Fully predestinated, called, and justified???

[Michelle]

I, too, wish Mellontes would reply point by point to what look2jesus has posted.

And why is it that when an attempt is made to explain the resurrection as not being physical, the retort is similar to "So, this life is all there is" etc? No one is saying that. Certainly not me.

Ah, sorry to have leapt to that conclusion based on your stridency in denying the bodily resurrection.

The Bible does not say what our life after death will be like. But Christians already have this eternal life. I doubt we could possibly even understand the after life. Do you really believe there are literal streets of gold and literal physical mansions? If you do, then there will be no point trying to persuade otherwise.

Okay, so you're not sure what it will be like, you just know a body won't be included.

The whole point of the post was to show the difference in the present glorified body of Christ and how we are made members of it at salvation while living VERSUS the future view that we get this glorified body of some sort after death. Redemption is fully complete at salvation for present-day Christianity.

Mellontes, I got your point. I'm pretty sure everyone got your point. I just happen to believe there is no all-caps 'VERSUS' needed.

What else does Jesus Christ need to redeem you from?

Death

Was Jesus Christ in his physical body when he was raised from hell (realm of the dead) according to Acts 2:27 and Acts 2:31 or was Jesus Christ in His limp body in Joseph of Arithamaea's tomb?

Christ was raised from the dead in his physical body.

The death Christ suffered was separation from God (Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani - Matthew 27:46), the same death that Adam suffered in the garden - separation from God (out of covenant). We are brought back into covenant with God through the mediator Jesus Christ. It has nothing to do with physical death.

Yes it does; Christ died a physical death.

The pattern of the resurrection is clearly defined in Romans 6:5...

Romans 6:5 - For if we HAVE BEEN PLANTED [past tense] together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

If living saints have already been planted in the likeness of His death, it cannot be a physical resurrection, yet this is what people have come to believe. 30AD to 70AD was so different than it is now. They were waiting for their completed redemption at the parousia of Jesus Christ. We don't wait for that event anymore...

How would it have been possible for Hymanaeus and Philetus to have overthrown the faith of ANYONE if there was to be a PHYSICAL resurrection. They distinctly said the resurrection was PAST. Paul never challenged them on the NATURE of the resurrection because it is not physical. He did, however, challenge them on the TIMING, much the same way I have been trying for well over a year to do here.

So, how do you think Hymenaeus and Philetus overthrew the faith of some by mistiming the resurrection? What would have made people leave the faith if they were taught that the resurrection took place between 30AD and 70AD? It seems to me that the TIMING of the resurrection is what misrepresents the NATURE of the resurrection, much the same way you have been trying for well over a year to do here.

Anyway, consider the horse severly flogged...

No kidding.

[Mellontes]

I guess there is little point in responding individually to all of your posts.

You folks believe in a physically resurrected body after physical death, and there is nothing I can say further to get you to rethink that position. I once held to that position too. but the comments I receive are based on presuppositions. Now, I know you don't like that but you guys just assert things without proving them from Scripture. Where are the verses that say you are going to get a physically resurrected body?

I ask what else you need to be redeemed from and I get the answer "Death." It doesn't matter at all if my post already stated that we have been raised from death unto life and stated Scripture to prove my point. It just gets ignored.

And the way that Hymanaeus and Philetus words are twisted is amazing. Please tell me how anyone's faith could be overthrown if the resurrection was physical resurrection. Those two had said the resurrection was PAST (emphasis). Anyone who believed in a physical resurrection would just laugh at them and point to the graves. The same thing goes for the dispensation rapture. If the resurrection was truly past you can be dead sure that the rapture had already taken place too. I can hear the crowd just roaring in laughter by now...

Our resurrection is passing from death unto life as John 5:24 so clearly states. It happens while we are yet alive.

You say we are going to be physically resurected because Christ was physically resurrected. What verse do you use for this? I have already shown you from Scripture that Romans 6:5 expresses this as a different resurrection (not physical) but it just doesn't matter.

And for the ever popular phrase "in some sense this may be true," what does that mean. What is the other "sense" and where would this other sense be found in Scripture?

The main problem is that the pre-parousia saints were still looking for their redemption to be completed. We don't need to hope for this anymore because Christ has come. What is rejected out of hand is the nearness of the parousia event by every Gospel writer. This imminent 1st century timing must be rejected because of the view that there is a physical resurrection of believers. Show me the verses and I will go through every one of them. Please be sure to exegete them as well demonstrating why you think it refers to physical resurrection. Let's do one verse at a time because responding to large posts with many points is a difficult task especially when Scripture is to be brought in and explained - not just our assertions printed in text as was Michelles's post. I cannot deal with, nor will I intend to deal with assertions or opinions with no Scriptural reference...

[look2jesus]

Dear Mellontes,

...but the comments I receive are based on presuppositions. Now, I know you don't like that but you guys just assert things without proving them from Scripture.

I cannot deal with, nor will I intend to deal with assertions or opinions with no Scriptural reference...

If you think this characterizes my second post from Saturday, so be it...but I fail to see how it would do so. Also, I think you would be wise to address people who respond to your posts individually, because lumping us all together like you have is not very fair to those who have tried to respond respectfully to you, as was, and is, my intention to do. I still would appreciate a response. Thanks.

l2j

[Michelle]

Mellontes,

You don't need to respond to my post, I'd rather you answered look2jesus's post. (I agree, he's been much more respectful than I have been.)

[look2jesus]

To my fellow posters,

It wasn't my intention to pass judgment on any one else, one way or another. After I reread my post I noticed that it could have been taken that way. Sorry for any misunderstanding.

l2j

[Candlepower]

Mellontes wrote:

The death Christ suffered was separation from God (Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani - Matthew 27:46), the same death that Adam suffered in the garden - separation from God (out of covenant). We are brought back into covenant with God through the mediator Jesus Christ. It has nothing to do with physical death.

Candlepower asks: Do you believe Jesus literally, actually, physically, biologically died from being crucified? The way you state "The death..." seems to exclude any other application of the word, "death." I want to know if I'm understanding you correctly. Do you be believe Jesus' death involved separation from God solely, or also included human biological death?

[darinhouston]

I ask what else you need to be redeemed from and I get the answer "Death." It doesn't matter at all if my post already stated that we have been raised from death unto life and stated Scripture to prove my point. It just gets ignored.

I haven't followed this entire thread, but it strikes me that we still need to be redeemed from our corrupted natures, the corrupted creation (along with the corrupted aspects of our bodies) and from the presence and temptation of sin. All of this (except for the presence of the tempter) is a result of the Fall. Our redemption is in part just as we "see in part" as looking through a glass dimly. Yes, we have power over sin, but only to the extent we are living in the spirit. This can be improved, but not perfected until we and creation have been perfected in glorification where we exchange our corruptible bodies for those which are incorruptible. The tempter will also be destroyed (finally and utterly) and we will dwell fully with Christ and the Spirit.

[Mellontes]

Candlepower asks: Do you believe Jesus literally, actually, physically, biologically died from being crucified? The way you state "The death..." seems to exclude any other application of the word, "death." I want to know if I'm understanding you correctly. Do you be believe Jesus' death involved separation from God solely, or also included human biological death?

Yes, absolutely it included both. There can be no raising from the realm of the dead (Hades) if He had not physically died. As I have asked before, where was Jesus when he was raised from hell (hades)? Was He in hell or was He in still in His earthly physical body that was in Joseph of Arimathaeus' tomb.

Act 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell [hades], neither his flesh did see corruption.
Act 2:32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

Jesus physically died as the offering of the sacrificial lamb. God raised Jesus from the realm of the dead [hades].

I guess it all boils down as to who Jesus was. Is He only Jesus while in His physical, human form, or can He be Jesus while in the realm of the dead [hades] apart from His human form?

I guess it all boils down to whether we are only ourselves when we are in a bodily form or whether we can existin heaven without this physical shell. It would seem that we can exists without our physical shell, because the vast majority of believers believe that departed loved ones are in heaven now (as I do) but are to get their resurrected bodies at some time in the future...

And the reason Jesus was put bak into His human form AFTER the resurrection from Hades was to prove to the disciples (and many others later on) that He had truly risen from the realm of the dead. If Christ was not put back into the human shell (which remained uncorruptible), there is no way the disciples could have known that Christ had victory over THE DEATH, which is exactly why I quote Romans 6:5 - the likeness of His resurrection was the likeness of their ALREADY planted state.

Hope this has helped somewhat...

[Paidion]

Our resurrection is passing from death unto life as John 5:24 so clearly states. It happens while we are yet alive.

My guess is that you would agree with the second century gnostics who wrote: "The soulish people (sometimes translated "The animal people", that is, the people of the universal Christian church who emphasized the physical rather than the "spiritual") say, 'First comes death, and then the resurrection.' They have it backwards! We say,'First comes the resurrection, and then death'."

[Candlepower]

Mellontes wrote

And the reason Jesus was put bak into His human form AFTER the resurrection from Hades was to prove to the disciples (and many others later on) that He had truly risen from the realm of the dead. If Christ was not put back into the human shell (which remained uncorruptible), there is no way the disciples could have known that Christ had victory over THE DEATH

Those are assumptions that fit your perception, I suppose, but off-hand I can't remember any Scripture that requires me to accept them. Are you sure that was "the reason Jesus was put back" into His human form/shell? (Excuse me, but this sounds like a vaudeville show between acts) Are you sure there is no other way the disciples could have known He had been victorious over the grave? That sounds awfully absolute. I am a disciple of Jesus (unworthy). I have never seen Him bodily, but I believe He bodily resurrected from death, as do you. I suspect you've never seen Him either. Scripture and God's Spirit have proven His resurrection to me as surely as if I had seen His pierced hands myself. I suspect there were many Christians between the Resurrection and the Ascension who didn't get to see Jesus, and only heard of His resurrection. So, there is another way to know. "Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." (John 20:29 KJV). I believe Jesus' bodily resurrection was a display of His Deity, but I don't think display was it purpose.

Candlepower