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

[Eloi]

Paul said:

1 Cor. 15:50 But I tell you this, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit God’s Kingdom, nor does corruption inherit incorruption.

Jesus is in God's kingdom right now. That region is described in this passage of the Bible:

Heb. 12:18 For you have not approached something that can be felt and that has been set aflame with fire, and a dark cloud and thick darkness and a storm, 19 and the blast of a trumpet and the voice speaking words, which on hearing, the people begged that nothing further should be spoken to them. 20 For they could not bear the command: “If even a beast touches the mountain, it must be stoned.” 21 Also, the display was so terrifying that Moses said: “I am afraid and trembling.” 22 But you have approached a Mount Zion and a city of the living God, heavenly Jerusalem, and myriads of angels 23 in general assembly, and the congregation of the firstborn who have been enrolled in the heavens, and God the Judge of all, and the spiritual lives of righteous ones who have been made perfect, 24 and Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and the sprinkled blood, which speaks in a better way than Abel’s blood.

It is a region where only spirit beings can live, not physical beings of flesh and bones. It is obvious, since beings of flesh and bones are directly connected with physical needs that can only be satisfied in the physical environment where we were placed when we were created. There are at least five passages in the Scriptures which teach us that Jesus is in a spirit body right now in heaven:

1 Tim. 3:16 Indeed, the sacred secret of this godly devotion is admittedly great: ‘He was made manifest in flesh, was declared righteous in spirit, appeared to angels, was preached about among nations, was believed upon in the world, was received up in glory.’

Heb. 9:14 how much more will the blood of the Christ, who through an everlasting spirit offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse our consciences from dead works so that we may render sacred service to the living God?

1 Cor. 15:44 It is sown a physical body; it is raised up a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual one. 45 So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living person.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 However, what is spiritual is not first. What is physical is first, and afterward what is spiritual. 47 The first man is from the earth and made of dust; the second man is from heaven. 48 Like the one made of dust, so too are those made of dust; and like the heavenly one, so too are those who are heavenly. 49 And just as we have borne the image of the one made of dust, we will bear also the image of the heavenly one.

2 Cor. 5:16 So from now on we know no man from a fleshly viewpoint. Even if we once knew Christ according to the flesh, we certainly no longer know him in that way.

1 Pet. 3:18 For Christ died once for all time for sins, a righteous person for unrighteous ones, in order to lead you to God. He was put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit ...

Why do theologians and religious leaders of Christendom continue to falsely teach their apprentices that Jesus lives in heaven with a body of flesh and bones? ... maybe a two meters tall body? Has his body gases inside? Does it need liquid like humans on earth to maintain his internal physical composition?

[historia]

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.

Christ's preexistence and virgin birth have also been the teaching of Christians from very early on. If that's not a good reason for Christians to believe those things, nothing is.

Blible does not say that Jesus new body is his fleshy body but transformed.

No, that's precisely what Paul says in 1 Cor. 15. If you don't think so, perhaps you can rescue myth-one's argument above against that interpretation, as she's clearly in need of some help.

Did Manoah believe that angels have a fleshy body (Judg. 13)?

I have no idea what Manoah believed.

On the other hand, I'm pretty sure Luke believed that the risen Christ wasn't a spirit, as he recounts Jesus saying precisely that!

"See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have."

Which is clearly more germane to our discussion, and also kind of inconvenient if you hold to the belief that Jesus became a spirit after his resurrection.

[myth-one.com]

Blible does not say that Jesus new body is his fleshy body but transformed.

No, that's precisely what Paul says in 1 Cor. 15. If you don't think so, perhaps you can rescue myth-one's argument above against that interpretation, as she's clearly in need of some help.

In I Corinthians 15, Paul compares the bodies which deceased Christians possessed before their death to the bodies that they will be resurrected with at the Second Coming of Christ.

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 dead Christian body that was buried, or sown, was sown a corruptible body.

The Christian body that will be resurrected, or raised, will be an incorruptible body.

<==================================>

The dead Christian body that was buried, or sown, was sown in dishonor.

The Christian body that will be resurrected, or raised, will be raised in glory .

<==================================>

The dead Christian body that was buried, or sown, was sown in weakness.

The Christian body that will be resurrected, or raised, will be raised in power.

<==================================>

The dead Christian body that was buried, or sown, was a natural body.

The Christian body that will be resurrected, or raised, will be a spiritual body.

<==================================>

In summary, the dead Christian body that was sown or buried upon their physical death was corruptible, dishonored, weak, and a natural body.

The Christian body that will be resurrected, or raised at the Second Coming, will be an incorruptible, glorified, powerful, spiritual body.

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

Deceased natural bodied human Christians will be sown or buried.

They will be resurrected with new spiritual bodies at the Second Coming.

This must be accomplished because natural bodies cannot inherit the spiritual Kingdom of God.

Thus we must be born again of the Spirit at the Second Coming as spirits in order to inherit the Kingdom of God.

It's very logical.

[historia]

In summary, the dead Christian body that was sown or buried upon their physical death was corruptible, dishonored, weak, and a natural body.

The Christian body that will be resurrected, or raised at the Second Coming, will be an incorruptible, glorified, powerful, spiritual body.

Yes, everyone here has read what Paul has written, which is why it is completely unnecessary for you to keep repeating this ad nauseam.

The problem with your interpretation is that you are erroneously assuming that the word "spiritual" means 'made out of spirit'. The Greek term that Paul uses here is pneumatikos, which simply cannot mean 'made out of spirit'.

Once you realize that, your interpretation collapses.

[myth-one.com]

In summary, the dead Christian body that was sown or buried upon their physical death was corruptible, dishonored, weak, and a natural body.

The Christian body that will be resurrected, or raised at the Second Coming, will be an incorruptible, glorified, powerful, spiritual body.

Yes, everyone here has read what Paul has written, which is why it is completely unnecessary for you to keep repeating this ad nauseam.

The problem with your interpretation is that you are erroneously assuming that the word "spiritual" means 'made out of spirit'. The Greek term that Paul uses here is pneumatikos, which simply cannot mean 'made out of spirit'.

Once you realize that, your interpretation collapses.

It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body.

According to the Bible(s), the natural bodies of deceased Christians will be sown or buried.

And the bodies which deceased Christians will have after their resurrection are spiritual bodies!

The English language word "spiritual" refers to the English language word "body"! It is a "spiritual body" as opposed to a "natural body" or a "spiritually ingrained" natural body.

That is not "my interpretation." It is what the Bibles confirm in writing!

For my "interpretation" to collapse, the Bible would have to collapse -- because I believe the Bible.

[Eloi]

[Replying to historia in post #5]
Oral tradition is not enough to accept as truth the things it tries to perpetuate. Where could those traditions have originated in the first place? If it was not from the apostles and verified in the Scriptures, they do not have enough sustenance.

2 Tim. 3:14 You, however, continue in the things that you learned and were persuaded to believe, knowing from whom you learned them 15 and that from infancy you have known the holy writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.

Scriptures shows that Jesus does not have a body of flesh in heaven ... In the time of Paul, "the days of [Jesus'] flesh" were past days.

Heb. 5:7 In the days of his flesh [Christ] offered up supplications and also petitions to the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear. 8 Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered; 9 and after he had been made perfect he became responsible for everlasting salvation to all those obeying him, 10 because he has been specifically called by God a high priest according to the manner of Mel·chizʹe·dek.

[historia]

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.

Christ's preexistence and virgin birth have also been the teaching of Christians from very early on. If that's not a good reason for Christians to believe those things, nothing is.

Oral tradition is not enough to accept as truth the things it tries to perpetuate.

I'm not talking about oral tradition, per se.

I'm referring to the early teachings of Christians, some of which, like Paul's letters, were passed along in writing rather than orally. The canonical gospels, too, are essentially oral traditions that have been written down.

Primitive Christian teachings and practices are also captured in early works that did not end-up in the New Testament, but are actually older than some of the latter books of the canon.

All of that together is what I mean by the "teaching of Christians from very early on."

[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.

Christ's preexistence and virgin birth have also been the teaching of Christians from very early on. If that's not a good reason for Christians to believe those things, nothing is.

Oral tradition is not enough to accept as truth the things it tries to perpetuate.

I'm not talking about oral tradition, per se.

I'm referring to the early teachings of Christians, some of which, like Paul's letters, were passed along in writing rather than orally. The canonical gospels, too, are essentially oral traditions that have been written down.

Primitive Christian teachings and practices are also captured in early works that did not end-up in the New Testament, but are actually older than some of the latter books of the canon.

All of that together is what I mean by the "teaching of Christians from very early on."

"that Jesus lives in heaven with a body of flesh and bones" (as you said) is not a Christian biblical teaching.

[historia]

"that Jesus lives in heaven with a body of flesh and bones" (as you said) is not a Christian biblical teaching.

If you think so, perhaps you can address the points I made earlier in the thread (see, e.g., post #30) about 1 Cor. 15 and Luke 24:39-40. Because simply restating your position, as you have here, is not an argument.

[historia]

Scriptures shows that Jesus does not have a body of flesh in heaven ... In the time of Paul, "the days of [Jesus'] flesh" were past days.

We really should begin our discussion on this topic with 1 Cor. 15 & Luke 24:39-40 as those are the key texts that explicitly address the nature of Christ's resurrected body.

But, in the meantime, let me just say a few things about this ancillary passage:

In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence.

"Days of his flesh" is clearly a reference back to an earlier passage in Hebrews:

Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil

The issue here is that the word "flesh" -- and particularly the idiom "flesh and blood" -- in the New Testament and other contemporary Jewish literature doesn't usually just mean 'muscles and tissue' in an (overly) literal way.

Instead, it's usually a metaphorical way of referring to frail, mortal humanity. When Jesus says to Peter "flesh and blood has not revealed this to you" (Matthew 16:17), he's not suggesting that muscles and blood vessels can somehow reveal things, he means no mortal human being has revealed this to Peter.

We see this metaphorical use of the word "flesh" in one of the other passages you cited in the OP, 2 Cor. 5:16:

From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer.

Obviously, this is not talking about Christ's flesh -- so, to that end, I'm not sure why you included it in the OP. Rather, it's referring to how "we" regard people. To regard someone "according to the flesh" is to regard them "in a purely human way" (so HCSB) or "from a worldly point of view" (so NIV).

Christians from the early Church to today agree that the days when Jesus was a frail mortal are over. They believe that the body he possesses now is not simply the weak, corruptible body revivified, but rather one that has been been transformed into a glorious, incorruptible (yet nevertheless still physical) body (see post #27).

[historia]

The problem with your interpretation is that you are erroneously assuming that the word "spiritual" means 'made out of spirit'. The Greek term that Paul uses here is pneumatikos, which simply cannot mean 'made out of spirit'.

. . .

The English language word "spiritual" refers to the English language word "body"!

Right, "spiritual" is an adjective describing the noun "body."

But, obviously, not all adjectives describe what something is made out of. If I tell you the Titanic was a steam ship, for example, am I saying it's a ship made out of steam? Or if I tell you about a wind turbine, am I describing a turbine made out of wind?

Clearly not! The adjectives in those two example are not describing what the thing is made of, but rather what powers it: A steam ship is a ship powered by steam, and a wind turbine is a turbine powered by the wind.

The same is true here of a "spiritual body."

The word "spiritual" in English has a wide range of meanings, including "of, relating to, consisting of, or affecting the spirit," so Merriam Webster.

But Paul didn't write in English, he wrote in koine Greek. The word he uses here is pneumatikos, which has a narrower range of meanings than the English word "spiritual." It simply cannot mean 'made out of spirit.'

That is not "my interpretation." It is what the Bibles confirm in writing!

Don't be silly, in order to understand what any writing means, you have to interpret it.

You have decided, for example, to interpret the word "spiritual" to mean 'made out of spirit,' but that is simply mistaken.