- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Mike,
Your unintentionally cherry picking the meanings of kind. Chances are that what you were taught and you haven't tested it. What I believe it's essential meaning is, is “a group united by common traits or interests”, Merriam-Webster's online.
v 39 is his first example of what he means and frankly he is talking about creature whose bodies are all composed of flesh but who have different physical forms. From there he talks about the difference in kinds of glory between celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies and then in v 41 about the different kind of glory various celestial objects have. As far as I can see none of his examples are speaking about what the body is composed of and the only mention of a bodies composition is flesh. It is self evident that none of the celestial bodies are flesh.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 19 2014,08:49) Quote (kerwin @ Mar. 18 2014,20:20) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 19 2014,07:28) Quote (kerwin @ Mar. 17 2014,00:38) As to the definition of the Koine Greek word meaning that the mortal body is composed of flesh that is absurd. None of the definitions say that though it has at least one definition in common with fleshly and so in that sense it is a synonym.
So the word most often translated as “natural” has “fleshy/fleshly” as a synonym , but it's “absurd” to think it has to do with flesh?
And your word “soulical” is “scriptural”, because it is in one ancient English translation? The word “hell” is also in ancient English translations, Kerwin. Is the word hell “scriptural”?
No matter, because we have moved beyond that “soulical” nonsense anyway. We are now dealing with verse 47.
Mike,If you think that is absurd then you probably do no realize that flesh is talking about the animalistic nature in Gal 5:16. In short both fleshly and soulical share the meaning “governed by mere human nature not by the Spirit of God” and are sometimes used to refer to that meaning in a spiritual context. In 1 Corinthians 15:44 it is a bodily context. Paul may even have purposely avoided using the word fleshly to avoid misunderstanding, though I have doubts he did.
Kerwin,YOU are the one who said it was “absurd” to think Paul was talking about “flesh”. And I pointed out to you that the word Paul used is a SYNONYM for “fleshy/fleshly”. So therefore it is NOT absurd to think Paul was talking about “flesh”.
Just because you chose “soulical” does not prohibit “flesh” from being, not only a perfectly sensible understanding, but the MOST sensible one.
Mike,I appear to have had a minor misunderstanding. Sorry,
I hope to answer this and number 2 when time allows.
Quote (kerwin @ Mar. 19 2014,09:15) Mike, v 39 is his first example of what he means and frankly he is talking about creature whose bodies are all composed of flesh but who have different physical forms. From there he talks about the difference in kinds of glory between celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies and then in v 41 about the different kind of glory various celestial objects have. As far as I can see none of his examples are speaking about what the body is composed of and the only mention of a bodies composition is flesh. It is self evident that none of the celestial bodies are flesh.
Yes Kerwin,He starts off by explaining that even those listening can see that there are different kinds of bodies. The bodies of the earth are made of flesh. (“Made of flesh” – not “led by flesh as opposed to led by spirit”.)
And even all of those flesh bodies are not made of the same kind of flesh. So even among “flesh-kind”, bodies are different from each other.
Then he steps it up a notch, and says, in essence, And just like all flesh bodies are not alike, flesh bodies IN GENERAL are also not like the bodies in heaven.
See? Flesh bodies are different from each other, and flesh bodies as a whole are different from the bodies of celestial things. Ie: celestial things are NOT made of flesh.
So if he starts off speaking about FLESH – the thing earthly bodies are MADE OF – why do you suppose he is NOT continuing to speak of the things various bodies are made of?
After all, the question was, “With what kind of BODY will the dead be raised”, right?
Good Kerwin,
You're half way there. You know this because Paul CONTRASTED the flesh bodies of the earthly against those celestial bodies, right?
40 There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another.
See? Big CONTRAST between the two, right? And what did Paul just get done telling us that those “earthly bodies” were made of? FLESH, right?
42 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead………
44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.
Again, he is CONTRASTING the two. And he is STILL talking about BODIES, and what they're made of – just like he was in the immediately preceding verses.
47 The first man is from the earth, made of dust; the second man is from heaven.
He is STILL talking about what bodies are made of, and CONTRASTING the earthly bodies of dust from the heavenly bodies of spirit. I keep forgetting……… what did Paul say those earthly bodies were made of? Oh, I remember: FLESH.
49 And just as we have borne the image of the earthly, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly.
And this is where Paul drives home the fact that our bodies will be DIFFERENT than they are right now. We right now bear the image of the earthly man. What is that “earthly man” made of again? Oh that's right: FLESH.
And the fact that our earthly FLESH bodies are once again being CONTRASTED against the heavenly bodies tells you that the heavenly bodies do NOT consist of flesh- like the earthly ones do.
50 I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God…….
And just in case you weren't quite sure up to this point, Paul just said it as directly as it can be said: Flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God.
The teaching is that we are right now FLESH. The bodies of the celestial and heavenly are NOT flesh. We HAVE borne the FLESH image of the earthly, and we WILL bear the NON-FLESH image of the heavenly.
It's all right there in front of you, Kerwin. What you do with it is up to you.
Mike,
I agree there is a contrast but the contrast is not the same contrast that was in v39. In 39 there are different types of flesh bodies but in v 40-41 it is the splendor of the body that is being contrasted. He even goes on to contrast the glory of one star to another.
The only place Paul mentions flesh bodies is verse 39 and then he states all flesh is not the same flesh. Note he does not say that all bodies are not the same bodies.
So far it is clear that there is no mention of body composed of spirit in Scripture not does 1 Corinthian 15:50 state only bodies composed of spirit can enter the kingdom of heaven.
Also not each and every event of a person being resurrected from the dead the person was always resurrected in a flesh body. Not only that but Paul specifically stated all flesh is not the same.
Hi MB,
The second man IS from heaven.
This is at the time the words were written when Jesus Christ was in heaven.Not WAS or ORIGINATED FROM.
Jesus Christ IS from heaven
We know for sure that satan and his angels are not flesh.
No one has ever seen satan nor his angels.
Jesus saw satan transforming into flesh.
Appearing as flesh,but he is spirit.Ephesians 6:12 For we wrestle
***not against flesh and blood***,
but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world,
***against *spiritual* wickedness in high places***This is proof that satan and his angels are not of flesh and blood.
Once doctrine has set in like concrete,a jackhammer is needed to break it. We use the spirit to break it,if the patient is willing.wakeup.
Wakeup,
You are jumping to conclusions as the only thing that is pronounced spiritual in that passage is wickedness.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 22 2014,12:49) Hi WU
You say
“Jesus saw satan transforming into flesh.”
Where is this written?
Nick.In the desert,when he was tempted.
wakeup.
Hi WU,
You mean in Lk4?
” 4 And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness,2 Being forty days tempted of the devil. And in those days he did eat nothing: and when they were ended, he afterward hungered.
3 And the devil said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread.
4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
5 And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.
6 And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.
7 If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine.
8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
9 And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence:
10 For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee:
11 And in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
12 And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
13 And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he departed from him for a season.”
No sign of a transformation there.
Quote (kerwin @ Mar. 21 2014,16:32) The only place Paul mentions flesh bodies is verse 39 and then he states all flesh is not the same flesh. Note he does not say that all bodies are not the same bodies.
Not to mention verse 38, where he says God gives a BODY to each “seed” as He chooses.Not to mention the very QUESTION Paul was answering, which had to do with the BODIES of the resurrected.
But you go on pretending that Paul wasn't contrasting the BODIES of those on earth from the BODIES of those in heaven.
Quote (kerwin @ Mar. 21 2014,16:32) So far it is clear that there is no mention of body composed of spirit in Scripture not does 1 Corinthian 15:50 state only bodies composed of spirit can enter the kingdom of heaven.
Oh it's there, Kerwin. You just refuse to see it. There is a “natural body” (synonym of “FLESHY”), and there is a “SPIRITUAL body” – (antonym of “FLESHY”).We have all borne the image of the earthy (FLESHY body), and we will bear the heavenly (SPIRITUAL body).
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 21 2014,17:14) Hi MB,
The second man IS from heaven.
This is at the time the words were written when Jesus Christ was in heaven.Not WAS or ORIGINATED FROM.
Jesus Christ IS from heaven
Nick, your point is flawed.The Greek words, translated literally, say:
the first man out of earth, made of dust, the second man, out of heaven
So the fact that the first man, Adam WAS (not “IS”) out of earth, leads to a translation of “the second man WAS out of heaven”.
But none of this matters anyway, since Jesus himself told us that he came down from heaven, and would ascend to where he was before.
Quote (Wakeup @ Mar. 21 2014,19:28) Ephesians 6:12 For we wrestle
***not against flesh and blood***,
but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world,
***against *spiritual* wickedness in high places***This is proof that satan and his angels are not of flesh and blood.
Way to go, Jackhammer Wakeup!You just killed Kerwin's “spiritual flesh” concept with one fell swoop!
Kerwin's comment concerning Ephesians 6:12 is of no regard, since it is clear that Paul was talking about our battle being against Satan and his demons, and NOT against FLESH AND BLOOD.
Kerwin can rail against that verse all he wants, but you have struck a fatal blow to his made-up doctrine, Wakeup.
Good job.
Mike,
Quote There is a “natural body” (synonym of “FLESHY”), and there is a “SPIRITUAL body” – (antonym of “FLESHY”). You do not even understand the words of the the lexicon which is not speaking of soulical and fleshly being synonyms when the earlier means composed of flesh as you want it to. Instead it is saying they are synonyms when they both mean bestial.
You are reaching by trying to give the definition composed of flesh to soulical when that is not one of its definitions. Instead humble yourself and admit that composed of flesh is not one of the definitions of it and that the same is true with natural when used instead.
Mike,
Nick commented on one point wakeup after the later put for his case in support with the words “No sign of a transformation there” and I agree with him.
The words “spiritual wickedness” are not evidence of of either angels or devils having spiritual bodies.
Now you are addressing the words “flesh and blood” which are known to an idiom for mortal. We use it for an idiom today to represent among other things the nature of the current human body. There is another human body that has only been addressed as flesh and bone in Scripture.
Note: Here is another individual that is using a similar argument to mine in this ebook Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Jehovah's Witnesses by Ron Rhodes
Quote (kerwin @ Mar. 22 2014,11:30) You are reaching by trying to give the definition composed of flesh to soulical when that is not one of its definitions. Instead humble yourself and admit that composed of flesh is not one of the definitions of it and that the same is true with natural when used instead.
The word Paul used, which is usually translated as “natural”, is a SYNONYM FOR “FLESHY”, Kerwin.Therefore, “If there is a FLESHY body, there is also a SPIRITUAL body.” Or, “We have borne the image of the FLESHY body, and we shall bear the image of the SPIRITUAL body.”
I am not reaching at all, since the entire teaching is to tell us that flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God, so therefore the FLESH body that dies will be raised as a SPIRITUAL body, like those of heaven have. “The body which dies is NOT the body that is raised.”
It is YOU who is reaching with words like “soulical” – which we can't even define because the word isn't even LISTED as a word in modern dictionaries.
Your idea is that Jesus' “body led by soul” died, and he was raised with a “body led by spirit” – as if he wasn't led by Spirit his entire life.
And you believe that the disciples clearly saw that new “body led by spirit”, yet John said he didn't know what he would be, because he HADN'T yet seen Jesus “as he is”.
And you believe the transfiguration of Jesus was of no importance, and for no reason whatsoever – because Jesus continues to exist in the same exact kind of flesh body we all have – except his body is led by spirit now, instead of being “soulical” – which means “led by soul”.
It is like you are going OUT OF YOUR WAY to believe the nonsensical instead of the sensible.
Quote (kerwin @ Mar. 22 2014,11:50) The words “spiritual wickedness” are not evidence of of either angels or devils having spiritual bodies. Now you are addressing the words “flesh and blood” which are known to an idiom for mortal.
The idiom “flesh and blood” is also used for HUMAN BEINGS, right?So if you can't see that Paul was saying our struggle is not against HUMAN BEINGS, but against SPIRIT BEINGS, then perhaps your own imagined “spiritual flesh doctrine” is getting in your way.
Ephesians
6:5 Slaves, obey your human masters (lit: “masters according to the flesh”) with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart as to Christ…….6:7 Obey with enthusiasm, as though serving the Lord and not human beings……. (“the Lord” is no longer “human being”, therefore the contrast)
6:11 Clothe yourselves with the full armor of God so that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil.
6:12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.
1. “Masters according to the flesh” refers to HUMAN masters – which are contrasted against our Lord Jesus, who is NOT a “human master”.
2. Verse 7 once again contrasts “the Lord” against “human beings”.
3. Verse 11 tells us our battle is against “the devil” – who is NOT a human being.
4. And that makes the “flesh and blood” idiom of verse 12 refer to HUMAN BEINGS – as opposed to the “SPIRITUAL forces of evil in the heavenly realms”.
Kerwin, the heavens are a SPIRITUAL realm. Spirit beings dwell there, not flesh beings.
So you can say “flesh and blood” is an idiom for “mortal”, but you also know it is an idiom for “human being”.
Now, which of those fits the context surrounding 6:12 better?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
