The OT is irrelevant to the Incarnation where Jesus became a MAN with a human body of flesh and bones. That is UNIQUE in History as is the Resurrection. You simply deny the truth which I have proven with your " recommended" Strongs Concordance giving you the biblical definitions of body and spiritual which prove the OP is correct and you are wrong.
What you believe is actually the very spirit of antichrist as per the Apostles. Those who deny Jesus has come in the flesh and remains in the flesh is the spirit of antichrist.
If we go back to the beginning of 1 John, we read that which we he beheld, and actually touched concerning the Word of life. That is a term expressing the very deity of Christ. Christ emanates from God as His living Word. He was with the Father in the beginning in 1:2. Jesus was One with the Father sharing the same essence with the Father in heaven with Him before the foundation of the world. John says He was manifested to us. John's language then starts out with the fact that Jesus Christ emanates from God as the very living Word of God. Jesus is the living Word of God,the One John says that was from the beginning that we heard, we saw and we touched. Jesus the Word of life was the eternal One who was with the Father prior to His Incarnation and was then manifested to us in the flesh that we could see and hear and touch according to John. Therefore, we can clearly see Jesus is the very Word of God Incarnate. He is the eternal life who became flesh. The Word who was with God, the Word who was God, was the One who John says was manifested to us. This is how we can tell the spirit of truth from the spirit of antichrist. Can you confess Jesus is God Incarnate?
1 John 4:2
By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God;
2 John 7
For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.
Erchomenon the present participle in 2 John 7
Alford- the present tense is timeless(pg 274 RNTC on 2 John)
Brooke- the Incarnation is not only an event in history, it is an abiding truth(pg 274 RNTC on 2 John)
Stott- the two natures manhood and Godhood were united already at His birth, never to be divided. In 1 John 4:2 and here in 2 John 7 emphasizes this permanent union of the natures in the One Person ( TNTC pages 209-210) He who denies the Incarnation is not just a deceiver and an antichrist but “the deceiver and the antichrist”. There is in this heresy a double affront: it opposes Christ and deceives men.(stott TNCT page 210)
Marshall- the use of the present and perfect tenses becomes significant if the point is that Jesus Christ had come and still existed “in flesh”. For him(John) it was axiomatic that there had been a true Incarnation, that the word became flesh and remained flesh. It is a point that receives much stress in 1 John 2:18-28;4:1-6;5:5-8. (NICNT pages 70-71)
Smalley- the present tense emphasizes the permanent union of the human and Divine natures in Jesus. Gods self disclosure in Jesus took place at a particular moment in history , but it has continuing effects in the present and into the future(Word Biblical Commentary page 317)
Nicoll- the continuous manifestation of the Incarnate Christ(Expositors Greek Testament Volume 5 page 202)
Akin- Much has been made of the fact that John uses the present tense in this Christological confession. Literally the verse reads, “Jesus Christ coming in flesh.” “Coming” is a present active participle. This stands out in remarkable contrast to the affirmation of 1 John 4:2, where the text states that “Jesus Christ has [emphasis mine] come in the flesh.” There the perfect active participle is used. The key, it seems, is to discover what John is affirming. Here in 2 John the emphasis falls on the abiding reality of the incarnation. First John 4:2 teaches that the Christ, the Father’s Son (v. 3), has come in the flesh. Second John affirms that the wedding of deity and humanity has an abiding reality (cf. 1 Tim 2:5). The ontological and essential nature of the incarnation that would receive eloquent expression one thousand years later in the writing of St. Anselm (1033–1109) in his classic Cur Deus Homo is already present in seed form in the tiny and neglected letter of 2 John.
Lenski- In 1 John 4:2 we have ἐν σαρκὶ ἐληλυθότα, the perfect participle, “as having come in flesh” (incarnate, John 1:14); here we have ἐρχόμενον ἐν σαρκί, “as coming in flesh,” although the participle is present in form it is really timeless.of Christ as "still being manifested." See the note at 1 John 3:5. In 1 John 4:2 we have the manifestation treated as a past fact by the perfect tense, eleeluthota "has come
Robertson- That Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh Ieesoun Christon erchomenon en sarki. "Jesus Christ coming in the flesh." Present middle participle of erchomai treating the Incarnation as a continuing fact which the Docetic Gnostics flatly denied. In 1 John 4:2 we have eleeluthota (perfect active participle) in this same construction with homologeoo, because there the reference is to the definite historical fact of the Incarnation.