Easter

  • 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!

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
A certain denomination insists that when a human being dies, it goes
completely out of conscious existence. Their resurrection doctrine therefore
is not a resurrection according to the traditional meaning of the word, but
rather; a re-creation: which essentially implies that when Christ died on the
cross, he ceased to exist; viz: for three days and three nights, there was no
Christ— neither in this life nor in the next. So in order to "raise" Christ from
the dead, it was necessary for God to create his previoius existence back to
existence. In other words: according to the beliefs of some religions; the
current Christ is a second Christ; viz: a redux.

That belief of course assumes that the Lord's soul died on the cross right
along with his body; which of course it didn't because assassins can't kill
souls.

†. Mtt 10:28 . . Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill
the soul.

In other words: the soul doesn't perish along with the demise of one's body.
Not that it's impossible; it's just that only God can pull off something like
that.

†. Mtt 10:28 . . but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and
body in hell.

But let's assume for a moment that one's soul does pass away along with
the passing of one's body. Well; even if that were true it wouldn't apply to
Christ because he has eternal life.

†. John 5:26 . . As the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son
to have life in Himself.

What kind of life does the Father have in Himself? Answer: eternal life, of
course; what else?

†. 1John 1:2 . .The life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear
witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and
was manifested to us.

The koine Greek word for "eternal" is aionios (ahee-o'-nee-os) which means:
perpetual. In other words: eternal life is continuous; viz: without either
interruption or intermission.

Eternal life is very interesting. The Father had no beginning, nor will He ever
have an ending; viz: from the vanishing point in the past to the vanishing
point in the future, the Father has always been and He will always be; ergo:
eternal life is impervious to death.

So then, when Christ's body expired on the cross, he didn't go out of
existence because eternal life cannot be terminated by the mere passing of a
frail organism; otherwise eternal life wouldn't really be eternal; and God
himself would be in constant peril of extinction.

Cliff
/
 

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
On the same avenue as the "soul resurrection" people are the "non-physical"
resurrection believers; which in a nutshell insist that Christ didn't come back
from the dead as a human, but rather, as a spirit. I think it might be both
interesting and profitable to examine some of their proof texts.

†. Mtt 28:1-6 . . After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week,
Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. There was a
violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and,
going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was
like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow.

. . .The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead
men. The angel said to the women: Don't be afraid, for I know that you are
looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here.

According to the wording of that passage, Christ was gone out of the tomb
prior to the angel rolling the stone away from the entrance. The non-physical
believers attempt to utilize that detail to prove that Christ rose from the
dead as a spirit instead of a human because in their mind's eye; organisms
of flesh and bone cannot pass through solid rock.

Don't they remember how Jesus walked on water, restored withered limbs,
cured blindness, healed serious diseases like leprosy, revived the dead,
controlled the weather, multiplied fish and bread, turned water into wine,
and levitated? What's one more miracle, more or less? Walking through the
stone? Walking through walls? Disappearing? How hard could any of that
really be for a man like Jesus of Nazareth?

Here's another:

†. 1Cor 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.

I'm going to deliberately misspell one of the key words. Watch for the
revision.

"It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spirit body. There is a natural body,
and there is a spirit body."

In other words: a spiritual body isn't necessarily a spirit.

The Greek word for "spiritual" in 1Cor 15:44 is a bit ambiguous.
Pneumatikos can indicate one of several things, including: non-carnal,
ethereal, a spirit being, supernatural, and/or regenerate and religious. So we
have some choices.

Personally, I prefer the definition "supernatural" because it implies a human
being similar in some respects to the man of steel popularly known at Comic
Con as Superman. The heroic figure from the planet Krypton isn't
constructed of spirit; but rather; of some sort of indestructible tissue. It
looks like ordinary human tissue; but in his case, appearances can be
deceiving.

I sincerely believe that the spiritual body spoken of at 1Cor 15:44 is in no
way composed of spirit. Of what material it is composed I don't know; but I
do know at least three things about it. One is that it's not of this world, and
two; it's living tissue, and the third is that it's impervious to debilitation and
death. I also know that it's quite capable of imbibing alcohol.

†. Mtt 26:29 . . I tell you: I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now
on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom.

And also capable of dining out.

†. Luke 22:15-16 . . I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you
before I suffer. For I tell you: I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in
the kingdom of God.

Cliff
/
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
I can see you'll have problems with believing the following as written then...


Matt 22:30
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
(KJV)

Mark 12:25
25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.
(KJV)


The angels have bodies. But they aren't flesh type bodies like we have. The idea of a 'body' is according to what dimension it is in, either of this earthly or of the heavenly. There aren't any more states of bodily existence than those two.


1 Cor 15:44-50
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
(KJV)

Apostle Paul was very direct with how he meant the "spiritual body" he was talking about. It is not a body of flesh and blood.
 

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
Matt 22:30. Mark 12:25

I don't see a reference to the physical properties of angel bodies within the
context of those passages. All I see is that angels don't reproduce.

The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit

The English words "was made" are not in the Greek manuscripts. They're
words that the translators inserted. Here's an unadulterated version:

"The first man Adam became a living being; the last Adam, a life-giving
spirit."

Christ was the life-giving Spirit of 1Cor 15:45 prior to both his birth and his
resurrection.

†. John 1:4 . . In him was life, and that life was the light of men.

†. John 5:21 . . For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life,
even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it.

1Cor 15:45 contrasts an Adam who cannot give life with an Adam who can;
viz: exact opposites. When utilized like that; the passage is actually an
excellent supplement to John 1:1-14 testifying that the cosmos' Creator
came into the world as a human being. and since it's self evident that the
origin of life cannot die, then it would be ludicrous to attest that he was
"made" from the remains of a dead body.

flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God

In the passage below, the English words "man" and "men" are translated
from the same Greek word.

†. 1Tim 2:5 . .There is one God, and one mediator between God and men:
the man Christ Jesus

The Greek word is anthropos (anth'-ro-pos) which means a human being; so
we could translate 1Tim 2:5 like this:

"There is one God, and one mediator between God and human beings: the
human being Christ Jesus."

In a nutshell then: the life-giving Spirit of 1Cor 15:45 is the human being of
1Tim 2:5; viz: the resurrected Christ exists as a human being, and as a spirit
being, both at the same time.

Your assertion got off on the wrong foot with a false impression of what Paul
meant by flesh and blood in 1Cor 15:50. He's not talking about the material
out of which eternal bodies won't be constructed; but rather: the source of
those bodies. In other words: the human body I have now was produced by
breeding human beings. The human body I'll have in the future won't be
produced by breeding; but rather; produced by an act of God. In other
words: "flesh and blood" refers to natural bodies created from dust; in
contrast to supernatural bodies created from apparently nothing.

I think you also made things difficult for yourself by assuming that the word
"spiritual" always refers to spirit; when actually the word pneumatikos can
indicate one of several things, including: non-carnal, ethereal, a spirit being,
supernatural, and/or regenerate and religious. So we have some choices.

And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

The "heavenly" is capable of imbibing alcoholic beverages.

†. Mtt 26:29 . . I tell you: I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now
on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom.

And also capable of dining out.

†. Luke 22:15-16 . . I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you
before I suffer. For I tell you: I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in
the kingdom of God.

It is also visible to the naked eye.

†. Rev 1:7 . . Look! he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see
him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will
mourn because of him. So shall it be.

Cliff
/
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
You can try... to get around what all Paul said in the 1 Cor.15 about the kind of body the resurrection is, but you won't be able to, and certainly not with lexicon gymnastics.
 

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
Sporadic Assertion: According to Php 2:6-7, when the Word of John 1:1
translated himself into a human being, he ceased to be a spirit and that's
how he became vulnerable to death.

In order for that theory to be even be taken seriously, it would first have to
be possible to terminate eternal life because the Lord came to earth not only
as a human life, but also as an eternal life; which is a kind of life that cannot
cease to exist.

†. 1John 1:1-2 . .That which was from the beginning, which we have heard,
which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our
hands have handled, of the Word of life. For the life was manifested, and we
have seen it, and bear witness, and show unto you that eternal life, which
was with the Father, and was manifested unto us

Some Christians at large insist that eternal life isn't life at all but rather:
merely information. They derive their theory from the statement below:

†. John 17:2-3 . .You have given him authority over all flesh, that he should
give eternal life to as many as you have given him. And this is eternal life,
that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you
have sent.

They take "this is eternal life" as a definition. However; the Lord is actually
pointing out an axiom of scripture well-known to students of the second
chapter of 1Corinthians; namely that the human mind is too limited to
fathom the mind of God.

In other words: the various species of life relate to each other so well
because their minds all work the same way; viz: bat minds relate to bats,
antelope minds relate to antelopes, cow minds relate to cows, swine minds
relate to swine, and human minds relate to humans. Christ's statement
implies nothing more than that a limited mind cannot relate to an eternal
mind. Hence the need for humans to obtain eternal life before they can even
begin to relate to either the Father or His son.

Common FAQ : If the Lord revived as a spirit, as some people claim, then
what happened to the corpse?

That is a very pertinent question because if his corpse didn't revive, then it
should have still been inside the tomb on resurrection morning when the
Lord's friends looked inside. And at the very least it should have eventually
decomposed, but according to Peter, it didn't. (Acts 2:25-27)

According to Luke 24:1-5, a couple of celestial beings informed women in
the cemetery that the body they were looking for wasn't in the tomb as they
expected simply because it was alive and no longer dead.

If opponents of a physical resurrection are going to insist that the Lord's
body didn't revive, then they are going to have to produce a corpus delicti in
order to make a sensible case for themselves or be thoroughly laughed out
of court.

FYI : the Watch Tower Society, in it's little handbook "Reasoning From The
Scriptures" claims God cached the Lord's body somewhere on the earth
because it wouldn't make sense to remove the sacrifice from off the altar:
the earth being the altar (a notion they apparently got right out of thin air
and a fertile imagination). But sin offerings don't have to stay dead, they
only have to die; at least once; nor do sacrifices have to stay on the altar.
Portions of Old Testament sacrifices ended up on the Levites' plates as food
for themselves and their families; which is their God-given heritage. And still
other sacrifices were taken down off the altar and incinerated in an isolated
location.

But Christ's crucifixion wasn't a normal sacrifice nor was it even a legal
sacrifice— no; Christ is a Melchizedekian priest rather than an Aaronic priest
(Ps 110:4, Heb 5:4-6, Heb 6:18-20, Heb 7:11) so he wouldn't be subject to
the rules and regulations of the Levitical system anyway even if offerings did
have to stay on the altar.

Cliff
/
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
What happened to our Lord's flesh body in the tomb? Simple! It was transfigured to the Heavenly order body, and it retained the marks of His crucifixion.


John 20:19-20
19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, "Peace be unto you."
20 And when He had so said, He shewed unto them His hands and His side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord.
(KJV)

Does that mean His Resurrection body was in the state of a flesh body? Nope! And it's simple why, because a flesh body like ours, and like the one He had before His crucifixon, is subject to flesh death! The type body associated with this present world is subject to flesh death, even as Christ's flesh body was, which is HOW His flesh body died on the cross!

But His Resurrection Body? Impossible for it to ever be subject to death, for it is of the Heaveny order, which is why He did that sudden appearance among His disciples in a room with the doors shut, and even why He suddenly disappeared in front of them at supper (Luke 24:30-31).

In the Gen.18 example of 'three men' suddenly appearing out of nowhere at Abraham's tent door, one of them was our Lord Jesus in Old Testament times, BEFORE He was born in the flesh through woman's womb. Abraham bowed to Him and called Him Lord. The other two men were the two angels which He sent to Lot in Sodom and Gomorrah per the next Gen.19 chapter. Abraham served them food and drink, so they were able to eat earthly food, walk upon this earth, and appeared with the image of 'man'.

Hebrews 13:2 reminds us to be hospitable to strangers, for some have entertained 'angels' and were not aware they were angels. That means we really cannot tell a difference with the type body angels have. According to the examples in God's Word, some other type of manifestation not common to what a flesh body can do is usually a sign to reveal a Heavenly body type presence amongst us.

Thus Paul's statement of 1 Cor.15:50 that flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God is a direct type statement of Truth, not subject to men's philosophical conditioning. Thus Christ's Body of today is a Resurrection type Body, not a flesh type like He had prior to His crucifixion. Instead, it is a body more associated with the type of Heavenly body He had BEFORE... He was born through woman's womb!
 

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
What happened to our Lord's flesh body in the tomb? Simple! It was transfigured to the
Heavenly order body

It's interesting you would assert such a thing so confidently when the New
Testament says nothing even vaguely similar.

It would be my guess that the Lord's body didn't undergo a physical
transformation until he was caught up to heaven; just as the Lord's people
won't be transformed themselves until they are caught up as per 1Thss
4:14-18.

FAQ : Doesn't Luke 24:36-43 prove that Christ rose from the dead
physically?

Well; it certainly does the trick for me; but not everyone is so easily
convinced.

Citing Abraham's experience with supposedly food-eating angels in the 18[sup]th[/sup]
chapter of Genesis some people contend that Christ "materialized" a human
body in order to show his disciples he was back from extinction.

So what's wrong with their theory? Well; for one thing: the Lord clearly
predicted his body would revive.

†. John 2:19-22 . . Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three
days. The Jews replied: It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and
you are going to raise it in three days? But the temple he had spoken of was
his body. After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he
had said.

Getting back to Abraham: the Old Testament word for "angel" is mal'ak
(mal-awk') which is an ambiguous word with more than one meaning to
choose from. It means primarily a dispatched deputy; viz: a prophet, a
priest, a teacher, and/or a celestial being.

My point is: the word mal'ak is nowhere in the text of the 18th chapter of
Genesis; and in point of fact, one of those three men who dined upon
Sarah's home cooking was Yhvh.

Jewish commentary insists that the supposed angels only went through the
motions of eating Sarah's food. But the texts of the two best Jewish Bibles
clearly says they did. Here it is from the 1985 JPS Tanakh.

"He took curds and milk and the calf that had been prepared and set these
before them; and he waited on them under the tree as they ate."

Here it is again; this time from the 2007 Stone Tanach.

"He took cream and milk and the calf which he had prepared, and placed
these before them; he stood over them beneath the tree and they ate."

So when all is taken into consideration: in order for Christ's resurrection
body to have been "materialized" then it would have to have been
materialized right from the get-go inside his mother's womb or otherwise the
Lord would be a great big fat fraud.

But was the Lord an honest-to-gosh, bona fide human being? Well; the
Lord's genealogy in Luke traces his ancestry all the way back to Adam and
the dust of the earth. If that isn't human; I just don't know what is.

Hebrews 13:2 reminds us to be hospitable to strangers, for some have entertained 'angels' and
were not aware they were angels.

The koiné Greek word for "angels" in that passage is aggelos (ang'-el-os)
which just simply means a messenger; either human or celestial. The same
word is employed in Revelation regarding "angels" to whom John penned
letters; which in that case were obviously church big shots rather than celestial
beings.

Cliff
/
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
.
It's interesting you would assert such a thing so confidently when the New
Testament says nothing even vaguely similar.

Well, that statement is just an assumption since I well covered the matter with those Scripture examples I gave.


It would be my guess that the Lord's body didn't undergo a physical
transformation until he was caught up to heaven; just as the Lord's people
won't be transformed themselves until they are caught up as per 1Thss
4:14-18.

Even upon the mount of transfiguration when His Apostles saw Him speaking with Moses and Elijah, His flesh body was shown in transfiguration per their description. The point is that Scripture is revealing to us two different type bodies, one that is earthly, and one that is of the heavenly. Also, in 1 Peter 3, we're shown that our Lord Jesus once His body was 'quickened', He went to preach The Gospel to the "spirits in prison", i.e., in the pit of hell, which is in the heavenly. And He led those who believed out of that prison, which was a prophecy in Isaiah associated with His death and resurrection.

It's a mistake to apply the 1 Thess.4 "caught up" event to be exactly like our Lord's resurrection, since our Lord Jesus' flesh body was transfigured. Our flesh bodies won't be. We will simply put off our flesh bodies, the body of 'corruption', on that day. That's what the 'change' at the "twinkling of eye" is about which Paul preached. The New Testament teaches that our spirit and soul cannot be separated from each other, but they can be separated from our flesh body.

Matt 10:28
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him Which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
KJV


The above word for "hell" is 'geena', from Hebrew Hinnom (Valley of Hinnom). It was used to represent the "lake of fire" event of Rev.20:14-15. The type body above that is destroyed in the 'lake of fire' is not a flesh body. It's the "spiritual body" which Paul preached in 1 Cor.15, a heavenly order body.



[quote]FAQ : Doesn't Luke 24:36-43 prove that Christ rose from the dead
physically?

Well; it certainly does the trick for me; but not everyone is so easily
convinced.[/quote]


1 Corinthians 15 is the Biblical authority of what type body the resurrection is, as our Lord Jesus Christ gave through His Apostle Paul. So if that Scripture witness did not exist, only then would you be justified in believing in everlasting life of the flesh.

But alas, Paul explained the resurrection in detail there, and made a direct statement that flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God, neither does 'corruption' inherit 'incorruption'. They are two different states of existence is what he showed us.

Citing Abraham's experience with supposedly food-eating angels in the 18[sup]th[/sup]
chapter of Genesis some people contend that Christ "materialized" a human
body in order to show his disciples he was back from extinction.

I'm not interested in in wordly contentions; I'm only interested in what God's Word reveals on the matter. And belief in everlasting flesh is... a worldly contention, especially among deceived Jewish traditions.

Because of what Apostle Paul revealed in 1 Cor.15 for the "last trump", we can know that our being changed to the "spiritual body" at Christ's coming is a major sign for the True coming of Jesus Christ. Someone coming in His place to try and offer us a salvation of our flesh body is a mark of a false prophet.



So what's wrong with their theory? Well; for one thing: the Lord clearly
predicted his body would revive.

†. John 2:19-22 . . Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three
days. The Jews replied: It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and
you are going to raise it in three days? But the temple he had spoken of was
his body. After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he
had said.

Getting back to Abraham: the Old Testament word for "angel" is mal'ak
(mal-awk') which is an ambiguous word with more than one meaning to
choose from. It means primarily a dispatched deputy; viz: a prophet, a
priest, a teacher, and/or a celestial being.

The word 'angel' does simply mean 'messenger'. I realize it is not a word to clearly define a heavenly being like a cherub, seraphim, etc. Arguing about that word 'angel' still won't dislodge how God's Word uses it about heavenly 'messengers' He sends to earth among flesh man. Such arguments against that are useless and only suggest Biblical illiteracy.


My point is: the word mal'ak is nowhere in the text of the 18th chapter of
Genesis; and in point of fact, one of those three men who dined upon
Sarah's home cooking was Yhvh.

Jewish commentary insists that the supposed angels only went through the
motions of eating Sarah's food. But the texts of the two best Jewish Bibles
clearly says they did. Here it is from the 1985 JPS Tanakh.

"He took curds and milk and the calf that had been prepared and set these
before them; and he waited on them under the tree as they ate."

Here it is again; this time from the 2007 Stone Tanach.

"He took cream and milk and the calf which he had prepared, and placed
these before them; he stood over them beneath the tree and they ate."

So when all is taken into consideration: in order for Christ's resurrection
body to have been "materialized" then it would have to have been
materialized right from the get-go inside his mother's womb or otherwise the
Lord would be a great big fat fraud.

But was the Lord an honest-to-gosh, bona fide human being? Well; the
Lord's genealogy in Luke traces his ancestry all the way back to Adam and
the dust of the earth. If that isn't human; I just don't know what is.

It now sounds like you're trying to prove that Jesus of Nazareth is not Immanuel God with us, simply because He was born through woman's womb like us.

Christ existed prior to being born through Mary's womb, and I'm pretty sure you're aware of the Old Testament Scripture that proves His existence before being born in the flesh. Thus it sounds like you might be struggling to understand how God could come in the flesh while having existed prior without the need for a flesh body. Like I mentioned lightly earlier, lot of Jewish traditions are confused about the difference between the earthly existence vs. the heavenly order existence. It's because of how those traditions rely upon this flesh existence of today, and not the existence of the world to come. That's why some of them have expressed to me personally they're not interested in any other type of existence than this flesh existence of today.


The koiné Greek word for "angels" in that passage is aggelos (ang'-el-os)
which just simply means a messenger; either human or celestial. The same
word is employed in Revelation regarding "angels" to whom John penned
letters; which in that case were obviously church big shots rather than celestial
beings.

Well, you're definitely confused about that. When the Book of Revelation mentions angels, it means heavenly beings, not flesh men on earth. Your attempt to push Jewish doctrine here on that just isn't gonna' work.
 

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
in 1 Peter 3, we're shown that our Lord Jesus once His body was 'quickened'

I recommend a critical look at the passage in question.

†. 1Pet 3:18 . . He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit

When the Spirit is capitalized— as it is in common translations —then it's
easily seen that the passage is merely saying that God's Spirit restored the
Lord's body to life.

†. Rom 1:4 . .Who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to
be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead

†. Rom 8:11 . . the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead

The Lord's sheep will themselves undergo a physical resurrection by the
Spirit

†. Rom 8:11 . . And if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead is
living in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your
mortal bodies through His spirit, who lives in you.

While they're waiting for themselves to be physically resurrected by the
Spirit; the Lord's people are supposed to be worshipping in the Spirit (John
4:23-24) praying in the Spirit (Jude 1:20) walking in the Spirit (Gal 5:16)
living in the Spirit (Gal 5:25) and also studying the Bible in the Spirit. (1Cor
2:9-16, 1John 2:26-27)

†. 1Pet 3:19-20 . . by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in
prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering
waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared,

They say timing is everything. Well; in this case, God's Spirit preached to
the spirits in prison in their day rather than Christ's; viz: while the ark was
being built.

†. Gen 6:3 . .Then the Lord said: My Spirit will not contend with man forever.

How did God's Spirit contend with the antediluvians? With his own voice?
No; with Noah's.

†. 2Pet 2:5 . . Noah; a preacher of righteousness

Apparently Noah was an inspired man who did a whole lot more for God than
just build a giant barge.


in the pit of hell

Christ didn't go to a pit of hell; he went to a paradise (Luke 23:43). The koiné Greek
word sometimes translated "hell" at Acts 2:31 is haides; which is simply the
afterlife.


It's a mistake to apply the 1 Thess.4 "caught up" event to be exactly like our Lord's resurrection

Maybe it's a mistake to you; but not to me.


I'm only interested in what God's Word reveals on the matter.

Of course you are; we all are.


Such arguments against that are useless and only suggest Biblical illiteracy . . . Well, you're
definitely confused

Just because people don't agree with your take on the Bible doesn't eo ipso
indicate they're biblically illiterate and/or confused. I highly recommend that
you be a bit more circumspect with your choice of words lest the hapless day
arrives when you are forced to eat them.

†. Mtt 12:36-37 . . I say to you: that every thoughtless word that men shall
speak, they shall render account for it in the day of judgment. For by your
words you shall be justified, and by your words you shall be condemned.

Cliff
/
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
.
I recommend a critical look at the passage in question.

†. 1Pet 3:18 . . He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit

When the Spirit is capitalized— as it is in common translations —then it's
easily seen that the passage is merely saying that God's Spirit restored the
Lord's body to life.


1 Pet 3:18-19
18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19 By which also He went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
(KJV)

The very next 1 Pet.3:19 verse reveals that quickening in connection with His preaching to the spirits in prison that were once disobedient back in the days of Noah. God prophesied through Isaiah about Christ doing that preaching to those in the pit prison in connection with His first coming to die on the cross.


[quote]†. Rom 1:4 . .Who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to
be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead

†. Rom 8:11 . . the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead

The Lord's sheep will themselves undergo a physical resurrection by the
Spirit

†. Rom 8:11 . . And if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead is
living in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your
mortal bodies through His spirit, who lives in you.

While they're waiting for themselves to be physically resurrected by the
Spirit; the Lord's people are supposed to be worshipping in the Spirit (John
4:23-24) praying in the Spirit (Jude 1:20) walking in the Spirit (Gal 5:16)
living in the Spirit (Gal 5:25) and also studying the Bible in the Spirit. (1Cor
2:9-16, 1John 2:26-27)[/quote]

That interjection of Romans Scripture changes nothing concerning the 1 Pet.3 Scripture about Christ preaching to the "spirits in prison" after The Father had raised Him.


[quote]†. 1Pet 3:19-20 . . by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in
prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering
waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared,

They say timing is everything. Well; in this case, God's Spirit preached to
the spirits in prison in their day rather than Christ's; viz: while the ark was
being built.[/quote]

Nope! What you're trying to say about that 1 Pet.3 example is a vain attempt to change that Scripture as it's written!

Should be very obvious to anyone with common sense too, since Christ was NOT preached to those back in the time... of Noah, but AFTER they had suffered the flood and were in the heavenly pit prison, that preaching by Christ Jesus Himself coming after The Father had raised Him from the dead. We're talking about the difference from around 2500 B.C. when the flood of Noah's day happened vs. around 29 A.D. when Christ was crucified upon the cross!

The rest of your post is purposefully misleading!
 

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
It now sounds like you're trying to prove that Jesus of Nazareth is not Immanuel God with
us, simply because He was born through woman's womb like us

The Bible's Godhead is one of the supernatural aspects of Christianity that I
avoid discussing online as much as possible because only hand-picked
insiders are permitted to comprehend it.

†. Mtt 11:27 . . No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows
the Father except the Son: and those to whom the Son selects to reveal
Him.

Cliff
/
 

xBluxTunicx82

New Member
Apr 6, 2012
150
5
0
Great point. Only Christ knows! This is why we have messages against false prophets and how to spot them, and the same for antichrists. We hear of those that will hate the truth, we learn of wheat and tares.

There are many who simply 'accept' Christ(I think we should worry about Him accepting us) and then call themselves Christian because they go sit in church and hear a preacher teach something. Being given eyes and ears to me represents the intense desire that some folks have to dedicate their precious time to studying the Word, and then taking what knowledge or understanding they have and spreading the message.

There are many half truths out there, many teachers that say "I am the way", but they are not... Jesus said that His followers would be hated, that He brought division between even the closest of family. Why is this? Is it because Christians are too loving, forgiving, and generous? I think not...love, kindness, generosity, all can be seen in the animal kingdom by wild animals, so it has to have a special meaning to Gods highest creation Man.

I have been shown the truth in my heart, called to service by Yahshua Christ, and I am doing my best to perform that service to the best of my ability. We are afterall, to be servants to Christ upon this earth.

The truth, like always, is often hard to accept. It is many times the very thing that tears people apart at the very seams. And while the majority of churchianity is busy thinking that their certain faction of Christianity is 100% correct and others are wrong, I say, ALL OF THEM ARE WRONG. There has been too much subversion from the truth since around 1948, ironically the same time that the Israeli state became just that, a state.

Line upon line, precept upon precept is how we study in spirit and in truth. If something you hear or read disagrees or contradicts something else you have heard, then you had better get back to studying. There is no error in scripture, there is nothing that can contradict itself, if viewed with a Godly mind. If you look at it with a worldly view, where gays are accepted, women are pastors, race mixing is ok, marriage isn't permanent, etc, etc, then you will shun anything you read where God condemns it. i.e. Many Christians continue getting tattoos on their bodies, justifying it because it may be Jesus's face on the arm, or some scripture elsewhere, despite the fact God says to not make markings in your flesh! Or they allow 'ordained' ministers that are just as colorful as Elton John to marry a black man and a white woman. Yet God teaches that sodomites are an abomination and that there is an eternal law of kind after kind, and the numerous instances of crises being sent upon Israel for marrying and taking in marriage from other 'nations'

All the while, we allow our children to be indoctrinated in communist public schools, and instead of learning the history of the earth as God gives it, where it says 'In the beginning", they learn the big bang theory....a childs mind is like a sponge, so what they 'eat' of while they are young, they will most certainly become. All for the sake of world citizenship and universalism..
 

Sabitarian

New Member
Sep 11, 2011
198
2
0
xBlux,
Are you saying that skin color makes us different kinds? Or that blacks and whites should not marry? We are all of the same kind and the deciples of Christ were not of Israel as Simon was a Cannanite, Not Simon Peter who was an Israelite. If you study the lines you find that Cannanites came from Ham and there origin is from Africa.
Humble servant of the Lord God Most High
 

xBluxTunicx82

New Member
Apr 6, 2012
150
5
0
Yes, I am. Adam was by no means THE 1st man. And even the creation account in Genesis records this. 1:26-27 [background=rgb(249, 253, 255)]And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. [/background][background=rgb(249, 253, 255)]So God created man in his [/background]own[background=rgb(249, 253, 255)] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. In 2:7 we find an entirely separate account "[/background][background=rgb(249, 253, 255)]And the LORD God formed man [/background]of[background=rgb(249, 253, 255)] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.[/background][background=rgb(249, 253, 255)]"[/background]
[background=rgb(249, 253, 255)]The word used for man in both cases is "eth-ha-Awdawm' and according to Stongs Exhaustive Concordance [/background]

119[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)] 'adam aw-dam' to show blood (in the face), i.e. flush or turn rosy:--be (dyed, made) red (ruddy).[/background]
120[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)] 'adam aw-dawm' from [/background]119[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)]; ruddy i.e. a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.):--X another, + hypocrite, + common sort, X low, man (mean, of low degree), person.[/background]
122[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)] 'adom aw-dome' from [/background]119[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)]; rosy:--red, ruddy.[/background]
124[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)] 'odem o'-dem from [/background]119[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)]; redness, i.e. the ruby, garnet, or some other red gem:--sardius.[/background]
125[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)] 'adamdam ad-am-dawm' reduplicated from [/background]119[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)]; reddish:--(somewhat) reddish.[/background]
127[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)] 'adamah ad-aw-maw' from [/background]119[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)]; soil (from its general redness):--country, earth, ground, husband(-man) (-ry), land.[/background]
132[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)] 'admoniy ad-mo-nee' or (fully) admowniy {ad-mo-nee'}; from [/background]119[background=rgb(233, 225, 205)]; reddish (of the hair or the complexion):--red, ruddy[/background]

Now, if Ham fathered blacks as purported by many churches, what is is more hateful? That they are black because of curse placed upon them, or that God created the races separate and distinct for His own purpose and Glory?

In Genesis 5:1, we are taught that this is book 'of the genealogy of Adam(rosy man)' and not the entire earth.

And yes, adultery is the mixing of things which do not belong. If God Almighty wanted His creation to be a muddy brown color, He would have made us so. Also, there have been clinical studies performed prior to the current age of "speak about race and you are a racist' mindset. All of the studies showed significant differences in the 3 major races in physical, mental, and physiological differences. Which all boils back to genetics. Explains why blacks are so fast and athletic compared to whites and asians, and whites and asians are physically stronger than a black. You know who performed these studies before they were slid under the table? The US Navy
Simon is calledKananaios, or Kananites (Matthew 10:4; Mark3:18), and in the list of apostles in Luke 6:15, repeated in Acts 1:13, Zelotes, the "Zealot". Both titles derive from the Hebrew word qana, meaningThe Zealous, though Jerome and others mistook the word to signify the apostle was from the town of Cana, in which case his epithet would have been "Kanaios" or even from the region of Canaan. As such, the translation of the word as "the Cananite" or "the Canaanite" is traditional and without contemporary extra-canonic parallel. Robert Eisenman has pointed out[sup][3][/sup] contemporary talmudic references to Zealots as kanna'im "but not really as a group — rather as avenging priests

Again, many, many, many terrible translations to be found in our beloved Word. This is why it is important to 'study to show thyself approved...'
Racemixing does nothing but erase the purity of those genes found at birth. It can be proven scientifically that as it progresses through generations, these mamzer children are more likely to develop mental problems, and physical defects. And ultimately, destroy both races involved. i.e. if every young white girl were to have children by blacks or some other, eventually there would be no black nor white but something that was not created by God.

(A bastard(mamzer) shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD).Deut 23:2

Christ taught that everything that His father did not plant will be rooted up and burned..

Also, the origins of blacks in Africa pre-date the 6000 year or so time frame in any biblical chronology, so its impossible for them to have been born of Ham.
 

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
52
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Just more white supremacist propaganda.