The Resurrection Body

[atHisfeet]

Not literally as Christ does at present, no. Do you not see a difference between Christ’s being raised from the dead and his being seated at God’s right hand (Eph 1:21) and our being “raised up with [Christ]” and “seated with him in the heavenly places” (Eph 2:5-6)? Is it not obvious to you that the former is literal and the latter is figurative?

How does Jesus sit next to the Father, who is spirit, any more “literally” than we do, when He lives “in us” and “in Him” we live and move and have our being?

Do you think Christ enjoys physical contact with other human beings at present? If not, why should it be a problem for me that he doesn’t?

I don’t know that I would call it “physical” contact, since I do not know what our existence will be like in eternity. But, since I’m not the one who believes in soul sleep, I certainly do believe that he enjoys the company of all of the men that have departed and gone on to be with Him.

Of course there’s a difference. But I fail to see how this is an argument against Christ having a physical body and being the only human being in heaven right now. While “physical companionship shared between humans” is wonderful and good, I doubt it tops enjoying communion with God in his immediate presence in heaven. And it’s not like Christ is never going to get to enjoy physical companionship with other humans ever again, so unless Christ has an unspiritual lack of patience while he’s waiting for the time when the dead are to be raised, then I hardly doubt the wait is adversely affecting his present happiness in God’s presence.

My only point was that your understanding is that Jesus Christ has a physical body and lives in a physical world (somewhere - this one or another one) as the “only man” in existence in that world. I disagree and don’t even see the point in believing that there even is or needs to be another physical world/universe/planet (?) out there somewhere on which Jesus can continue to live physically in order for him to continue to exist/live. So since our difference on this has been established, perhaps you can just move on from this now?

It’s evident that Paul is not teaching that Christ does not have a physical body when he refers to him as a “life-giving spirit,” since Christ, as a resurrected man, has a body of “flesh and bones” (which you seem to admit he possessed at some point, though I could be wrong). And since we are not told that Christ would or did discard the body with which he was raised (why would he?), it is likely that Paul’s calling Christ a “spirit” is to be understood in a figurative sense.

Why would you believe that Jesus had to retain His physical body? Where are we told that that which is seen (physical) is anything other than temporal? Where do you get the idea that the spiritual realm of God is anything other than spiritual? Is it your contention that this physical universe is not ever going to pass away and that Jesus still exists “somewhere” in it? Can you not even begin to image that there was a very good (but different) reason for Jesus having “a body of flesh and bones” after His resurrection?

Paul is probably alluding to the “breath (spirit) of life” that God breathed into Adam that made him a “living soul” (Gen 2:7) and which was in all living, breathing things (Gen 6:17). This would certainly fit nicely with the immediate context. But I doubt that even you would affirm that Christ is literally the breath/spirit that God breathed into Adam to make him a “living soul.” Just like God (who is the only Being in Scripture unequivocally said to be “spirit” - John 4:24) breathed into Adam the breathe of life making him a “living soul,” so Christ is going to impart life (i.e., immortality) to the dead at the end of his reign. It is in this sense that Christ is a “life-giving spirit.” Does this mean Christ doesn’t also give spiritual life to people who are spiritually dead? No, of course not. But that is not Paul’s emphasis here in chapter 15.

Jesus is a man, but the spirit of Christ ~is~ the spirit of God and it is by “this” spirit (of Christ / of God) that we are “born again” (quickened). It is not “Jesus” (a man) who lives “in us” but HIS SPIRIT (which is also the spirit OF GOD) that lives in us – and, I believe, quite literally. And, while you may disagree, I do not believe that Paul is talking about a physical resurrection in 1 Cor 15, I believe that he is using the physical resurrection of Christ to teach us a spiritual truth, as it relates to the “resurrection of the dead” that applies to those who are “dead” in sin.

Are you suggesting that Christ wasn’t really raised with a physical body?

I have never even come close to suggesting that.

Or that he doesn’t currently reside in a physical body?

We are “the body of Christ” (not the body of “Jesus”, but the body of “Christ”.). I believe that Christ dwells “in us” and, as such, does have “a body of flesh and bones”. However, I do not believe that Jesus currently has a physical body, since I do not believe that Jesus lives in a physical world. It could very well be possible but I don’t think that is it “proven” by His physical resurrection. Neither do I believe that he is the only resurrected man wherever/however he lives.

Do you think that when Paul said, “we know no man after the flesh” he was denying that Christ possessed a physical body?

I believe that it means that we are to know no man according to the flesh. It has nothing to do with affirming or denying that Christ possesses a physical body, as far as I can tell. It simply has to do with how we relate to each other and how we judge things (which should not be according to the flesh).

It would seem from Gen 32:24-25 that Jacob and the angel were involved in physical contact: “And a man wrestled with [Jacob] until the breaking of the day. When the man saw that he did not prevail against Jacob, he touched his hip socket, and Jacob’s hip was put out of joint and he wrestled with him” (Gen 32:24-25). And to say that this angel did not actually possess but merely “appeared” with a physical body is to beg the question.

Begs what question? I don’t have to read that and believe that Jacob actually wrestled with someone all night long. But even if he did, I’m not the one who said it was an angel, you did. The verse says it was a man. So was it a man or was it an angel? And why all night long, why until the breaking of the day, and what is so significant about his “thigh”?

As far the angels go, I simply pointed out that I do not believe that all mentions of “angels” in the Bible are referring to spiritual beings who were made manifest in this world to appear unto men. And if/when they were then they most assuredly did ‘appeared’, didn’t they? So what would you prefer me call it?

If by “spirit being” you mean a being without a physical body, where are we told that angels do not have physical bodies of some sort? There are a number of verses that seem to indicate otherwise.

Where are we told that they do? And why are you so hung up on “physical” bodies? Other than Christ remaining on the earth for 40 days (in a physical world) in a body of flesh and bones, what makes you think that “the natural body” and “the spiritual body” are both “physical bodies"?

Yes, seriously. I thought I understood your view from reading your blog, but in light of more recent statements you’ve made on this forum, I’ve not quite sure how exactly you understand the resurrection of the dead in 1Cor 15. For instance, you said you believed that all the dead were collectively raised at some point in the past, but in your blog you seem to be saying that not everyone is raised at the same time (or at all).

Or at all, meaning what? I have not denied the resurrection of the dead, either here or in any of my blogs. I don’t, however, believe that the resurrection of the dead speaks to physically dead bodies being resurrected out of physical graves. And if you don’t believe that it the case either, with (perhaps) very few exceptions then why do you tie the resurrection of the dead so tightly around our physical bodies?

For instance, you say in your blog, “Those who are “babes” in Christ have “the earnest of the spirit” and they are “YET CARNAL”. They have not yet gone on unto perfection. They have not been delivered of THE CHILD and had Christ formed IN THEM,” and “Not all go on unto perfection and pass from death unto life (attaining THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD, through THE REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST).” Contrast these statements with the following: “Then you still do not understand my view because I believe that ALL of the dead have been “collectively” raised, as ALL men are found IN HIM and HE IS RISEN.”

There is no contradiction there. It just depends on whose perspective you are seeing it from. Both the living and the dead are “in Christ”. He is Lord of both; and Christ, who is “the light that lighteth every man cometh into the world”, in not dead. So even we, who are reckoned “dead” after a spiritual truth, still have that “life” hidden with us. It is this life that is waiting to be made manifest (by Christ being formed in us). But it is Christ (in us) who God sees as he reckons us righteous (and sons) through the righteousness of Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son. Christ came to save us “from sin and death”. Why assume that we need to be saved from two different deaths or from a death that is not the penalty for sin? And just as God lead Israel “through the wilderness” and “into the promised land” isn’t meant to teach us that the promised land it actually to be found in a literal city in the middle east, I do not believe that physical death is anything other than a ‘type’ of spiritual death. It is through that which is seen that we are able to see and understand that which is not seen. That is why Jesus said that Lazarus was “asleep”, but the disciples didn’t know what He meant until he said “Lazarus is dead”.

Also, as far as I can tell, your blog doesn’t reveal your understanding of what the “spiritual body” (which you believe resides within the natural body) has to do with the resurrection of the dead. As I’ve said before, one position is that the resurrection takes place for every person at physical death, when the spiritual body is thought to be released from the natural body. But this evidently isn’t your view; you seem to believe that the resurrection of the dead is the goal of our present Christian walk in which full spiritual maturity/perfection is reached, and you seem to make it equivalent to our being “born again” and having Christ “born in us” (which, as far as I can tell, doesn’t have anything necessarily to do with anyone’s post-mortem existence). But at the same time, you seem to believe the resurrection of the dead is a past event that embraced all the dead. So I’m just requesting some clarity on your position.

I do not see it as a “past event”. I simply see all of these literal, physical, tangible events as “types” or “shadows” of spiritual truths. And while certain things are played out physically “in time” such that they have the appearance of being past, present or future, I believe that we have to look beyond the physical if we truly want to see the spiritual things to which they point and hear what the spirit is saying unto the churches. The Word/God was made flesh “in the end of the world” but Jesus Christ is also said to be “the lamb slain from the foundation of the world”. As I see it, the Word/God has always existed, even if it was only “made flesh” in the man Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior in these last days. That doesn’t change the fact that it has always been (even from the foundation of the world) “by the Word of God” (that “incorruptible seed”) that men have been “born again”. Christ IS the resurrection of the dead, the first-fruits of them that slept…. not “was” the resurrection… not “will be” the resurrection, but “is” the resurrection and the life. And while we don’t all “know” THE POWER OF His resurrection at the same “time” (from our own perspective or experience, as we have to come to know it’s power in order to “pass” from life unto death), we are and always have been a part of the body of the Christ and have always had the “light” (life) within us, just waiting to be made manifest.

Abraham, Isaac and Jacob walked and died IN FAITH and it is BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH that we are saved. And God said: “I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” and He is NOT the God of “the dead” but of THE LIVING.

Again, I don’t read anything in 1Cor 15 that would suggest that the resurrection of the dead is not the same kind/nature of resurrection experienced by Christ on the third day. There is no indication that Paul is talking about a literal, physical resurrection for Christ and something entirely different for the rest of mankind. You can talk about spiritual death and spiritual life all you want, but the fact remains that there is nothing in the context that indicates Paul was addressing this topic in 1Cor 15. And I demand proof that the resurrection of the dead spoken of by Paul in 1Cor 15 and “eternal life” are equivalent.

You can “demand” all you want. But I’m not the one who can open you eyes or your ears to it, so perhaps a better route to take would be one of prayer.

Jesus Christ is an embodied being presently sitting at God’s right hand. How can he literally be abiding in anyone? The fact is, he can’t - just like he can’t literally be “born” in anyone. Literally, Jesus was born of his mother Mary nearly 2,000 years ago.

And surely you know that since God is spirit that Jesus sitting “at his right hand” is not to be taken literally, right? Still, it is the spirit of Christ/God by which we are born again. And that most assuredly comes from within.

And yet it hasn’t lost any of its force; it’s still fatal to your present view.

And perhaps that is only because you don’t understand my view.

The fact remains that there is no causal relationship between our possessing the spiritual life of which Christ speaks in John 5 and 11, and our having some kind of post-mortem existence (whether embodied or otherwise). Our post-mortem existence depends entirely on our being raised just as Christ was raised, and has nothing at all to do with whether or not we have “passed from death to life” in a spiritual sense. Where is your proof that having spiritual life now by faith in Christ is in any way causally related to our having a conscious, post-mortem existence after we physically die?

As I said before, I find that a very strange statement coming from someone who believes that we (for the most part) get “a new body” and it’s not “this body” that is being resurrected. But, anyway, our eternal/immortal existence depends on the power of HIS RESURRECTION.

Where have I said that physical death is “the penalty for sin?” While certainly a premature death can be a result of sin, I have never asserted that the “wages of sin” is physical death. I believe just as strongly as you do that it’s spiritual death.

I know; which is why I can’t for the life of me figure out why you are so hung up on physical death, as if that is the death that men need to be redeemed from. It’s not even the death we are “reaping” as a result of sin. Which is my entire point.

But this fact neither proves you right nor proves me wrong. Physical death can still be an “enemy” that needs to be destroyed without its also being the “wages of sin.” The fact that the death of his friend Lazarus caused Jesus himself to weep flies in the face of your view that physical death is not something from which we need to be saved. If Christ needed to be saved from physical death (Heb 5:7), how much more do we? And what do you think Paul meant when he wrote that those who had fallen asleep in Christ had “perished” if Christ had not been raised (1Cor 15:18)?

Christ did not need to be save from physical death. His physical death provided the blood that was required for the sin offering and it provides the covering for our sins, but that was not the penalty for sin, nor how He “paid” that penalty. He paid the penalty for sin by being “made flesh” and descending into the realm of the dead in order to condemn sin “in the flesh”. And His physical resurrection provides the proof that “the dead are raised”. And the fact that he had “a body of flesh and bones” speaks to the truth that “we” are His body and Christ IS COME in the flesh.

Again, your argument simply does not follow. The fact that spiritual death is the “wages of sin” from which we need to be saved does not negate the fact that physical death is also something from which mankind needs to be saved. It’s almost as if the moment you learned or rediscovered in a profound way that spiritual death was the wages of sin (and thus something of consequence from which we need to be saved by receiving spiritual life), you became unable to see physical death as something that, apart from a resurrection like Christ’s, is equally “serious” in regards to keeping us from experiencing the life for which we were created.

Well, to me, it’s as if you lived your whole life seeing only the shadow of a car in your driveway and because everyone told you it was “a car” you believed that “that” was what “a car” was. But the minute that you were actually able to see “the car” you still couldn’t get past “the shadow” because you still saw it as being “just as important” as the car.

Get in the car, Aaron, and maybe you won’t notice the shadow so much… you won’t even see it at all if the sun is shining brightly overhead!!

This is what I meant when I spoke of the “either/or mentality.” It’s like having a set of scales with one side reading “spiritual death” and the other, “physical death” - and whereas I understand Scripture to “weight” them as being more or less equal in importance, you’ve put a 10 ton weight on the “spiritual death” side and a mere feather on the other. But I see no scriptural justification for doing that, and I think that doing so forces one to do some major interpretive and theological gymnastics when coming to passages like 1Cor 15 or 1Thess 4:13-18, or simply when considering the meaning and implications of Christ’s death and resurrection.

Hanging onto the shadow of the car is not actually going to take you anywhere, Aaron. That which “is seen” (which is TEMPORAL) is meant TO REVEAL TO US that which “in not seen” (which is eternal). Are we not told that we are not to be looking upon that which is seen but on that which is not seen? to compare spiritual things with spiritual? How can you do that by focusing so much on the physical, even after you can see the spiritual things that are meant to be revealed through them? Doesn’t “Babel” mean “confusion” (by mixing)? What do you think that it means to “rightly divided the word of truth”?.

It’s not that I don’t see the physical or that I am claiming that the physical doesn’t exist (and neither do I “ignore” the physical), but the physical is the weight of a feather on the other side of scale, as far as I am concerned, when it comes to spiritual truths.

I mean do you really think that when Christ’s disciples realized that their master was alive again after being crucified, dead and buried, their joy and wonder and zeal to proclaim this fact was due to the “allegorical application” they understood it as having? Is that why they exposed themselves to ridicule, persecution and death in order that this good news might be believed on by as many people in the world as possible? I doubt that’s what you think (but if it is, I guess we’re at an impasse and we just need to agree to disagree). But if that’s not what you think, then it would seem that the fact of Jesus’ physical, bodily resurrection to immortality was of much greater importance, and was more inherently meaningful, to Jesus’ apostles (as well as to all of their converts) than it is to you. To understand Christ’s resurrection as little more than an “object lesson” for people to help them better understand spiritual death and life is, I think, to empty the gospel of its life-changing power.

You act as if I am saying that the spiritual/allegorical meaning is the “only” meaning and that, as such, all we ever have is “eternal life” (life now) and that when we die we are just dead, that there is no life beyond this one, when that is not what I am saying at all.

Jesus Christ being resurrected from the dead proves “the resurrection of the dead”; that there is more than “this life only” for which to have hope. But until we know THE POWER OF “His resurrection” we cannot “know God of Jesus Christ whom He sent” and we simply walk in darkness being “dead” to God. You don’t believe that the promise of “eternal life” is good enough reason for Paul to want to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ? That the only reason to preach the gospel is the hope in another life after this one?

No, I believe that both spiritual death AND physical death are states from which we need to be saved. Both/and not either/or. I don’t read anything in Scripture that suggests that being saved from spiritual death has anything whatsoever to do with whether or not we have any kind of post-mortem existence - and since I don’t see Scripture as teaching that our hope for “life after death” rests on anything but the fact that Christ rose from the dead as the firstfruits of those who sleep, I believe your theology to be inadequate. The fact that sin was “condemned in the flesh” and the curtain of the temple was torn in two (which I agree signifies our spiritual access to God made possible by Christ’s death) is a wonderful truth I hold dear, but it doesn’t negate the need we have for a literal, physical resurrection. And I really don’t think you’ve proven that it does.

Sort of like how Aaron37 sees both of our theologies as being “inadequate” to prove the salvation of all men? (How does that prove that it actually “is” inadequate? )

And what did Paul mean when he spoke of being “unclothed?” Answer: physically dead in the literal grave. And what did he expect to be “clothed upon” by after his “earthly home” was destroyed? Answer: a new, imperishable body (1Cor 15:35-49). How can you understand the “spiritual body” of 1Cor 15 as referring to the body we will have after death, but not understand Paul to be talking about that body here? And if I misunderstand you on this, I implore you to take the time and clarify your position for me. Even if I disagree with you, I don’t WANT to misunderstand you.

He did not say “after”, Aaron. He said that we know that if this body of flesh were dissolved that we would know THAT WE HAVE our heavenly (spiritual) body. His whole point was that we do not have to be unclothed to be clothed upon. It is not even our desire to be unclothed… but to be clothed upon. It couldn’t be any clearer to me and yet you keep claiming that Paul is saying that we “put on” our spiritual body “after we die” (that we have to be “unclothed” first) when Paul never said any such thing. He said WE HAVE that house not made with hands.

I certainly don’t think Paul wanted to stay dead, no. Do you?

Paul knew what the resurrection of the dead is. He knew that when he departed he would be with the Lord. That is why he wanted to depart. He wasn’t torn between staying in the flesh and sleeping in the dust; he wanted to depart and be with the Lord.

I think both the context and the genre allows us to view this “resurrection” in a non-literal sense, and that’s how I’ve always understood it. But the fact that Isaiah could use the imagery of bodily resurrection to speak of Israel’s deliverance as a nation suggests to me that a hope in this kind of resurrection was not foreign to the Jewish people (though it would be many years before “life and immortality” would be “brought to light” by Christ actually triumphing over death). In other words, while I don’t believe Isaiah was in this passage directly prophesying concerning the literal resurrection of the dead (as I think he does in Isaiah 25:6-8), I don’t think he would have used it as an image of hope and joy for the nation of Israel if the Jewish people had no belief in a literal resurrection for those who had physically died (Job 14:7-15; Psalm 16:9-11; Psalm 17:15; Isaiah 25:6-9; Hosea 13:14; cf. Heb 11:35).

How is Job 14:7-15 about physical death? Christ was not “left in hell”; he wasn’t left IN THIS WORLD anymore than his body was left IN HIS TOMB. How is Psa 17:15 talking about the physically dead when the preceding verses are talking about LIVING MEN? We are awaken our of sleep, out of the dust of the ground (from which we are formed); we are redeemed “from the power of the grave”… from “the body of this death” whose THROAT is AN OPEN SEPULCHER.

Anytime a people or nation is judged by God.

As seen in this realm (played out “in time”), I believe the Lord “came out of His place” to judge the nations when the Word/God was made flesh, as Christ said "I am come to send fire on the earth” and “now is the judgment of this world”. But I think that all of these things have been being fulfilled, spiritually, within the hearts of believers, even from the foundation of the world as “the dead” who have come to know THE POWER of His resurrection have passed from death unto life.

[atHisfeet]

Christine wrote (to Aaron37):
You accuse me of not knowing the importance of being born again or, perhaps, of not even believing that one needs not be born again and you are wrong, Aaron. I have said repeatedly that one must be born again. I also acknowledge that we are born again BY THE WILL OF GOD. Perhaps you should acknowledge that as well and stop taking credit for what you think you have done and give credit to Whom the credit (and glory) is due.

We may have a number of theological differences, Christine, but I just wanted you to know that I think we’re in complete agreement in regards to understanding God’s role in our salvation as being completely sovereign and “monergistic.”

AMEN!!

[atHisfeet]

Aaron37,

If you will give me a chance to answer your posts I will do so, just as I always have. There is no need for you to send me every one your posts by PM even once much less mutiple times because you haven’t gotten an answer from me yet. I’ve already told you once that you don’t need to keep sending me PMs of your posts, will you please stop and just give me the opportunity to get to them? I have a job; I work 10-12 hour days (not even counting the 2-21/2 hour commute). So just give me a chance to respond and I will. OK?

[atHisfeet]

Christine.

What do you mean we are born again by the will of God?

I gave you the verse, Aaron; I even quoted it for you. Did you read it? Do you not believe it?

1 John 1:12-13: But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

And what about Phl 2:13: For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

Or what about Rom 9:14-24 **What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? **

Do you understand the difference between the vessel unto honour and the vessel of wrath fitted to destruction? For they are of the SAME LUMP and they are both IN THE FATHER’S HOUSE.

2 Tim 2:12 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour.

You see us as either one or the other and cannot see that we are BOTH! As we are “by nature the children of wrath” (fitted to destruction). It is the vessels of wrath fitted to destrution that have to be “destroyed” in order for A NEW VESSEL (the vessel of mercy, unto honour) to be made.

Do you now see the difference between the child of God and the child of the devil? God is not the Father of both. One is a born again or made a spiritually alive spirit and the other is a fallen spiritually dead spirit that belongs to the family of the devil (he is the father of spiritual death). The child of God and the child of the devil are not one big family, Christine.

The children of the devil (the wicked one) are those who walk in the flesh, rather than the spirit, Aaron. They are those who mind the things of the flesh and the things of this world, who are subject to the lust thereof, those who are dead in sin. But that does not change the fact that Jesus Christ died for the sins of the whole world or that He is Lord BOTH OF THE LIVING AND THE DEAD, for ALL THINGS ARE HIS, created by, though and for HIM. And whether we live or whether we die we either live unto the Lord or we die unto the Lord, for we are HIS.

You have told me you understand that we need to be born again, but you have never explained to me what it is and why it is essential to salvation. Also, if you truly grasp the bibilical knowledge of being born again or made spirtually alive by faith and why it is essential to salvation…you cannot possibly hold on to the belief that believers and unbelievers go to the same place when they die. The very fact your considered a believer is because you are born again or made spiritually alive by faith in Jesus and the very fact your considered an unbeliever is because you have not accepted Jesus and remain spiritually dead. So, if the light comes on ( hopefully it does)…because most of us know that born again believers and un-born again unbelievers do not go to the same place when they die. Please show in the bible how un-born again unbelievers become born again believers after they die.

Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of the Father, Aaron. Believe it or not. Think that it is not a confession unto salvation but unto condemnation for all of those who died in the sins, if you want; but Jesus Christ was not a propitiation for your sins only, but for the sins OF THE WHOLE WORLD.

[Aaron37]

Christine.

John 1:12-13 teaches that we are born again not of blood( heritage) nor the will of the flesh or the will of man ( meaning pro-creation), but of God ( regeneration by the Holy Spirit). This verse teaches about the new birth and how it is obtained. This verse has nothing to do with the will of God sovereignly making people His children.

Phil 2:13 teaches God is always leading our born-again spirit, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, in the direction of His will. That’s what pleases Him. Yet, we have a say in what takes place in our lives. God puts it in but we have to work it out . (verse 12). It has nothing to do with God sovereignly performing anything.

Romans 9:14-24… Paul is drawing an illustration from an Old Testament passage of scripture from Jeremiah 18:3-6. In that passage, God sent Jeremiah to the potter’s house to learn a lesson. The potter was making a vessel and it was marred, so he remade it. The Lord spoke to Jeremiah and said, “O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? . . . Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.”

From this illustration, some people have drawn a wrong conclusion that the Lord creates some people evil and predestined to a life of damnation, not by their choice, but by God’s. However, a closer look at the passage in Jeremiah and its context will show that is not the case.

First of all, the potter started to create a good vessel but the clay was marred. Whose fault was that? It wasn’t the potter’s fault. The clay was faulty. So, the potter took this imperfect clay and, instead of discarding it, he refashioned it into another vessel that may not have been worth nearly as much as his original design, but was still useful.

Likewise, the Lord does not create certain individuals for destruction, However, some do become marred by their own choice, not due to any fault of the Creator. Instead of just removing them from the earth, the Lord will endure (v. 22) their atrocities. He may even put them in great positions of authority such as He did with Pharaoh, so that He may manifest His great power through His victory over them and their devices. God can still use someone who has rejected Him in the same way that a potter can take a marred piece of clay and find some use for it.

It can be clearly seen that the Lord does not do these things against the will of the individual by continuing to read the context of Jeremiah’s experience with the potter. In verses 7-10, the Lord says that when He purposes evil or good against a nation, if that nation repents, then God will change His plans for them. That undeniably states that our choice influences God’s choice.

Christine, Phil 2:10-11 teaches that the devil and all unbelievers will bow their knees and confess Jesus as Lord as an act of submission to His power, not confession from the heart that leads to salvation.

Christine, please answer the following questions:

1. What is the biblical knowledge of being born again or being made spiritually alive and why is it essential to our salvation?
2. If the righteous and unrighteous go to be with the Lord when they die, why does Peter in 2 Peter 2:4 and 2 Peter 3:9 talk about keeping demonic spirits and the unrighteous under punishment in Hades or Hell until of the day of judgement?

Sorry about the Pm’s… did not realize your work schedule, but in the future please refrain from rebuking me on the discussion board…do it with the PM. Thanks.

[Dondi]

Enjoyed that Dondi. Please allow me to share a thought for your consideration.

I believe everything material has Christ’'s Spirit sewn into it. He is in all things and they are sustained by His Spirit. The material/physical realm is the lowest level of the spiritual realm, that being the “natural” realm. God never annihilates but makes all things new and thus He raises/resurrects the natural into the higher realms of Himself. So I would think even our disordered/corrupted DNA has a spiritual component or better said a little of heaven sowed into it. Can you go there with me?

Color God green. He recycles and wastes nothing in His purpose.

Well, yeah, that’s what I tried to convey in this thread with the discussion of the Jewish concept of tzimtzum, the idea that the creation of the universe is a contraction of God.

I believe the concept is biblically sound, certainly I don’t see anything that would contradict it:

“Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:” - Isaiah 42:5

“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:” - Romans 1:20

*For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." - Colossians 1:16-17 *

“Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:” - Hebrews 1:3

Now I don’t know if I would go so far as to promote panthiesm, but from what I gather everything material is governed by His Spirit and Power. He is greater than His creation.

And even then, the particles that make up matter (protons, neutrons, and electrons) may not me made of anything at all, according to some scientists

I would be interested in reading something on that Dondi ?

A more accurate description would be that matter is made of vacuum fluctuations. This stems from the idea that tyhe universe is statically at zero-point energy (that is energy can be either positive or negative, but the sum value of the universe is zero at it’s ground state). Fluctuations in the vacuum is what creates an imbalance and thus matter can form out of that imbalance (either matter or antimatter, depending on the direction). It is also the reason that electrons don’t expend their energy and fly out of orbit in an atom’s normal state, for the zero-point energy keeps it at bay. (There have been studies and experiments that have attempted to tap into this zero-point energy to provide an unlimited source of power, but thus far unsuccessful).

Zero-point Energy

[atHisfeet]

Christine.

John 1:12-13 teaches that we are born again not of blood( heritage) nor the will of the flesh or the will of man ( meaning pro-creation), but of God ( regeneration by the Holy Spirit). This verse teaches about the new birth and how it is obtained. This verse has nothing to do with the will of God sovereignly making people His children.

So something not happening by the will of the flesh or the will of men, but of God doesn’t mean that it happens “by the will of God”? It really is by the will of man or the will of the flesh? Or how is a man’s “choice” not “the will of man”?

It seem to me that this verse is talking about how men are born again (which I agree is by the Holy Spirit) not by their own will or the will of the flesh but the will of God. Doesn’t it say that this happens NOT by the will of the flesh or the will of men, BUT OF GOD? If so, then how is that you are saying this doesn’t happen by the will OF GOD?

Phil 2:13 teaches God is always leading our born-again spirit, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, in the direction of His will. That’s what pleases Him. Yet, we have a say in what takes place in our lives. God puts it in but we have to work it out . (verse 12). It has nothing to do with God sovereignly performing anything.

You didn’t get to decide whether or not to “die” in Adam did you? So what makes you think you have the choice of whether or not to be “made alive” in Christ? And what does that have to do with our working out our own salvation? Did you save yourself, Aaron? What makes a believer you so much more special to God than an unbeliever? Their faith? Who is both the author and the finisher of their faith? Is it not Christ? So then by “whose” faith are we saved? Our faith or the faith of Christ?

Besides, don’t the scriptures say that the many who were made righteous by the disobedience OF ONE (Adam) are made righteous by the obedience OF ONE (Christ)? What role do you think that any of us played in either? Other than being found in both?

Romans 9:14-24… Paul is drawing an illustration from an Old Testament passage of scripture from Jeremiah 18:3-6. In that passage, God sent Jeremiah to the potter’s house to learn a lesson. The potter was making a vessel and it was marred, so he remade it. The Lord spoke to Jeremiah and said, “O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? . . . Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.”

From this illustration, some people have drawn a wrong conclusion that the Lord creates some people evil and predestined to a life of damnation, not by their choice, but by God’s. However, a closer look at the passage in Jeremiah and its context will show that is not the case.

First of all, the potter started to create a good vessel but the clay was marred. Whose fault was that? It wasn’t the potter’s fault. The clay was faulty. So, the potter took this imperfect clay and, instead of discarding it, he refashioned it into another vessel that may not have been worth nearly as much as his original design, but was still useful.

So it’s the clay’s fault the clay is marred? What part did the clay have in its own creation, Aaron? Why is it that the clay (man) cannot even reply against God and ask “Why have you made me thus?” Does the passage say “because it’s not the Potter’s fault”? Or does it say that the Potter is the one with the power over the clay to make whatever He wants with it; whether it is fine china or everyday dishes?

is it not God who formed Adam (man) out of the dust of the ground (natural man) before he ever placed Adam into the garden and breathed the breath of life into Him (making Him “a living soul”)?

I think you are missing the huge significance of this and what it reveals about HOW God is creating man in His image and after His likeness… and it comes not through “the first man” (Adam) but through “the second man” (Christ, whose body we are and in whose image we are being conformed).

Why do you believe that it was never “the first born” that God allowed to be blessed? Why do you believe that Ishmael was born first, before the seed of promise, though whom The Promised Seed would come? Why do think that God “love Jacob” (the second born) and “hated Esau” (the first born) before either had done anything good or evil?

Likewise, the Lord does not create certain individuals for destruction,

I never said he created “certain individuals for destruction”; that is not the point of the story. It is the same vessel that was marred (not a different one) that is re-created into a new vessel. Is this not what happens when we are born again and become “a new creation”?

However, some do become marred by their own choice, not due to any fault of the Creator. Instead of just removing them from the earth, the Lord will endure (v. 22) their atrocities. He may even put them in great positions of authority such as He did with Pharaoh, so that He may manifest His great power through His victory over them and their devices. God can still use someone who has rejected Him in the same way that a potter can take a marred piece of clay and find some use for it.

God is our creator; therefore God is responsible for that which he created. Why would you think otherwise? Why else do you think God provided us with a Saviour - even HIMSELF? Our “choices” are not without influence, Aaron. And the carnally minded CANNOT choose or even know the things of God. God has to give us a new mind and a new heart (make us a new creation) in order for that to even happen. That, dear friend, IS UP TO GOD; we are HIS WORKMANSHIP!! We are “by nature” the children of wrath, lost, dead in sin. The dead do not “know” anything; neither can they “do” anything. It takes God to raise the dead. We cannot raise ourselves. It is we who are “dead in sin" who God endures with much patience as He works in us to destroy the vessel of wrath fitted to destruction (the flesh, the carnal mind, the wicked heart, the poisonous tongues, etc) as He conforms us into the image of His Son, by which He exercises His grace and His mercy and to Him belongs all the glory.

It can be clearly seen that the Lord does not do these things against the will of the individual by continuing to read the context of Jeremiah’s experience with the potter. In verses 7-10, the Lord says that when He purposes evil or good against a nation, if that nation repents, then God will change His plans for them. That undeniably states that our choice influences God’s choice.

God is not subject to man, Aaron. God works all things according to the good pleasure of His own will and if God actually “changes His mind” then why in the world would he not “change His mind” about the penalty for sin if you that penalty is an eternity of torment - if it is not His desire to eternally torment the wicked, but his desire for all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth? Why makes you believe that God is not even capable of bringing all men to repentance?

Christine, Phil 2:10-11 teaches that the devil and all unbelievers will bow their knees and confess Jesus as Lord as an act of submission to His power, not confession from the heart that leads to salvation.

How would that be to the glory of the Father, Aaron? Bow at my feet before I send you to hell to be tormented for all eternity? Is that how you love your children?

It is the natural/carnal man that God is enduring with much patience as he waits for the sons of God to made manifest in them, so that they can be conformed into the image of His son. The “second man” is THE LORD FROM HEAVEN. We are called by His names, as we have been baptized by one spirit into one body. And just as we have born the image of the earthly (the first Adam/man) so shall we also bear the image of the heavenly (the last Adam/second man).

Christine, please answer the following questions:

1. What is the biblical knowledge of being born again or being made spiritually alive and why is it essential to our salvation?

Just as we have been born of the flesh (water) we have to be born of God (the spirit) in order to enter into the kingdom of God, Aaron. And just as we all have a Father of our flesh so do we also have a father of our spirit; as it is the spirit of God by which we are born again as His spirit bears witness to our spirit that we are the children of God.

2. If the righteous and unrighteous go to be with the Lord when they die, why does Peter in 2 Peter 2:4 and 2 Peter 3:9 talk about keeping demonic spirits and the unrighteous under punishment in Hades or Hell until of the day of judgement?

The angels who sinned who are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the day of judgment are the Jews, Aaron. And according to 2 Pet 3:9 is not God’s desire that any should perish but that all should come unto repentance. What makes you believe that God cannot accomplish that which God desires? Does God himself not say that he works all things according to the pleasure of His own will; that that which He has DECLARED so shall he DO? And did not Paul say that ALL ISRAEL shall be saved, that the casting away of the Jews (the angels which kept not their first estate) was THE SALVATION OF THE WORLD? So what shall the receiving of them be, Aaron, but life from the dead?

Sorry about the Pm’s… did not realize your work schedule, but in the future please refrain from rebuking me on the discussion board…do it with the PM. Thanks.

It wasn’t meant as a rebuke, just to let you know that I am going to get to your posts; I just need more time to do so, sometimes. (And I did tell you via PM first, but since you continued to send them I wasn’t sure you were getting or reading my PM’s so I said something here. Sorry, I meant no offense by it. I just don’t need to get the posts by PM, too, is all. )

[Aaron37]

Christine.

If the believer and unbeliever both go to be with the Lord when they die, Why did Jesus say, " Everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven. ( Matthew 10:32-33)

I’m going to wait to see your response to what the biblical knowldege of being born again or made spiritually alive and why it is essential to salvation because if you have the biblical recognition of what happens to you when you are born again and why it is essential to salvation you cannot possibly hold on to the belief that both believer and unbeliever go to be with the Lord when they die. I hope the light bulb comes on Christine. Look forward to your responses.

Btw, I was referring to 2 Peter 2:9. not 3:9.

[Aaron37]

Christine.

you said:

1. What is the biblical knowledge of being born again or being made spiritually alive and why is it essential to our salvation?

Just as we have been born of the flesh (water) we have to be born of God (the spirit) in order to enter into the kingdom of God, Aaron. And just as we all have a Father of our flesh so do we also have a father of our spirit; as it is the spirit of God by which we are born again as His spirit bears witness to our spirit that we are the children of God.

Aaron37: Sorry, let me be more specific. Explain to me what happens inside of you when you get born again. Explain to me why being born again is essential to salvation.

you said: The angels who sinned who are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the day of judgment are the Jews, Aaron.

Aaron37: Wow. I’m amazed. I have never come accross someone interpreting 2 Peter 2:4 as the Jews being the angels who sinned. Does anyone else support Christine’s interpretation of God calling the Jews “sinning angels” in 2 Peter 2:4?

[AUniversalist]

MY VIEW:

1. Jesus (flesh and blood body) died on the cross was buried in a tomb
2. Jesus (flesh and blood body) returned to dust.
3. Jesus rose in a new body (flesh and bone body), unrecognizable due to the nature of this body to the observer (they see spiritual things through fleshly understanding) by apophenia.
4. Jesus (flesh and bone) appears to those who knew them but each see what they want or expect to see (apophenia), body is spiritual (do a study on the word bone) but also physical (spiritual body doesn’t mean ethereal body).

[Aaron]

Craig wrote:
MY VIEW:

1. Jesus (flesh and blood body) died on the cross was buried in a tomb
2. Jesus (flesh and blood body) returned to dust.
3. Jesus rose in a new body (flesh and bone body), unrecognizable due to the nature of this body to the observer (they see spiritual things through fleshly understanding) by apophenia.
4. Jesus (flesh and bone) appears to those who knew them but each see what they want or expect to see (apophenia), body is spiritual (do a study on the word bone) but also physical (spiritual body doesn’t mean ethereal body).

Hi Craig,

I’m curious why you think Jesus’ body returned to dust. I mean, I think it could have, and Jesus still be raised on the third day with different matter than that which composed his corpse. But the fact that his tomb was empty indicates to me that God transformed his original body into his new body (and that, consequently, it didn’t “return to dust”). Your thoughts?

[atHisfeet]

Christine.

If the believer and unbeliever both go to be with the Lord when they die, Why did Jesus say, " Everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven. ( Matthew 10:32-33)

I’m going to wait to see your response to what the biblical knowldege of being born again or made spiritually alive and why it is essential to salvation because if you have the biblical recognition of what happens to you when you are born again and why it is essential to salvation you cannot possibly hold on to the belief that both believer and unbeliever go to be with the Lord when they die. I hope the light bulb comes on Christine. Look forward to your responses.

Btw, I was referring to 2 Peter 2:9. not 3:9.

Well you wrote 3:9. I wasn’t sure why, but I didn’t want to assume that it wasn’t what you meant to write.

As to your question, do we not have to pass from death unto life? If so, then why do you see a man as either one or the other when you say yourself that we are all born DEAD? So who, among “the dead” are confessing Jesus before men?

We have to be born both of the water and the spirit… of the flesh and of God. We bear the image of the first Adam (natural) FIRST, but we shall also bear the image of the Last Adam (spiritual). Have you ever taken a look at the first man vs the second man, the natural man vs the spiritual man, the outward man vs the inward man? The “second man” IS “the Lord from heaven”. We are HIS BODY, baptized by one spirit into ONE BODY. Just because some sleep, doesn’t mean that not all have been changed. In fact, Paul said that we shall not all sleep, but we shall ALL BE CHANGED. You see that as talking about believers only, but Paul speak of “the dead in Christ” and tells us not to be concerned for them for those who are “alive and remain” SHALL NOT PREVENT THEM WHO ARE ASLEEP. Why? Because “the dead in Christ shall rise first”. Why would believers be concerned for or be mourning other believers who have the same HOPE that they do, as if they have “no hope”?

Christ both died and rose and revived that He might be Lord both of THE LIVING and THE DEAD. Whether we live or we die we live or die unto the Lord for all are His. We have been gathered together IN HIM, baptized into HIS DEATH so that we can also know HIS LIFE (and THE POWER of HIS RESURRECTION).

Rom 6:3-11 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

We have to be baptized into His death (the second death - the first was our being found “in Adam”) before we can know the power of His resurrection and walk in the newness of life. One IS, the other SHALL BE. Just as we HAVE BORNE the image of the earthly (the first/natural man) SO SHALL WE ALSO bear the image of the heavenly (the second/last/spiritual man). And “the second man” IS THE LORD FROM HEAVEN.

[atHisfeet]

Christine.

you said:

1. What is the biblical knowledge of being born again or being made spiritually alive and why is it essential to our salvation?

Just as we have been born of the flesh (water) we have to be born of God (the spirit) in order to enter into the kingdom of God, Aaron. And just as we all have a Father of our flesh so do we also have a father of our spirit; as it is the spirit of God by which we are born again as His spirit bears witness to our spirit that we are the children of God.

Aaron37: Sorry, let me be more specific. Explain to me what happens inside of you when you get born again. Explain to me why being born again is essential to salvation.

you said: The angels who sinned who are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the day of judgment are the Jews, Aaron.

Aaron37: Wow. I’m amazed. I have never come accross someone interpreting 2 Peter 2:4 as the Jews being the angels who sinned. Does anyone else support Christine’s interpretation of God calling the Jews “sinning angels” in 2 Peter 2:4?

Is it so hard to believe that “the angels of God” (ie “messengers of God”) are MEN?

Paul said that he himself was “received as an angel of God, even as Christ himself”. And didn’t Jesus say “the reapers are the angels”? Who did Jesus send to reap, Aaron? Who are “the angels of the churches” (who are also “the stars in His right hand”) being addressed in the book of Revelation? Who is pouring out the wrath of God in the book of Revelation? And who did God say was given the honor “to execute” the judgment written?

[Aaron]

Christine wrote (in response to Aaron37):
Is it so hard to believe that “the angels of God” (ie “messengers of God”) are MEN?

Paul said that he himself was “received as an angel of God, even as Christ himself”. And didn’t Jesus say “the reapers are the angels”? Who did Jesus send to reap, Aaron? Who are “the angels of the churches” (who are also “the stars in His right hand”) being addressed in the book of Revelation? Who is pouring out the wrath of God in the book of Revelation? And who did God say was given the honor “to execute” the judgment written?

While I’m very much inclined to side with you in your discussion with Aaron(37), I don’t see why it’s necessary to believe that, because some “angels” are human, all “angels” should be understood as such. I think there is enough Biblical evidence to believe that 1) there is a distinct class of non-human entities that function as “angels” for God, and 2) Peter and Jude were alluding to an (uninspired) extra-biblical story involving such non-human, supernatural beings (though without any intention of sanctioning the story as historical fact). So simply demonstrating that some angels are human does not thereby demonstrate that all angels necessarily are (kinda like spiritual death vs. physical death ). Anyway, carry on. I’ll try to have a response posted in response to your last post to me by tomorrow afternoon (though I’ll try to keep it short, as I can sense that our discussion is quickly deteriorating into dead-horse beating ).

[Aaron37]

Aaron.

Its, OK, to refer to the " non- human, supernatural beings" in Jude and 2 Peter, as the “demonic spirits” they are. Lol.

[atHisfeet]

Christine wrote (in response to Aaron37):
Is it so hard to believe that “the angels of God” (ie “messengers of God”) are MEN?

Paul said that he himself was “received as an angel of God, even as Christ himself”. And didn’t Jesus say “the reapers are the angels”? Who did Jesus send to reap, Aaron? Who are “the angels of the churches” (who are also “the stars in His right hand”) being addressed in the book of Revelation? Who is pouring out the wrath of God in the book of Revelation? And who did God say was given the honor “to execute” the judgment written?

While I’m very much inclined to side with you in your discussion with Aaron(37), I don’t see why it’s necessary to believe that, because some “angels” are human, all “angels” should be understood as such. I think there is enough Biblical evidence to believe that 1) there is a distinct class of non-human entities that function as “angels” for God, and 2) Peter and Jude were alluding to an (uninspired) extra-biblical story involving such non-human, supernatural beings (though without any intention of sanctioning the story as historical fact). So simply demonstrating that some angels are human does not thereby demonstrate that all angels necessarily are (kinda like spiritual death vs. physical death ). Anyway, carry on. I’ll try to have a response posted in response to your last post to me by tomorrow afternoon (though I’ll try to keep it short, as I can sense that our discussion is quickly deteriorating into dead-horse beating ).

Aaron,

Just because I see physical death as a ‘type’ of spiritual death doesn’t mean that physical death doesn’t exist, though you keep trying to accuse me of taking an either/or stand. I just happen to see physical death is relation to the death of the body (which profits nothing and returns to dust) and not the death of the person as a whole (body, soul and spirit).

Neither have I ever claimed that all references to “angels” are references to men. I simply said that not all of them are references to spiritual being who are non-human. And last I checked “not all” doesn’t mean “none”.

That being said, I do still believe that the angels “which kept not their first estate but left their own habitation” are the Jews. Even Rev 18 speaks of Babylon the great falling and “is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird”.

[Aaron37]

Christine.

I believe “Babylon the Great” in the book of Revelation represents the “World System”, not Israel.

[AUniversalist]

Craig wrote:
MY VIEW:

1. Jesus (flesh and blood body) died on the cross was buried in a tomb
2. Jesus (flesh and blood body) returned to dust.
3. Jesus rose in a new body (flesh and bone body), unrecognizable due to the nature of this body to the observer (they see spiritual things through fleshly understanding) by apophenia.
4. Jesus (flesh and bone) appears to those who knew them but each see what they want or expect to see (apophenia), body is spiritual (do a study on the word bone) but also physical (spiritual body doesn’t mean ethereal body).

Hi Craig,

I’m curious why you think Jesus’ body returned to dust. I mean, I think it could have, and Jesus still be raised on the third day with different matter than that which composed his corpse. But the fact that his tomb was empty indicates to me that God transformed his original body into his new body (and that, consequently, it didn’t “return to dust”). Your thoughts?

There is no evidence of transformation of the original body, that is your assumption. There was a transformation, but of Jesus and not his body. He was raised in a spiritual body, not his dust body. If dust did not return to dust, then Jesus never died. Dust returned to dust where it came, Jesus rose up a spiritual body. His original body returned to dust, tell me when you look at a dirt floor of a cave, would you make note of it?

There was no clothing in the tomb for Jesus to dress in, in fact…

**John 20:7
**…as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus’ head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen.

Was Jesus running around naked? Someone was in the tomb and had cleaned it, even FOLDING the cloth and separating it from the linen.

Just because something is not mentioned outright, does not mean it was not there. Much of your understanding of the resurrection comes from assumption and guesses, so it has just as much clout as any other ‘theory’ including mine.

2 Corinthians 5:1
Now we know that if the earthly tent (body of flesh and blood) we live in is destroyed, we have a building (body of flesh and bone) from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands. Meanwhile we groan, longing to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, because when we are clothed, we will not be found naked. For while we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. Now it is God who has made us for this very purpose and has given us the Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.

Do you even believe that Jesus is alive and well and has been visiting people for a long time since, even to this day, allowing people to touch and see him in his spiritual body?

…edit: rephrased.

[Gabe]

But Craig, what of the empty tomb? You didn’t address that.

[AUniversalist]

But Craig, what of the empty tomb? You didn’t address that.

Yes I did. Dust returned to dust, and the cloth was cleaned and folded. Jesus walked out of that Tomb, but not in a transformed body, but in a new body. Dust on a dirt floor would not be noticed. What was noticed was 1. 3 angles in the tomb. 2. Cloth and linens separated and folded.