Christendom inconsistent beliefs #4: Christ, flesh and bones in heaven?

[Eloi]

[myth-one.com]

When Paul talks about the "spiritual" person here, obviously he doesn't mean a person made out of spirit. He means a person oriented toward the Spirit of God, in contrast to the "natural" person, who is oriented towards his or her own human nature.

Paul writes that there are two type of bodies, natural and spiritual:

There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. (I Corinthians 15:44)

Each of these body types require a separate and unique type of birth:

That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. (John 3:6)

Likewise, when Paul talks of the "spiritual" body in 15:44, he is not talking about a body made out of spirit.

Yes, he absolutely is! He is talking about a spiritual body which was born of the Spirit:

It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

If pneumatikos here means made of out "spirit" (pneuma), then, in order to be consistent, we have to interpret the psychikos body as one made out of "soul" (psyche). But that makes no sense.

The natural body is born of flesh, and the spiritual body is born of the Spirit. They are separate and do not mix. The natural body comes first and may be followed by the spiritual body.

And like any "body" we should understand the latter as something physical.

All bodies are not physical. There are natural and spiritual bodies. Only the natural bodies are something physical!

According to Jesus Christ, spiritual bodies are spirit, and natural bodies are physical flesh.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. (John 3:6)

This is reinforced a few verses later (v. 53) when Paul says:

For this perishable body must put on imperishability, and this mortal body must put on immortality.

"Putting on" (endysasthai) here strongly suggests something added to the perishable, mortal body. Whereas the interpretation that others in this thread have advanced that Christ's body was dissolved and he was re-created as a spirit does not sound at all like what Paul is describing here.

Deceased physical bodies return to dust.

If imperishability and immortality are added to the mortal body, then that body would become perishable, imperishable, mortal, and immortal.

That makes no sense!

[historia]

All bodies are not physical. There are natural and spiritual bodies. Only the natural bodies are something physical!

I appreciate the fact that you believe that. But I'm only interested here in what Paul believed.

Paul writes that there are two type of bodies, natural and spiritual:

There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. (I Corinthians 15:44)

Each of these body types require a separate and unique type of birth:

That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. (John 3:6)

The wider context of this verse in John makes it clear that Jesus is talking about baptism, rather than bodies.

But, more importantly, Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:44 is not contrasting a "fleshly" (sarkinos) body with a spirit-ish body, but rather he is contrasting a soul-ish (psychikos) body with a spirit-ish body. The contrast for Paul in v. 44 is between soul and spirit, not flesh and spirit.

Likewise, when Paul talks of the "spiritual" body in 15:44, he is not talking about a body made out of spirit.

Yes, he absolutely is!

If you thinks so, I have two questions for you:

First, if pneumatikos ("spiritual") means 'made out of spirit,' does that mean the "spiritual person" in 1 Cor 2:13-15 is a person made out of spirit?

Second, if soma pneumatikos ("spiritual body") means a 'body made out of spirit' (pneuma), why doesn't the corresponding term soma psychikos mean a 'body made out of soul' (psyche)?

This is reinforced a few verses later (v. 53) when Paul says:

For this perishable body must put on imperishability, and this mortal body must put on immortality.

"Putting on" (endysasthai) here strongly suggests something added to the perishable, mortal body. Whereas the interpretation that others in this thread have advanced that Christ's body was dissolved and he was re-created as a spirit does not sound at all like what Paul is describing here.

Deceased physical bodies return to dust.

If imperishability and immortality are added to the mortal body, then that body would become perishable, imperishable, mortal, and immortal.

That makes no sense!

Huh? If imperishability and immortality are added to the mortal body, then the body would become imperishable and immortal. Just like, if I add a new, shiny coat of paint to my old, dull car, the car then becomes shiny, not somehow simultaneously dull and shiny.

Again, the important point here is that Paul thinks that imperishability and immortality are put on the current body. Your interpretation requires Paul to think the old body is discarded. That is clearly not what he is saying.

[myth-one.com]

Again, the important point here is that Paul thinks that imperishability and immortality are put on the current body. Your interpretation requires Paul to think the old body is discarded. That is clearly not what he is saying.

Paul describes what occurs to deceased Christian bodies in First Corinthians:

So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, The first man Adam was a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

The Christian body that is sown is a natural body.

At the resurrection, Christians are resurrected with spiritual bodies.

This is exactly what the above verses state!

There are two type of bodies -- natural and spiritual.

But natural bodies cannot inherit the spiritual Kingdom of God.

Thus man must be born again of the Spirit, as a spirit, to enter the spiritual Kingdom of God.

And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God;

The natural body comes first and is then followed by the spiritual body at the Second Coming for Christians:

Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

The natural bodies of nonbelievers will simply perish and return to dust, never to live again.

[historia]

[Replying to myth-one.com in post #33]

Again, you're simply telling us what you personally believe.

By not responding to any of my questions and not addressing any of my objections, you're not telling us why the rest of us should accept your interpretation of this passage. In other words, you're not debating, which is kind of the point of this forum.

[myth-one.com]

[Replying to myth-one.com in post #33]

Again, you're simply telling us what you personally believe.

Actually, I did not write the book of Corinthians nor any other book of the Bible.

I'm simply quoting what Paul wrote as inspired by God.

Yes, that is what I personally believe and that is what is confirmed by the scriptures.

============================================

It is sown a natural body.

It is raised a spiritual body.

Natural and spiritual are not equals.

Thus, they must be different bodies.

The natural body comes first and is followed by the spiritual body.

[historia]

I'm simply quoting what Paul wrote as inspired by God.

And your interpretation of what Paul wrote depends on certain assumptions you are reading into the text.

The problem here is that the rest of us can't judge whether your interpretation of the text is any better or any worse than other possible interpretations until you explain why your interpretation is better.

A good way to do that is to answer the questions I posed to you in post #32. If you're unwilling or unable to answer those questions, then simply repeating what Paul wrote doesn't advance the conversation in any way.

[myth-one.com]

When Paul talks about the "spiritual" person here, obviously he doesn't mean a person made out of spirit.

Why do you find that "obvious"?

He means a person oriented toward the Spirit of God, in contrast to the "natural" person, who is oriented towards his or her own human nature.

Paul writes that there are two type of bodies, natural and spiritual:

There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

Each of these body types require a separate and unique type of birth:

That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

The word "oriented" occurs in the Bible zero times.

Likewise, when Paul talks of the "spiritual" body in 15:44, he is not talking about a body made out of spirit.

It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

Paul is comparing the body Christians have before their death to the body they will have upon being resurrected to everlasting life.

It (the human body which is sown, or buried) is sown as a natural body. It (the body they will have upon their resurrection) is a spiritual body. Can it be any clearer?

If pneumatikos here means made of out "spirit" (pneuma), then, in order to be consistent, we have to interpret the psychikos body as one made out of "soul" (psyche). But that makes no sense.

The resurrected body is a spirit. The body which was sown was physical flesh and blood.

The natural body is born of flesh, and the spiritual body is born of the Spirit. They are separate and do not mix. The natural body comes first and may be followed by the spiritual body.

And like any "body" we should understand the latter as something physical.

It appears that you assume all living bodies to be physical. Is that correct?

The reward of the saved is everlasting life. No Human body can live forever.

According to Jesus Christ, spiritual bodies are spirit, and natural bodies are physical flesh.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

This is reinforced a few verses later (v. 53) when Paul says:

For this perishable body must put on imperishability, and this mortal body must put on immortality.

Yes, the one remaining difference between man and godly beings is mortality. Man is mortal and godly beings are immortal spirits.

"Putting on" (endysasthai) here strongly suggests something added to the perishable, mortal body. Whereas the interpretation that others in this thread have advanced that Christ's body was dissolved and he was re-created as a spirit does not sound at all like what Paul is describing here.

Deceased physical bodies return to dust, don't know that they dissolve. Whereas Spirits never die.

After mankind ate from the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil, they became closer to the angels.

They were ejected from the Gardin of Eden to prevent them from eating from the Tree of Life and gaining immortality.

The remainded of the Bible is about how mankind can gain everlasting life and become equal unto the angels.

[historia]

When Paul talks about the "spiritual" person here, obviously he doesn't mean a person made out of spirit.

Why do you find that "obvious"?

I would be more than happy -- delighted, even -- to answer this and the other questions you posed in post #37.

But it only seems fair that, if I'm going to answer your questions, you should first answer mine from post #32:

First, if pneumatikos ("spiritual") means 'made out of spirit,' does that mean the "spiritual person" in 1 Cor 2:13-15 is a person made out of spirit?

Second, if soma pneumatikos ("spiritual body") means a 'body made out of spirit' (pneuma), why doesn't the corresponding term soma psychikos mean a 'body made out of soul' (psyche)?

Can it be any clearer?

Your argument would be a lot clearer if you could explain why you think the word pneumatikos means "made out of spirit" instead of just assuming that it does, which is all you have done to date in the thread.

[myth-one.com]

When Paul talks about the "spiritual" person here, obviously he doesn't mean a person made out of spirit.

Why do you find that "obvious"?

I would be more than happy -- delighted, even -- to answer this and the other questions you posed in post #37.

But it only seems fair that, if I'm going to answer your questions, you should first answer mine from post #32:

First, if pneumatikos ("spiritual") means 'made out of spirit,' does that mean the "spiritual person" in 1 Cor 2:13-15 is a person made out of spirit?

Second, if soma pneumatikos ("spiritual body") means a 'body made out of spirit' (pneuma), why doesn't the corresponding term soma psychikos mean a 'body made out of soul' (psyche)?

Can it be any clearer?

Your argument would be a lot clearer if you could explain why you think the word pneumatikos means "made out of spirit" instead of just assuming that it does, which is all you have done to date in the thread.

I quote The Holy Bible to support my claims.

I cannot find the word "pneumatikos" in any Bible!

It looks like Greek to me.

[Eloi]

Why do theologians and religious leaders . . . teach . . . that Jesus lives in heaven with a body of flesh and bones?

Because this has been the teaching of Christians from very early on.

That is not reason enough to consider it as absolute truth and teach it as that.

As noted above, Christians believe that Christ's body has been transformed into a glorious body that possess new attributes that allow it to live in heaven, in a way that the natural human body on its own could not.

Blible does not say that Jesus new body is his fleshy body but transformed. His fleshy and weak human body died, and he got a new one. The body with which he appeared to his disciples was only a temporary body, to become visible, like angels did in old times ... Did Manoah believe that angels have a fleshy body (Judg. 13)?