- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Kerwin,
It doesn't matter WHAT “glory” refers to in that passage. What matters is that they wouldn't be able to see Jesus' REAL glory until they were in heaven with him.
And THAT tells us that no one on earth was able to see Jesus' REAL glory.
Also, the word “SEE” is a hint that this “glory” would be something eyes could BEHOLD. Jesus was talking about a PHYSICAL thing that could be SEEN.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,11:30) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 22 2014,23:19) Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,10:11) I am not sure where you get the idea from Scripture that Jesus' Transfiguring was a foreshadowing of the radiance that he would have. During that event Jesus was still in his mortal body.
Were Moses and Elijah also there in their mortal bodies? (Luke 9:30-31)Didn't Jesus appear to the disciples as glorious as Moses and Elijah appeared to be?
Kerwin, I want you to stop dodging the point here. I want you to explain WHY God would have shown Jesus to the disciples, glowing as bright as lightning and the sun, if the best he was ever going to be was a regular-looking human being like the rest of us.
Mike,I presenting the evidence and at times commenting on it at this point. The disciples opinion is that Jesus, Moses, and Elijah had bodies that required to be sheltered from the elements as they offered to build them shelter.
Peter seemed to put more stock into the words God spoke than into the events that proceeded it.
First, I already explained that Peter offered to make shelters because he was in shock, and didn't know what he was saying. I learned this fact from SCRIPTURE, Kerwin.Secondly, none of what you wrote ANSWERS the question.
What PURPOSE would it serve to show Jesus as a radiant, glorious, blinding being, if he was never going to be anything other than a regular looking flesh and bone human being like everyone else?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2014,01:32) Kerwin, It doesn't matter WHAT “glory” refers to in that passage. What matters is that they wouldn't be able to see Jesus' REAL glory until they were in heaven with him.
And THAT tells us that no one on earth was able to see Jesus' REAL glory.
Also, the word “SEE” is a hint that this “glory” would be something eyes could BEHOLD. Jesus was talking about a PHYSICAL thing that could be SEEN.
Mike,There is nothing in the verse, much less the chapter that says they would not see Jesus' risen body until they entered heaven. Scripture elsewhere states that people will see Jesus coming in the clouds.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,13:43) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2014,01:32) Kerwin, It doesn't matter WHAT “glory” refers to in that passage. What matters is that they wouldn't be able to see Jesus' REAL glory until they were in heaven with him.
And THAT tells us that no one on earth was able to see Jesus' REAL glory.
Also, the word “SEE” is a hint that this “glory” would be something eyes could BEHOLD. Jesus was talking about a PHYSICAL thing that could be SEEN.
Mike,There is nothing in the verse, much less the chapter that says they would not see Jesus' risen body until they entered heaven. Scripture elsewhere states that people will see Jesus coming in the clouds.
“My hope is for them to be WITH ME WHERE I AM, so they can see my glory.”If they could see his entire glory right there on earth, then WHY was Jesus wanting them to be with him WHERE HE WAS so they could see it?
Also, although Jesus will come again on the clouds with many angels and much glory, it doesn't mean that those who see him coming on the clouds will be seeing the ULTIMATE glory he has when he's in heaven with his God.
Get it? Different “shades” of glory. Jesus had glory while on earth. Jesus had more glory after he was resurrected. Jesus will have tons of glory when he comes on the clouds. But the glory he has in the presence of his God Jehovah in heaven could still be 10 times greater than all of those combined.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,13:45) Mike, How does a blind man “see”?
Don't divert, Kerwin. If you want to say that the English word “see” can also refer to “perceiving with one's mind”, then just say that.In the meantime, don't ask any questions until you've answered the one I keep asking and asking:
What PURPOSE would it serve to show Jesus as a radiant, glorious, blinding being, if he was never going to be anything other than a regular looking flesh and bone human being like everyone else?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2014,01:36) Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,11:30) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 22 2014,23:19) Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,10:11) I am not sure where you get the idea from Scripture that Jesus' Transfiguring was a foreshadowing of the radiance that he would have. During that event Jesus was still in his mortal body.
Were Moses and Elijah also there in their mortal bodies? (Luke 9:30-31)Didn't Jesus appear to the disciples as glorious as Moses and Elijah appeared to be?
Kerwin, I want you to stop dodging the point here. I want you to explain WHY God would have shown Jesus to the disciples, glowing as bright as lightning and the sun, if the best he was ever going to be was a regular-looking human being like the rest of us.
Mike,I presenting the evidence and at times commenting on it at this point. The disciples opinion is that Jesus, Moses, and Elijah had bodies that required to be sheltered from the elements as they offered to build them shelter.
Peter seemed to put more stock into the words God spoke than into the events that proceeded it.
First, I already explained that Peter offered to make shelters because he was in shock, and didn't know what he was saying. I learned this fact from SCRIPTURE, Kerwin.Secondly, none of what you wrote ANSWERS the question.
What PURPOSE would it serve to show Jesus as a radiant, glorious, blinding being, if he was never going to be anything other than a regular looking flesh and bone human being like everyone else?
Mike,Mark writes that Peter spoke without thought, automatically, because he was full of fear.
Peter already told you the purpose.
“but with our eyes we saw his majesty”
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 24 2014,00:30) Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,13:45) Mike, How does a blind man “see”?
Don't divert, Kerwin. If you want to say that the English word “see” can also refer to “perceiving with one's mind”, then just say that.In the meantime, don't ask any questions until you've answered the one I keep asking and asking:
What PURPOSE would it serve to show Jesus as a radiant, glorious, blinding being, if he was never going to be anything other than a regular looking flesh and bone human being like everyone else?
Mike,Jesus answered questions with questions so why can't I?
Okay. And in which of the verses we're discussing would you like to argue for a “more sensible” understanding of “perceive with the mind” instead of “see with the eyes”?
(Remember that just because it CAN mean “x”, doesn't mean “x” fits the context or the teaching the best.)
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 23 2014,12:46) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2014,01:36)
What PURPOSE would it serve to show Jesus as a radiant, glorious, blinding being, if he was never going to be anything other than a regular looking flesh and bone human being like everyone else?
Mike,Peter already told you the purpose.
“but with our eyes we saw his majesty”
So they were allowed to see a “majesty” that Jesus never actually possessed for real, because in reality, he's a regular old human being that looks just like the rest of us? Is that what you believe?Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 25 2014,08:24) Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 23 2014,12:46) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2014,01:36)
What PURPOSE would it serve to show Jesus as a radiant, glorious, blinding being, if he was never going to be anything other than a regular looking flesh and bone human being like everyone else?
Mike,Peter already told you the purpose.
“but with our eyes we saw his majesty”
So they were allowed to see a “majesty” that Jesus never actually possessed for real, because in reality, he's a regular old human being that looks just like the rest of us? Is that what you believe?
Mike,I am not sure majesty is the right English word as none of the definitions I saw quite fit the meaning that Peter seems to be putting into the word. The closest definition seemed to be found at the freedictionary site as grandeur or “The quality or condition of being grand” and it sums up the whole vision from the point of Jesus being transfigured, through his converse with Elijah and Mosses, and to the words being spoken about him from heaven.
President Obama has grandeur of a sort and still is a human being. Obama has power and glory but it does not make him other than a human being. In Jesus case it showed he was a human being that was granted majesty by God, even though he had not yet been made King of all things in heaven and on earth.
Mike,
John 17:24
Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and I am in you, and when they are there to perceive with their hearts my glory, the glory you gave me for the reason that you loved me before you created the world.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 27 2014,12:36) President Obama has grandeur of a sort and still is a human being.
President Obama never started glowing as bright as the sun.I believe that God was allowing those disciples a “sneak peek” at Jesus' future glory and condition.
You seem to believe that God made Jesus glow as bright as the sun for no purpose whatsoever.
Kerwin, WHY would God show those three disciples a “glowing version” of Jesus if Jesus was never going to actually BE a “glowing person”?
If Jesus was to remain a human being with a new body that looked just like his old human body, then why show a transfiguration at all?
You say it was to show the disciples Jesus' “grandeur”. But what was the point if Jesus is never to actually HAVE that “grandeur”?
Mike,
With modern lighting technology anyone can be made as bright as the sun. It is not done much as it causes over exposure. Obama is lighted to what the those in charge of lighting deem to be best.
I believe you think his surface was luminous and that is as good a guess as any from what little I know. A luminous surface would just be another miracle of the many he performed.
I do not know about a foreshadowing as God spoke in the present tense when he said “this is that my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased: hear him.” and Peter said Jesus' majesty was shown to them that day.
I like the idea of Jesus glowing in his changed body though I don't know if there is any support for it in Scripture.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 28 2014,12:39) I like the idea of Jesus glowing in his changed body though I don't know if there is any support for it in Scripture.
Well, he must have been glowing pretty brightly to blind Paul.The point still remains that there was no reason whatsoever to show Jesus to the disciples in that majestic state if nothing was ever to come of it.
Why show him that way if he was never going to BE that way?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 01 2014,06:45) Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 28 2014,12:39) I like the idea of Jesus glowing in his changed body though I don't know if there is any support for it in Scripture.
Well, he must have been glowing pretty brightly to blind Paul.The point still remains that there was no reason whatsoever to show Jesus to the disciples in that majestic state if nothing was ever to come of it.
Why show him that way if he was never going to BE that way?
Mike,I am not sure the light was emitted by Jesus as it sounds like a spot light in Acts 22:6.
Acts 22:6
1599 Geneva Bible (GNV)6 ¶ And so it was, as I journeyed, and was come near unto Damascus about noon, that suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me.
Paul's companions saw it as well but were not blinded.
Acts 22:9
1599 Geneva Bible (GNV)9 Moreover they that were with me, saw indeed a light and were afraid: but they heard not the voice of him that spake unto me.
The light was bright enough to flash blind him.
Psalm 56
56:4 ….. in God I trust, I am not afraid. What can mere men do to me?56:11 ……in God I trust, I am not afraid. What can mere men do to me?
In this psalm, David repeats the same basic phrase twice. But in verse 4, the Hebrew word translated as “men” is “flesh”. And in verse 11, the Hebrew word is “man”.
As if often the case in scripture, the word “flesh” is idiomatic for “human being”. And “flesh” cannot enter, see, or inherit the kingdom of heaven.
So far in this thread, I have shown you that Jesus says we must be born again of something other than flesh to see or enter the kingdom of God.
I have shown you that Paul says that flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven.
I have shown you that the first Adam became a living being, while the last Adam became a spirit.
I have shown you where Jesus asks God for his disciples to be with him where he is in heaven, so that they can see him in his real glory.
I have shown you where John says that he doesn't yet know what he will be, because he hasn't yet seen Jesus “as he is”.
And I have tried to show you that it would make no sense for God to show Jesus to the three disciples in a glorious, illuminated way, if Jesus was never going to exist in that glorious illuminated way.
I have pointed out that seeing Jesus on the road to Damascus caused Paul to be blinded – which is likely due to the brilliance of the being Jesus has become.
You have chosen not to accept any of these things, Kerwin. And the worst thing is that your entire concept starts off with you believing that God's spirit sons consist of flesh, and that Jesus is just another one of these flesh beings dwelling in the spirit realm of heaven.
I don't know what else to say, and I have grown tired of fielding your illogical alternatives to what these scriptures teach.
You have proven yourself to be the master of letting your own personal wishes blind you to the most logical and sensible meaning of many scriptures, opting instead for a completely nonsensical alternate meaning.
You have an “answer” for everything, but those “answers” are lame, illogical, and weak.
I will take a note out of tigger's book, and consider this discussion to have been an exercise in futility, since there is apparently nothing that will overcome your willful ignorance.
In other words, I give up. I quit.
This thread is now open to all.
Mike,
You claim you have done much that you have not done.
You quote Psalms 56 the make assumptions about what it means. The Psalmist is speaking about wicked men or I assume he is as angels are also among his enemies. It was certainly a time when David acted out of fear of human beings, King Saul and King Achish.
Psalms 56:56 states the men(flesh) seek the soul of the Psalmist but Jesus states fear not men that can kill the flesh but not the soul. Further more this Psalmist also states in verse 13 that God delivers his soul from death and his feet from falling that he may walk before God in the light of the living. That would be eternal life unless you agree with the Sadducee interpretation.
In sort these are humans that are serving the powers of this dark world in a spiritual war and not a physical war. They are carnal men seeking to cause others to fall to the temptations of the flesh.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
