O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
Hi everybody, a new member with the same old questions here. I have been aware of preterism for a couple of years now and though I find much of it appealing I however have challenges with primarily 2 issues, one being the resurrection and the other being the end of the old covenant. These may even be the same question. Searching for discussions about these issues has led me here, Im sure it will be beneficial, so just bear with me guy.
How is 1 Cor 15:12-13 " Now if Christ is preached that he hath been raised from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither hath Christ been raised" to be understood
Thanks for the thought Patricia
I am happy that you believe 1 Cor 15:47 speaks to the constituent element of the physical body and you seem to agree that it is somewhat a summary or high point statement of the heart of resurrection. This means my questions are well placed.
The reference to John 8 was to dispel a subconscious assumption. We are always in danger of reading our positions into the Bible. The verse of John 8 shows that being from heaven or from below (which I suppose is equivalent to being earthy) need not speak to the physical body at all, thus when we read 1 Cor 15:47 we must not assume its about the constituent elements of the physical body. Thus my primary point was to open up other possibilities of what being earthy or heavenly may mean.
Now coming to the verse, when it says the first man was earthy, does the use of first not invoke the corporate headship of Adam and thus impose a covenantal context? This I believe is strengthened and proven by the use of the second man. Do you see the "second" being in relation to covenantal headship?
I can see how one would easily think of being earthy in relation to Adam's body from the creation narrative but wasnt Christ also born with the same natural body as we all? How then could He be said to be from heaven if its in relation to the physical body? Are we to say that Christ only became the second man at the resurrection? Further, while I can see God taking dust and forming man, it still takes power from "heaven" for dust to become a living creature. Why then wouldnt that constitute the body as heavenly yet God endowing this current body with immortality would be counted as making it heavenly?
I can see how one can think of Christ as being from heaven in the sense that He descended from heaven into Mary's womb but to say the change of His body in the tomb then made if "from heaven" just doesnt sound right. Or to say that the saints who are transformed while still on earth without having died suddenly are from heaven leaves me wondering how, since they aint never been to heaven :)
These are the thoughts Im struggling with, hop you can shed a bright light
Hi IT guy,
You asked if the use of the term "first" invoked the corporate headship of Adam and thus imposed a covenantal context. I hesitate to use the term "covenant" here, simply because it is such a loaded term on this site, and might carry shades of meaning that I do not intend to convey. Instead, I'll stick to a simpler term and just call Adam (the first man) the representative of all humanity that would descend from his seed. I realize there are those who believe there were other humans before Adam and Eve, which the scripture flatly denies in Genesis 2:5 - there was "not a man to till the ground" before Adam was created.
I find that ALL of scripture (not just Genesis) is saturated with the concept of representation. The whole idea of "headship" you mentioned is linked with the role of being the source, or the origin of a family, a tribe, a nation, or a people. As the "head", the source, and the generator of the entire human race, in his fallen state, Adam could only replicate others like himself in the same condition he was in - with bodies that were corruptible, and would return in death to the dust Adam was originally created from.
There is a question in Job 14:4 that expresses my thought more succinctly: "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one." A pretty blunt statement. If the representative (Adam) became unclean by reason of sin, then anything generated by that unclean source was also unclean from its conception. Like begets like after its kind - regardless of the species.
This concept of a single corrupted male representative polluting everyone who was generated after him needed a solution for Christ to bypass the ordinary male source of the seed. This is why scripture emphasizes that Christ would be called the "seed of the WOMAN" in Gen. 3:15, and who was also described as being "made of a woman" in Gal. 4:4, without utilizing the seed generated by a fallen male. This was the promise of the "new thing in the earth" in Jeremiah 31:22, when "a woman shall compass a man" in the virgin birth process which produced that "holy thing" called Jesus.
Jesus Christ had a "body prepared" for Him (Heb. 10:5) that had no representative human father to pass on the inherited uncleanness of the sin nature at conception. A fallen Adam, our own representative, was made of dust (the earthy part of I Cor. 15:47). Christ our high priest representative had a body that was originated by the power of the Highest in heaven (the heavenly part of I Cor. 15:47), with the virgin Mary providing the receptive human egg - but without the unclean human representative factor involved to pollute the process.
I strongly suspect that it actually wasn't even physically possible for Christ to die unless He voluntarily willed to give up His life. Remember, He said that no man could take His life from Him, but that He would lay it down of Himself. He had power to lay it down, and He had the power to take it up again (John 10:17-18). Only a man with a body that originated from heaven's source of deathless power could say this.
So, not only was Christ's glorified, resurrected body a "heavenly" one at that point (which I described above), but it was always from conception one that originated from heavenly components. The Second Man Christ was "made out of heaven" as the counterpart of the First Man Adam who was "made out of dust".
Your last comment, IT guy, about "transformed" saints who don't pass through the death process is a concept unknown to scripture. There is absolutely no teaching of a translation change scheduled for the living saints at any time in history. Enoch was the lone exception, and the only one that ever did or ever will experience a translation-type change for the human body without dying. There was a particular reason he was the sole example of this, but that's a subject for another post. As for all the rest of us, "...it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:" (Heb. 9:27).
You might want to read one of my posts debunking the myth of the translation-type change for the living believers that people assume is taught in the I Thess. 4:13-18 verses as well as the I Cor. 15:51-53 text. It's found at the following link written back in Nov. 2016:
IT guy, I feel as if I have walked all the way around your point without really addressing it, but hopefully something is there in the mix that speaks to the issue you are raising.
IT guy, I feel as if I have walked all the way around your point without really addressing it, but hopefully something is there in the mix that speaks to the issue you are raising
I give you another opportunity ROFL
You might want to read one of my posts debunking the myth of the translation
Having read your post, how do you see the final resurrection happening? Jesus comes, everyone died then gets resurrected?
So, not only was Christ's glorified, resurrected body a "heavenly" one at that point (which I described above), but it was always from conception one that originated from heavenly components.
Does that not take away from the incarnation? For if Christ was always different from us since His body was always heavenly was he ever really a son of Adam?
Does that not also take away from the very fact of looking at Christ resurrection and learning from it our own resurrection? If the Christ seed (i.e. "heavenly" physical body) is different from our seed (i.e. earthy physical body) how can the plant (glorified resurrected body) be the same?
Instead, I'll stick to a simpler term and just call Adam (the first man) the representative of all humanity that would descend from his seed
Please go on to explain how Jesus becomes the "second" man? i would suppose the same sense the first man had descendants should be the same sense in which the second man has descendants.
Hi again IT guy,
How do I see the final resurrection happening? Well, we know that no one gets through life without dying once, and that would also necessarily have to apply to those still alive on the planet when Jesus returns a third and final time. There's a couple ways that an end of human history could turn out. We know that scripture says that no one can look on God's face and live through the experience, so perhaps all it takes to kill everyone on the planet simultaneously is a view of God's glory in full manifestation. Directly following that, all those who ever were "in Christ" as God's adopted children would all be raised simultaneously in glorified resurrected body forms, with the wicked destined to perish.
Either that scenario could happen, or on the other hand, mankind might finally pull off what would amount to mutual nuclear destruction of each other in a cataclysm that eventually wipes out animal and human life on the planet. I am less inclined to believe this happening, simply because God presents a more hopeful aspect for the progress of the gospel in the world (i.e., the rock of Daniel's prophecy growing to fill the earth - and you can't fill the earth with the gospel without having people around to spread it to. Or the kingdom's "leaven" growth that eventually fills the loaf, or the mustard seed, which eventually excels all other herbs in size). In addition, God has promised to preserve the seasons, the cycles of day and night, and the harvests as found in Genesis 8:22, as long as the earth remains.
So, I'm more inclined to believe that God, (being the "consuming fire" of utter holiness that He is), by an exhibition of His glory on full display, could accomplish the simultaneous death of all human life, and a resurrection for the righteous dead to follow immediately after. I can think of a whole lot worse ways to die than to be killed by a view of God's holiness revealed in its fullness. What a way to go if you're one of His children! Especially if you get to see Him just afterward in a resurrected, glorified state.
Your next observation was to ask if Christ was ever really a son of Adam, if His body while on earth was originated from heaven. He has the title of "the Son of Man" (anthropou - meaning mankind or humanity in John 5:27) to show His human identity as one of us through Mary's body supplying the necessary human material. But God Himself through the agency of the Holy Spirit was the "head" or the source , or origin of Christ, as we are told in I Cor. 11:3.
We as believers become sons of God in a slightly different manner than Christ, in that we have become ADOPTED sons of God, with the spirit of that adoption residing in us, causing us to say Abba, Father (Rom. 8:15). But even if we have been adopted instead of being directly generated by God's power as Jesus was, He is "not ashamed to call us brethren." Heb. 2:11: "For both He that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all OF ONE:" (because "OF Him are we in Christ Jesus - I Cor. 1:30), "for which cause He is not ashamed to call them brethren."
Far from this "adoption" status making our resurrection different than Christ's, scripture tells us we inherit the same kind of glorified body in the resurrection. Because if we are God's children - even by means of adoption - we are still considered "heirs; heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with Him, that we may also be GLORIFIED TOGETHER" (Rom. 8:17). No difference in our glorified resurrection-type of body than Christ's.
You finished with a fairly accurate statement about how Christ has the title of the "Second Man". As you say, in the same sense Adam the "First Man" generated those that were copies of his fallen condition, in the same sense, Christ as the "Second Man" generates those who are copies of His likeness by imputing His own righteousness to them.
Thanks for the thoughts and interaction Patricia
Since it is not always necessary for people to agree but to at least understand each other, I will not keep pressing much further as I am now more convinced that being the second man from heaven has absolutely nothing to do with the physical body.
Are there any scriptures which speak of the mass death of humanity at the coming of Christ? Is there any hint that the coming of Christ spells death for the believer? Speculation is good, but we must always work with the outlook the Bible itself provides. I for one do not know a single verse which marks death for the at the coming of Christ or which speaks of global death at Christ coming either from the Old Testament or from the New. I would thus like to see some verses which provide such an outlook.
I cannot really follow what you mean in reference to Jesus' body. Initially I understood as if you said Jesus' body was always special thus different from our earthy bodies. Now you are saying it was Mary who supplied the building material for Jesus' body. So please clarify, did Jesus have a different body from ours? If being under the federal headship of Adam is in reference to the physical body, yet Jesus' physical body was heavenly rather than earthy, how can He be a son of Adam? I don't understand how you are working this out.
1) is being a son of Adam in reference to the physical body and its make up?
2) was Jesus a son of Adam?
3) was Jesus' physical body the same as descendants of Adam?
4) does being a son of Adam mean and necessitate having an earthy body?
Yes, no responses to these questions will help me better understand what you are saying.
You have said we shall have the same glorified body as Jesus, yet Jesus had a heavenly body yet we have earthy bodies. I know the scriptures say so but does it not bother you that you are having a mango seed (dead heavenly body) and a peach seed (dead earthy body) both producing the same plant (identical resurrected body)? It certainly bothers me :)
I got a bit lost in your use of being sons of God, adoption and resurrection. Are you saying being sons of God has to do with the make up of the physical body? My point was that if our being under Christ's headship is in reference to our standing before God (i.e. imputed righteousness) NOT the physical body, then surely our being under Adam's headship must be in terms of condemnation as well and NOT in terms of the physical body. And the coronary too, if we say our being under Adam is in reference to the physical body then our being under Christ must relate to the physical body as well but then Christ does not have biological children thus this option is impossible or we are not yet under His headship!
I think you are asking the wrong questions. You are trying to equate the heavenly and the earthy into one thing (the body of Christ). They are not equal.
What I mean is that Jesus' body was just that - a body, made of flesh, blood, and bone. That body, after its resurrection, no longer had any blood. Jesus said so. He said a spirit does not have flesh and bone as you see I have.
So, Jesus appeared after His resurrection as somebody whom you could touch and feel. He said that what you could touch and feel was NOT spirit. But it WAS something else different than what you and I are right now. It lacked blood, since Jesus had shed His blood on the cross.
The OT tells us that the "life is in the blood". This was an OT statement concerning animal sacrifices, and was deliberately stated by God so that OT people would understand that bloodshed had to happen so that God would "cover" or atone for people's sin. Jesus had to shed His blood to make a permanent atonement for our sins.
So, when He appeared to the disciples, He made a point of letting them know that His bloodless body of flesh and bone was NOT a spirit. It was something you could touch and feel, and wanted Thomas to demonstrate this fact.
So why then was Jesus able to transport Himself through walls and disappear in front of people, if His body was flesh and bone but not spirit?
The answer is that He was BOTH!
When Jesus came as a man, He called Himself the "son of man". He is described elsewhere by many names, but constantly referred to Himself as the Son of man. When He called Himself this, He meant that he was "just like a man", in the sense that He was born of a woman, just like we are, and felt the same things that humans feel in the flesh. He felt heat and cold. He was hungry. He had bodily functions, etc.
But, there was the Holy spirit which dominated all the actions of His body, such that His body was incapable of dominating and overruling His Holy Spirit, since what people heard come out of His mouth and saw Him do were actions that were direct reflections of God on earth. In other words, His body was in complete subjection to the will of God and none of the bodily urges we all commonly experience had dominance over His physical body. That is why Jesus never sinned, because the greater (God's Spirit) always dominated the lesser (the body)
However, at our birth, or even from conception, we aren't imbued with the Holy Spirit. We are subject to corruption because we aren't guided 100% by God from conception. From conception on, we are like a clock running down. Unless God winds us up from time to time, our innate desire to do good runs out and we "crash and burn" in sinful ways. Some sins are worse than others, but we ALL have that tendency to go for the lowest common denominator, and give in to the sin that is all around us. It is the fate of all flesh by nature, because we don't have the Holy Spirit, or should I say we are not God in the flesh.
Now, at conversion, we receive the Holy Spirit, and as we allow our human spirit to be dominated by the Holy Spirit, we conform more and more to the image of God. Our baptism puts us symbolically into the body of Christ, meaning we take on the characteristics of Jesus' body as He lived it on earth, and also puts us into the body of Christ that the world sees, the church universal. THis is also where we receive mutual support in the flesh and hearing of the Word to "keep us going" as we walk through this world.
So what then of our bodies? Must we also "shed our blood" and become flesh and bone as Christ did? I would say no, there is no need for this. What Jesus did after his crucifixion was a special thing specifically for being a witness about what He had accomplished. His disciples needed to be witnesses to this wonderful thing.
But the really miraculous thing about His resurrection was NOT the resurrection of the body. That had happened before both in the old testament, and in the new. Bodies had been reanimated before. But He was called the "firstborn of many brethren". If it was all about His physical body being reanimated, then He would not have been the firstborn, would he, since others had already been resurrected in the flesh before Him?
Therefore, the significance of Jesus' resurrection was not about His physical rising of His body from the tomb. Instead, His SPIRIT was raised out of the tomb. This is a vitally important truth. We are promised resurrection in His likeness. But if you are concerned about the physical body's resurrection, you have it all wrong. Jesus had the scars of the crucifixion to prove He was who He said He was - nothing more. Those scars were witnesses in that body so that the disciples would believe. They are not permanent scars that He carries around in heaven as some sort of burden. He is a spirit now just as He has always been.
And, since we are to be in His likeness, we too are to be resurrected just as He was.
Is it necessary for our bodies to appear to others to witness what we have done in our flesh? I hope not, because I don't want others to see my body in all its faults.
Some will say then that we shall have "glorified bodies" at a resurrection. What exactly does that mean? Does it mean we will have all the scars in our bodies we earned in life? Jesus' body did! Therefore, using strict logic, we too would have to be "just like Jesus" at our resurrection, meaning that if, for example, our arm was cut off in life, we will have to go through eternity with one arm missing! Jesus' scars weren't healed at His resurrection, so why should ours be? Are we better than Him? The bible says explicitly that we will be raised "in His image".
So, our resurrection is to eternal life.
And, if you believe that at baptism and conversion we are unconditionally granted immortality, then our "eternal life" starts the moment that happens! That means we are resurrected at conversion, plain and simple. We are brought from a state of death and dying to life and immortality. We do not have to wait until some future time when our bodily functions cease to be in God's kingdom. We are already there.
But, some have difficulty with this because they see a difference between the sins we continue to commit now in our flesh and what we expect to be "in heaven".
First of all, heaven is not actually a place. It means that wherever the Lord is, that is where heaven is. It means a perfect state of communion with Him. It means that no longer will the pulls of the flesh dominate us. Flesh will be a thing of the past after we die in the flesh.
But, have we not already died to self when we accepted Jesus as our Lord?Have we not, in our wills, accepted the free gift of salvation, now, in this flesh? Therefore, we are no longer in the flesh (1 Pet. 4:2 and Gal. 2:20), but in the Spirit. If we have therefore put on immortality, we are no longer flesh, we are spirits. Our spirits witness with His Spirit. This is the church of God in heavenly places.
This discussion about bodies is simple. We "have" bodies, but those bodies must be surrendered, both now (when we use them for God's glory on the earth in what we do), and later when we give them up because they are worn out or when God chooses to take us early. Either way, we are immortal now because we have been given an immortal (Holy) spirit at conversion. That is what resurrection is. It is not about the body, it is about the spirit!
Thanks for the thoughts Doug
Seems to me we have much in common and though I have reservations on one or two comments thanks hey.
There seems to be a lot of smoke and assuming in a lot of these posts in the last few days. God is a Spirit. He and Jesus (and the Holy Spirit) are One and the same, now. Jesus, at His ascension disappeared and was taken up into the clouds. Jesus is not now in some type of physical pliable form, sitting on a physical throne. God/Jesus/Holy Spirit is/are everywhere and omnipresent.
Never over look the Covenant aspect of the relationship between the Trinity and The Body/The Church/Israel. Jesus Christ is the Head of The Church, Jesus Christ IS Israel.
1 John 3:2
Jesus was Manifested for one reason. He became flesh and did the bidding of The Father and after that returned to His true state.
1 John 3:5
All will physically die at one point in time. After that physical death, your dirt body is just that, dirt. We have a Spiritual Body within this dirt body, and at some point we will be released from the body of flesh and be fully as Jesus (God the Father/ Holy Spirit) is.
Hi Brother Les,
I presume you follow the current Alan Bondar approach with the idea that Christ's resurrected body simply evaporated at His ascension. It is quite a different thing to say that Christ's body "disappeared" from view than to say it went out of existence. A disappearing Christ in the gospels could suddenly reappear at will. Quite a different matter than ceasing to exist. If Christ did not retain that resurrected body form at His ascension, then you, Brother Les, have absolutely no mediator in heaven that can be a "daysman" (like in Job 9:33) to put a hand on both God and man at the same time and represent you before the Father. We legally require a perfect human body form in heaven (who is also the divine God at the same time) to represent us as a deathless high priest.
I would question also your somewhat dismissive attitude to the soil under our feet. If God rated it "good" and "very good", then who am I to regard the dust with disdain? Especially since I believe the planet will not cease to exist at the end of human history as we know it, when the final resurrection occurs.
Jesus was NOT raised with a body marked with all His crucifixion wounds. If He had, He would not have been able to present Himself in heaven that next morning as a blemish-free sacrifice for us. Hebrews spells this out in definite terms when it says that He "offered Himself WITHOUT SPOT to God" (Heb. 9:14). No flaws, no imperfections - no scars.
Christ went to extreme lengths to preserve the purity of His risen physical body. That is why scripture makes a point of saying that He was buried in a tomb cut out of the rock (which was what the vessels were made of at the wedding of Cana - stone waterpots for the purification of the Jews).
Also, it had to be a new tomb that never man was laid in before Christ. A high priest could not touch the dead body of anyone, not even mother or father, or he would become ritually unclean and could not perform his duties as high priest. In the process of becoming our high priest, Jesus could not have had his flesh come in contact with any putrefaction from another corpse's body when he came out of the tomb, or his high priesthood would have been sullied.
As another restriction, a high priest could not tear his robes. Christ's garment of one piece was not torn or divided at the cross, but providentially had the soldiers cast lots for it, so that Christ as our high priest could keep his garment intact as required by law.
Also, a high priest could not drink either wine or strong drink before performing his duties. This is why Christ refused to drink the wine mingled with gall at the cross, in order to obey this restriction put upon his upcoming high priesthood.
The maximum limit of 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb was also critical. Decomposition sets in on the fourth day, as the case of Lazarus exhibited. Christ did not go over the 3-day-3-night time limit, because His body was not going to see corruption, as the prophecy foretold.
Also, Christ did not allow Mary to touch Him on the morning after His resurrection, because at that point, he had to present Himself in heaven as a spotless sacrifice without even the slightest touch of uncleanness from contact with unclean humanity. After that spotless sacrifice was offered and accepted by God, then God could look upon those of His children as vicariously righteous, and the touch of human hands with imputed righteousness could not defile the Savior from that point on. Which is why Christ DID allow the women to hold Him by the feet a short time afterward, after He had returned from heaven that same morning.
ALL of this has to do with the sense of physical purity as well as the sense of spiritual purity on resurrection morning. BOTH elements were and are included in the saints' resurrection prospects.
So, how is it possible for a blemish-free Christ on resurrection morning to all of a sudden have scars that same day in the evening, when He manifested Himself to the disciples? The answer to that is that Christ was able to assume different forms of appearance at His own discretion. This is evidenced by those who met Him on the road to Emmaus. As they walk and talk with Him, there is no registered shock expressed at viewing any gaping wounds that Calvary inflicted on Christ's body. They talk and engage in a normal conversation with one they presumed was an ordinary stranger traveling the road. The scripture says they failed to recognize Him because He showed Himself in "ANOTHER FORM" (hetera morphe - Mark 16:12).
If our resurrected bodies are supposed to resemble that of Christ's, then we too will have the option of assuming different forms at will. In other words, a paralytic who died in that condition is raised in a perfected condition, with the option of returning to a paralytic appearance if he so desires to assume that particular form. Those who have lost limbs, etc., will also be perfected, with the option of assuming their former earthly appearance if they so choose.
There is one thing absent in this discussion of the nature of the resurrected Christ, and that is the nature of the resurrected Matthew 27:52-53 saints that were raised along with Him. It is one thing to presume that Christ's raised body was a one-time unusual anomaly that would not be duplicated in our case, since we are not God. However, that presumption totally discounts the examples Christ additionally provided in raising the Matthew 27 saints from the grave in their glorified bodies. This is why I went to great lengths in your latest post, Doug, ("This Site Active?") to spell out what scripture indicates happened to these 144,000 resurrected Matthew 27 Firstfruits saints after Christ ascended to heaven. To echo your statement, Doug, in the case of the Matthew 27 resurrected saints, flesh was NOT a thing of the past after they died in the flesh, because they were raised in glorified bodies of flesh and bones like Christ, and appeared unto many.
So I would alter your last sentence, and say that resurrection is not JUST about the body, it is about the spirit too.
And why speak so disparagingly about the dust that God created, out of which our flesh was composed? Did not God call everything He made "good", and "very good"? Dust included. God has shown His intentions to make the "very good" even "better", by rendering it incorruptible in the resurrection.
I am not Doug... (if you are speaking to me)
and you are writing more INTO the Bible and pulling out that assumption to fit a paradigm that you want.
Jesus Christ is not 'coming back'.... because He is already here.
There is no fleshly body (without blood, your words, paraphrase) in the fullness of the Spiritual Realm.
I enjoy reading most of what you write... but sometimes you go off on some rabbit trial that is more of opinion than Scriptural.
I think that you are way off base on your opinion on the 144,000. These are of 12,000 from each tribe that is LISTED in Revelation. Thry are Resurrected from the Death, Salvation from the Death, Redeemed from the Death, at the end of the First Century.
1) I do not read Alan Bondar or know his view point, so not relevant.
2) My point on your rabbit trails (laying on of hands). you are dragging legalism into your paradigm. Funny and at the same time sad. Fulfilled is Fulfilled. Sins forgiven..... Judgment has happened... and then you wish to 'expand' that to legalism. No....