- This topic is empty.
- Posts
tigger,
The key word in your sentence is Trinitarian. From the use of morph’s that there is some deception used with their statement though it probably come from the lack of knowledge of those that interpret the experts words. Some Trinitarians interpret it to the word nature in Philippians 2:5-7 which is not literally “form in the sense of outward appearance.”
This may shed light on the situation as Google Dictionary claims that one meaning of the word form is “the visible shape or configuration of something.” I assume you understand how form is used in English.
The word sóma means body and would be a better use if Paul meant body.
Even Jehovah’s Witnesses to not see it as meaning body. Instead they see it as meaning consistency of the body or the same kind as God.
Tigger,
You do realize the Trinitarians probably believe God has the same bodily form as human beings. They are arguing with their brother Trinitarians; who instead believe Jesus is the essence as God.
Unless you branch off from the JW’s teaching you will be a member of the later group not the earlier. The idea that morph means bodily form does not go with the idea “form of a servant” means “form of human”.
You do present evidence it is debated among Trinitarians.
Nick,
It is not written that flesh and blood is not imperishable. Instead it is written that God found his creation very good. It is also written that Adam was flesh and bone in the Garden and death came into the world through his sin. Do you believe death was in world before he sinned?
Guys,
‘The Form of God’ has nothing to do with any kind of physical attribute.
The form of God is nothing to do with God being Spirit… (Indeed, at the very least a desperate interpretation could only be ‘spirit’: ‘God is Spirit’.)
We are not desperate trinitarians so common sense tells us that ‘The form of God’ is ‘Having the spirit (small ‘s’) and nature of God – being pure, holy, sinless, able to I dwell the Holy Spirit.’
Phil 2 tells the apostles to ‘Have this in them as Christ Jesus had it in him’. So those who mistakenly, deliberately or innocently (by mis-teachings) imagine that ‘the form of God’ absolutely means Jesus WAS God must be hard pressed to explain how Jesus (by Scriptures) teaches the hope that all mankind could become as he is… (God?).
Of course, no trinitarian ever responds to such detailed analysis of their fallacious ideology – oh, sorry, yes, they will say that it is Jesus ‘the man – not the God’ that they are referring to… Makes sense?
What then…. Is Jesus Christ schizophrenic?
And then again, how do they explain Jesus ’emptying himself’ and then being ‘filled’ again – yet was ALWAYS 100% God (I see they attempt to change the word ’emptied’ to now mean ‘veiled’ and when that didn’t work they again changed it to ‘Chose not to exercise some of his divine privileges’.)
So, and even, if Jesus was ‘in the form of God’ means he was ‘God’ (oh boy!!!) Does anyone say that:
- ‘The Holy Spirit (trinity) was in the form of God’?
- ‘The Father was in the form of God’?
Please add this also:
What is the trinity definition of ‘God’? (Father, son and Holy Spirit) – AND/OR ‘Essence and nature of God’ – so…For Jesus to be in the trinity form of God he would have to be:
- All THREE trinity persons (think about it!!)
- ‘God’ would be something ELSE that the three partake of… Some other thing that IS that essence meaning Jesus was IN that other form of thing (Essence and nature)
Can everyone see why trinitarians have to be creative in their response to the interpretation of Phil 2 – despite the obvious clear meaning!!?
Ckear meaning: ‘Jesus, a man sanctified by God’ (who is God… Remember that Trinity God INCLUDES Jesus himself…did he sanctify himself… And certainly it is the Father who sanctified Jesus – so did the Holy Spirit – trinity God also – have any part to play… The apostles don’t say so!!)
Hi KW,
Flesh is of the soil of earth and earth is to be burned.
Death entered through sin and sin and death still rule over flesh.
Paul could not wait to be freed from his tent because it had no future. Rom 7
As Peter said salvation is for the soul.
Nick,
There is a new earth and a old earth and the only difference is one is freed from bondage to corruption. Paradise is in the third heaven and the tree of Life is still in its center. Only humanity was cast out so the flora and fauna, except possibly the serpent, still remain. You also know that flesh and blood can enter the current heavens so the fact Eden is in the third should not surprise you.
In short flesh that is freed from corruption is incorruptible and you already know God promised he would free his creation.
Hi KW,
Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom.1cor 15
Are you saying the flesh of Adam was not of the dust of earth?
Remember man that thou art dust and unto dust thou shalt return.
Nick,
That is not what the ISV states.
1 Corinthians 15:50International Standard Version (ISV)
50 Brothers, this is what I mean: Mortal bodies[a] cannot inherit the kingdom of God, and what decays cannot inherit what does not decay.
Footnotes:1 Corinthians 15:50 Lit. mean: Flesh and blood
I assume you are not making the ignorant mistake of insisting be literal because you say it must be literal. Others do that with passages that litterally stated Jesus is the Savior before he died on the cross.
Let us see how that argument works out with another passage of scripture.
Matthew 24:22International Standard Version (ISV)
22 If those days hadn’t been shortened, no one[a] would survive. But for the sake of the elect, those days will be shortened.
Footnotes:Matthew 24:22 Lit. flesh
According to your argument flesh would be saved not destroyed even for creating a non-flesh body. Then the littoralist would refuse to believe any other interpretation such as the one translators use.
Would that littoralist be wise or foolish?
Nick,
Revelation 2:7Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.
2 Corinthians 12:3-4Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) 4 how that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.
This certainly sounds like it is in the third heaven now though once it was on earth.
Nick,
Remember man that thou art dust and unto dust thou shalt return.
Scripture declares that Eve was made flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone but God did not curse till after he ate of the tree of fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. That is when creation was bound to frustration.
Nick,
No, you really do need to either 1) figure out the actual definitions of speculation or 2) stop acting like this is a political arena where a lie is more popular than the truth.
Instead it is deductive reasoning based on the assumption that Paradise mentioned in Revelation 2:7 is the same as the Paradise mentioned in 2 Corinthians 12. It is also known to have been taught by Jews; of which Paul is one.
In addition I am aware of no evidence against it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
