbyrd009 was suggesting, but is instead Paul's expression of real desire to be out from under the flesh, and living in the Way of God?

Much love!

 

[bbyrd009]

Interestingly, when I clicked reply, there were a few more lines to the post.

ya, i tend to kind of "build" posts piece by piece lol

But on this one . . . Yes, it's all about whether we are accepted by our Lord, because we will all stand before Him.

hmm, well, who told you that you were naked? and
all sins are forgiven kinda suggest other things to me than that...

An inclusive "we" not meaning to include himself, rather, then to show the error of thinking that way? Do I understand you correctly?

well, rather than an accusative "you, you all," yeh; plus, it's a great way to hide wisdom too i guess

 

[marks]

well, rather than an accusative "you, you all," yeh; plus, it's a great way to hide wisdom too i guess

It's worth considering, imo. I think the same thing is used in other places too.

 

[marks]

hmm, well, who told you that you were naked? and
all sins are forgiven kinda suggest other things to me than that...

But are you still naked? Now that you know?

All sins will be forgiven men, but still God urges, be reconciled to Him.

Much love!

 

[BarneyFife]

Ephesians 2
4But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus

 

[bbyrd009]

bingo

What is your idea on this part:

21 For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.
22 But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not.
23 For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better:
24 Nevertheless to abide in the flesh is more needful for you.

well first id wanna translate it into english, but my guess is that Paul would have rather been doing anything else other than his mission, at least quite often, bc he was called to be an apostle/leader wherein it is hard/impossible to "die" to self, to yield iow, to surrender; he had to run the show, straighten ppl out, etc--"yet what i shall choose i wot not," which is made more clear maybe by the "but if i shall live in the flesh"

so iow he is likely not using "live" and "die" in the literal sense

 

[amadeus]

Not to change the subject . . . does this mean that you, as do I, see the "flesh" being "our body of flesh", that is, our physical body?

Much love!

This is where I am at the moment on this.

Is not the physical body a temporary vessel holding us that is dying whether we are serving God or not? It seems you are asking if the physical body is equal to the "old man" Paul mentions? I believe that there is a "me" that chooses to go the way of the "new man" or the way of the "old man". The "me" is perhaps the inner man mentioned here:

"That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man;" Eph 3:16

I guess I had an inkling of what was the truth of the matter before, but @Episkopos some time ago in one of his OPs clarified what it was I thought I was seeing/understanding the difference between the new man and the inner man. I cannot recall now which thread it was.

Before meeting the Master, our direction usually and generally follows [consider those in the OT such as Moses and David for apparent exceptions?] the ways of the old man. Upon meeting the Master we have another real option, the Way of the new man. The one that does the choosing is "the inner man". The inner man effectively chooses Life or death.

Our physical body is involved because that is the source of our physical perceptions via vision, smell, taste, hearing and touch plus the conclusions made by the carnal mind. Those senses as we know can be and at times most certainly are deceptive. The old man, [really separate from the body of flesh] uses these natural perceptions in the process of making decisions. Before the "new man" is born, the inner man has little choice but to follow the lead of the old man. Until born again or from above, each person is dead anyway...

When there is no new man [as in unbelievers] an "old man" will certainly make some serious mistakes even though trying his best to do 'good'. He needed the law of God and some man of God or priest according the OT... but let's not get into that here.

The "new man" is the one that can and should make the difference for us. Some people believe that with the advent of the new man in us, salvation is a done thing. I disagree with that.

We are to work on killing our "old man" something only made possible because of the existence of the "new man" in us. Killing the old man is not killing the physical body as in a physical suicide. It is winning the final battle within ourselves. The battles are between the "old man" and the "new man". The "new man" will always win every battle, unless we, that "me" [the inner man] choose to quench the Holy Spirit in us [the power of God in us]. Paul warns us against doing that.

Jesus had all of these battles in himself for he had all of the same temptations that we do. He never lost any battles and won the final battle, I believe, in the Garden of Gethsemene [Matt 26:39]. Then he had overcome the world of his own temptations [John 16:33]. Then he was no longer in the world of his temptations [John 17:11] even though he still had the cross before him. He had to suffer and die, but he was no longer tempted to find a way out for the sake of his flesh. His 'old man' was already dead, killed once and for all in Gethsemene... but his physical body was still alive. On the cross that died!

 

[bbyrd009]

But are you still naked? Now that you know?

now that i know what?

but for whatever reason my ego has always been tenuous anyway, or ill say that at least a reasoned appeal has usually been able to sway me to the other pov; i dont mind losing iow

 

[bbyrd009]

Similar sort of statement, except that he adds "knowing that". Is your thinking the same here? That his intended audience is being confident in something though it's the wrong way of thinking about it?

almost for sure, and i recall doing this here a year or so ago...
ya, cant find it now, but i wonder if he is playing with the def of "body" or what, or just setting up for the repeat two vv later, dunno

 

[amadeus]

And also then, that the later statement,

We are confident, [I say],
and willing rather to be absent
from the body, and to be
present with the Lord.

that this isn't like a sarcastic, "You're so sure that you'd rather be dead and partying with Jesus", as @bbyrd009 was suggesting, but is instead Paul's expression of real desire to be out from under the flesh, and living in the Way of God?

Much love!

Perhaps @bbyrd009 was being sarcastic, but he was also expressing what many people act out in effect by the way they "serve" God and the reason they "serve" God. They, like the Pharisee of old, serve God for some reward or glory rather than because they love God. One of those rewards is unending life. Another is a heavenly place with streets of gold, etc. "Let me die God, so I can have these blessings".

What the scripture as I read it shows, is that 'Today is the day for rejoicing rather than some remote future time after the dirt is thrown over the faces of our bodies of flesh.

 

[marks]

It seems you are asking if the physical body is equal to the "old man" Paul mentions?

Not so much "equal to the old man", more like, the mind that is produced by the body having a brain is the "mind of the flesh".

I'll need some time reread and assimilate your post, please bear with me.

Much love!

 

[marks]

almost for sure, and i recall doing this here a year or so ago...brb

You can recall a year ago?

 

[marks]

Perhaps @bbyrd009 was being sarcastic,

I had meant the verse being sarcastic, maybe not the best word, I'm hoping you know what I mean.

 

[bbyrd009]

You can recall a year ago?

lol

I had meant the verse being sarcastic, maybe not the best word, I'm hoping you know what I mean.

it was the "i say" part that originally got me thinking diff about that v several years ago

 

[marks]

Perhaps @bbyrd009 was being sarcastic, but he was also expressing what many people act out in effect by the way they "serve" God and the reason they "serve" God. They, like the Pharisee of old, serve God for some reward or glory rather than because they love God. One of those rewards is unending life. Another is a heavenly place with streets of gold, etc. "Let me die God, so I can have these blessings".

What the scripture as I read it shows, is that 'Today is the day for rejoicing rather than some remote future time after the dirt is thrown over the faces of our bodies of flesh.

I believe we enter into eternal life in the present time, and we should be living accordingly.

Now, to be sure, I think there are glories and pleasures that we will know that will be much greater than anything we will know in this life, just the same, no, we mustn't short-change ourselves here!

Much love!

 

[marks]

now that i know what?

but for whatever reason my ego has always been tenuous anyway, or ill say that at least a reasoned appeal has usually been able to sway me to the other pov; i dont mind losing iow

Adam was naked, right?

 

[bbyrd009]

All sins will be forgiven men, but still God urges, be reconciled to Him.

well imo that will show when someone has been given of the hidden manna i guess; we speak in facts and say we are laying down "truth," right, rather than what is it?