Did Christ preach to the dead while dead?

[Chris]

So, I'm not sure what you are saying--that we are resurrected first in spirit, then in soul, then in body?  And, that once the resurrection 'process' starts, it will continue until it is complete?  Or that there is no life after physical death?  I just can't tell exactly what you are saying...

Well, I am certainly not saying that we cease to exist upon physical death. What Christian denomination teaches that there is no life after physical death?

What I am saying is that, according to scripture, it is THE SPIRIT that is quickened, while the flesh profits nothing.

The context, when Jesus said this, is worth noting. Jesus said:

John 6:56
He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

This puzzled the disciples:

John 6:60
Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?

Then Jesus said:

John 6:63
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

The saying of Jesus was obviously a deep one, that requires interpretation, which is partly given in the last verse quoted. He was talking about spiritual things. "Eating his flesh" meant understanding his words. Some of them, we need to "chew" on a little. 

So what does it mean to you that it is THE SPIRIT that quickeneth while the flesh profits nothing?

Paul said that he turned such as one over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that HIS SPIRIT might be saved in the day of the Lord. He even tells us that if this earthly tabernacle (flesh and bones) were dissolved that we would see that WE HAVE an house of God, not made with hands (our heavenly/celestial body). We are told that we do not desire to be UN-clothed, but CLOTHED UPON; that it is THIS MORTAL that must PUT ON immortality.

I don't see that as talking about corpses, but living beings - mortals.

It's not about taking something off... it's about putting something on. And I don't believe that I need to die physically to be resurrected from the dead or to be clothed with my heavenly body. There is a dividing between the flesh and the spirit and the flesh profits nothing. And the reason that believers "never die" is not because they do not die physically, right? It is because they have already been resurrected from the dead (after a spiritual truth) and are children of the resurrection. They have already passed from death unto life (which has nothing to do with the fact that this body of flesh that we all live in will one day die).

If it were true that all the saints who lived before, had received their rewards already, some would have lived for many centuries, presumably in heaven, and in all that time, they would have learned much, having been given greatly superior immortal bodies and intellects, not having to take any time to sleep, etc., so it is hard to see why they would not have become much more learned than us, when we finally receive our rewards.

Being so much more qualified, would they not be much better suited for the best positions in the Kingdom, like ruling cities and nations, (or galaxies, or whatever) when Christ assigns those rewards? We, OTOH, would be fit for only the inferior positions.   

What "positions" are you talking about? What "cities and nations" are you desiring to rule over? Are you looking for a physical kingdom?

   
But Jesus indicated it won't be like that at all!

Matthew 19:29-30
And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

Are you waiting to die physically to enter into the kingdom of God and to inherit eternal life?

But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.[/size][/color]

Some of those who were first, which would include many of the early saints, will be last, he said, while some who are last, (perhaps some living in our age) will be first. That does not fit the scenario above, that says saints who lived and died centuries ago have been made immortal already, implying some have enjoyed immortality for many centuries.

The statement of Jesus, "many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first" does fit the view that all the saints and prophets wait in their graves till the resurrection, at the last trump, which is yet to occur. It is after the first 6 trumpets have been blown. It is at the 7th trumpet that God rewards his servants:

Revelation 11:18
And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

And the author of Hebrews also confirms that those who lived before must wait for their rewards, till we are ready to join them: "they without us should not be made perfect." [Hebrews 11:40]

Doug

As I see it, those who were "first" were the Jews - God's chosen people, according to the flesh, but who (by in large) did not enter into "the promised land" (the kingdom of God) because of unbelief.

Those who were "last" are the Gentiles, who received mercy because of the unbelief of those who were "first" chosen.... but who would ultimately be "the first" (by in large) to accept and put their faith and trust in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour... being "first" to enter in to the kingdom of God and eternal life.

Spiritual truths, as I see it, that are not dependent upon a time-line, per say.

So I agree, they weren't /aren't made perfect without us, as there is only one body. 

[Molly]

We pass from death unto life IN THIS WORLD. As he is so are we IN THIS WORLD. Right?

If we pass from death to life in this life [which I also believe, btw] what happens with nonbelievers who die in their sin, and are not clothed in Christ?

But even those who "sleep" who are "dead" are IN CHRIST, as God was in Christ reconciling THE WORLD unto himself, creating ONE NEW MAN (Eph 2:15), having baptized us, by one spirit, into one body (whether Jew or Gentile, bond or free):

Is this to be understood as Christ on the cross contained both God and all of sinful humanity within his body?  Or is that too literal?


12that ye were at that time without Christ, aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

 13but now in Christ Jesus *ye* who once were afar off are become nigh by the blood of the Christ.

 14For *he* is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of enclosure,

 15having annulled the enmity in his flesh, the law of commandments in ordinances, that he might form the two in himself into one new man, making peace;

 16and might reconcile both in one body to God by the cross, having by it slain the enmity;

 17and, coming, he has preached the glad tidings of peace to you who [were] afar off, and [the glad tidings of] peace to those [who were] nigh.

--Eph 2


Is it possible to reject this gift of reconciliation?  Or is all humanity under it by default? [as I am a default citizen of this country because I was born here.]

[Beloved Servant]

PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS (1)

19 If we are having an expectation in Christ in this life only, more forlorn than all men are we.
20 (Yet now Christ has been roused from among the dead, the Firstfruit of those who are reposing.
21 For since, in fact, through a man came death, through a Man, also, comes the resurrection of the dead.
22 For even as, in Adam, all are dying, thus also, in Christ, shall all be vivified.

[Molly]

Eph 2:16 is the clearest argument for UR I've ever seen.  That is, if it is saying what I think it is saying.  Interesting, I've never noticed it before.  Now I have to figure out how Christ could contain all of sinful humanity within his body.

[Cardinal]

  Molly, when I read your thought here, the thought I had right behind it, was that it was thru their blood. The life of the soul is in the blood also, so like a spiritual "blood guiltiness" pattern of the OT? Just thinking out loud here.......Blessings...

[Doug]

So then, the scriptures tell us that it is THIS MORTAL that must PUT ON immortality. Again, I see this as a spiritual truth, not a carnal/natural one. We do not put on immortality by dying a physical death and taking part in a physical resurrection. We pass from death into life as believers, when we partake of the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ, who is our life and who ONLY has immortality.

Passing from "death" to "life" when we believe in Christ is like conception, the resurrection from the dead is like a birth. That is why the church, represented by the woman in heaven clothed with the sun, is called our "mother." The saints, her yet unborn children, are called her "seed," Rev. 12:17.

Rev. 12:2
And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

The resurrection of the saints is referred to here:

Isaiah 66:8
Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

Isaiah 25:7-8
And he will destroy in this mountain the face of the covering cast over all people, and the vail that is spread over all nations.
He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD hath spoken it.

And that cannot be accomplished without physical death? Or without 'soul sleep'?

Paul quotes the above verse from Isaiah in 1 Cor 15, and he indicates it can indeed be accomplished without dying, by a "change," that converts living mortal bodies of the saints to immortal ones, at the time when the saints who have previously died are also raised up, i.e. the "last trump."

1 Corinthians 15:51-53
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

I disagree with your assessment of this passage, in that I don't believe that it speaks of physically dead corpses being resurrected back to life at all. As I understand it, "the dead in Christ" (those who "sleep") are among those who remain, those who are physically alive, yet dead in sin. The dead in Christ are not physically dead saints, but "the tares" who are, according to both Christ and Paul, harvested first.

In the above quoted passage, [i.e., 1 Corinthians 15:51-53] Paul is telling us about the resurrection of the saints at the last trump. This is the same trumpet we read of in Rev. 11, the seventh trumpet. Consider the context:

1 Corinthians 15:20-22
20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

In Adam we are all mortal. We eventually die. Death came because of the sin of Adam, according to the scripture. This is the problem that Christ has fixed. He rose from the dead, and is the first human to obtain immortality. That is why he is called "the firstfruits of them that slept."

In this chapter, Paul explains more about the resurrection from the dead, that Christians seek to obtain. In verse 35:

1 Corinthians 15:35-37
35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:

Paul uses sowing wheat in the ground as an analogy for burial of dead people. Both our dead bodies, and wheat, are buried in the ground; he then shows there are various kinds of creatures, human, animal, fish, birds, and various types of stars, and if he were writing today, he might also have mentioned planets, and asteroids. He mentions the sun and moon; we know the moon orbits the earth, and both the earth and the moon together, and all the planets orbit the sun. Paul compares their light intensity; some bodies shine more brightly than others; some, like the moon, only reflect light from elsewhere. These are mentioned to illustrate the variety of bodies that will be raised up in the resurrection. We won't all be the same.

1 Corinthians 15:42-46
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

Everything here refers to the contrast between the human state, and the future glorified state, that the saints will have in the resurrection. Our present state is the natural one, subject to corruption, disease, growing old, weakness, etc. The future glorified state is one of incorruption, power, and a spiritual body like that of Jesus.

1 Corinthians 15:47-50
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
 
Paul contrasts our present human, "earthy" condition with the future state, which he calls "heavenly." It is an incorruptible body, like that of Jesus. Nothing in the verses quoted refers to death metaphorically, as a person who does not know or believe the gospel. It is all describing the great contrast between the mortal, human condition, and the glorious type of life which those in the resurrection will receive.

1 Corinthians 15:51-53
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

The same is true of these verses. "Sleep" refers to death. Jesus spoke of both the 12 year old girl who he raised to life, and Lazarus who he brought back from the grave as "asleep" Paul describes the saints who remain alive when Christ comes being suddenly changed to an immortal, glorious state, and those who have previously died in Christ being raised up, in a similar condition.

1 Corinthians 15:54-58
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.
57 But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.

These things are for our encouragement. Our eternal state is to be glorious. No one but Jesus has yet obtained that state. When the resurrection occurs, the whole world will be judged by the saints, Paul said.   

1 Corinthians 6:2
Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?

Doug

[Tony N]

Molly, when I read your thought here, the thought I had right behind it, was that it was thru their blood. The life of the soul is in the blood also, so like a spiritual "blood guiltiness" pattern of the OT? Just thinking out loud here.......Blessings...

The bible does not say "the life of the soul is in the blood." Rather, it just says "the soul is in the blood."

[Chris]

We pass from death unto life IN THIS WORLD. As he is so are we IN THIS WORLD. Right?

If we pass from death to life in this life [which I also believe, btw] what happens with nonbelievers who die in their sin, and are not clothed in Christ?

Christ is the light that ligheth every man that cometh into the world, is he not? As i see it, we have all been baptized into the death of Jesus Christ. It just that we have not all (yet) known the power of His resurrection. If we do not have eternal life (which is to know God and Jesus Christ whom he sent) in this life then when we die we will, as we will see Him as he is, seeing him "face to face".

Even Paul says that those who sleep (the dead in Christ) are caught up to be the Lord, even before those those who "alive" and remain... and we shall be caught up with them, and we shall forever be with the Lord. If this is what happens to "the dead" who remain unto the coming of the Lord then why would it be any different for those who die physically before that time comes when all flesh will be destroyed and all things have been fully recinciled to God such that the kingdom is turned over to the Father, who will be all in all?

Seems to me that the new creature has already been created in Christ, who is Lord both of the living and the dead (both being "in Christ" and of "the body of Christ"). We are not longer "dead" (for death has been overcome/conquered by Christ, but many still "sleep" (though, spiritually speaking, the two are pretty synonymous).

There is an outward man (first/natural) and an inward man (second/spirit) and "the second man" IS "the Lord from heaven". Christ IN YOU, the hope of glory, right?

Seems to me that it is that inward man, that spiritual man, that second man, that new man, that hidden man of the heart, that is renewed day by day - while that first adam, that outward/natural man perishes.

But even those who "sleep" who are "dead" are IN CHRIST, as God was in Christ reconciling THE WORLD unto himself, creating ONE NEW MAN (Eph 2:15), having baptized us, by one spirit, into one body (whether Jew or Gentile, bond or free):

Is this to be understood as Christ on the cross contained both God and all of sinful humanity within his body?  Or is that too literal?


12that ye were at that time without Christ, aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

 13but now in Christ Jesus *ye* who once were afar off are become nigh by the blood of the Christ.

 14For *he* is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of enclosure,

 15having annulled the enmity in his flesh, the law of commandments in ordinances, that he might form the two in himself into one new man, making peace;

 16and might reconcile both in one body to God by the cross, having by it slain the enmity;

 17and, coming, he has preached the glad tidings of peace to you who [were] afar off, and [the glad tidings of] peace to those [who were] nigh.

--Eph 2


Is it possible to reject this gift of reconciliation?  Or is all humanity under it by default? [as I am a default citizen of this country because I was born here.]

Many Christians speak of "accepting" (or thus "rejecting") God's gift of salvation, as if it is up to us to save ourselves, as if Christ only "offers" it but does not actually "do" it or "accomplish" it. But God's gifts are without repentance, irrevocable. We do not have to "accept" salvation in order to be saved; therefore we cannot "reject" it and not be saved.  It is not up to us, but to Christ, who said that if he be lifted up He would draw all men unto himself.

The only "rejection" that takes place, if you want to call it that, is that which comes through the workings of "the flesh", the working of satan, if you will, which will ultimately be destroyed. Correct?

[Zeek]

....why would it be any different for those who die physically before that time comes when all flesh will be destroyed and all things have been fully recinciled to God such that the kingdom is turned over to the Father, who will be all in all?

so even with your "view; you still look to a time when all "flesh" will be destroyed??  do you mean literal flesh here??

why would there need to be an end all, when it is happening indiviudually, either "while alive-eternal life", or at physical death when every one will see "him as he is"??

[Doug]

John 6:63
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

The saying of Jesus was obviously a deep one, that requires interpretation, which is partly given in the last verse quoted. He was talking about spiritual things. "Eating his flesh" meant understanding his words. Some of them, we need to "chew" on a little.

So what does it mean to you that it is THE SPIRIT that quickeneth while the flesh profits nothing?

I already suggested an explanation. It was to explain this previous statement of Jesus that gave the disciples so much trouble:

John 6:56
He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

Here is what John Wesley said:

Verse 63. It is the Spirit - The spiritual meaning of these words, by which God giveth life. The flesh - The bare, carnal, literal meaning, profiteth nothing. The words which I have spoken, they are spirit - Are to be taken in a spiritual sense and, when they are so understood, they are life - That is, a means of spiritual life to the hearers.

J. B. Coffman commented:

This was Jesus' way of saying, "Look, with regard to what I said about eating my flesh and drinking my blood, you must not take that literally, but spiritually. `The flesh profiteth nothing ...' Of course, eating my literal flesh would be to no profit; but my words are spirit and are life. It is my teaching which you must assimilate."

These both give the sense, I think. It has nothing to do with explaining what the eternal state is to be, or the resurrection; it is telling us how to understand the words of Jesus, and also the words of the prophets, which are similar in that they too are to be spiritually understood. They are given to us as parables, figures, visions, "similitudes," etc.

Hosea 12:10
I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets.

If it were true that all the saints who lived before, had received their rewards already, some would have lived for many centuries, presumably in heaven, and in all that time, they would have learned much, having been given greatly superior immortal bodies and intellects, not having to take any time to sleep, etc., so it is hard to see why they would not have become much more learned than us, when we finally receive our rewards.

Being so much more qualified, would they not be much better suited for the best positions in the Kingdom, like ruling cities and nations, (or galaxies, or whatever) when Christ assigns those rewards? We, OTOH, would be fit for only the inferior positions. 

What "positions" are you talking about? What "cities and nations" are you desiring to rule over? Are you looking for a physical kingdom?

It is from the parable of the talents:

Matthew 25:14-29
14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.
15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.
16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.
17 And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.
18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.
19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.
20 And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.
21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
22 He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.
23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
24 Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:
25 And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.
26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:
27 Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.
28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.
29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.

Whether or not they are literal cities, which are given to those servants who are profitable, and who do the will of God, the point I was making is that the scripture shows the saints are to be raised up together, at the coming of Christ, and the last trump. Until then, the saints who have died wait in their graves, like Job. 

Job 14:14
If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come.

The parable indicates that Jesus "reaps where he sowed not, and gathers where he has not strawed." It may indicate that even with incorrect or literal interpretations, people can still believe the gospel, and have faith in Christ, with limited understanding. There is a great range in the lifestyle of saints in the OT, for example. And in the history of the church.

Doug

[Cardinal]

Molly, when I read your thought here, the thought I had right behind it, was that it was thru their blood. The life of the soul is in the blood also, so like a spiritual "blood guiltiness" pattern of the OT? Just thinking out loud here.......Blessings...

The bible does not say "the life of the soul is in the blood." Rather, it just says "the soul is in the blood."

  Tony, you know I respect your opinion a great deal, and glean a lot from what you write, but we are not always on the same page as far as looking at/for the natural things that are bearing witness for the spiritual.

So, that said, I guess that would depend on which blood you're talking about. He breathed (which is Spirit and HIS blood) into Adam and he became a living soul, or a soul that had life. So if the soul is in the blood (natural blood) and the life (His blood which is Spirit) is in the soul........unless of course you think natural blood is what was taken into heaven, seeing how flesh and blood cannot enter the kingdom. Blessings....

[Chris]

So then, the scriptures tell us that it is THIS MORTAL that must PUT ON immortality. Again, I see this as a spiritual truth, not a carnal/natural one. We do not put on immortality by dying a physical death and taking part in a physical resurrection. We pass from death into life as believers, when we partake of the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ, who is our life and who ONLY has immortality.

Passing from "death" to "life" when we believe in Christ is like conception, the resurrection from the dead is like a birth. That is why the church, represented by the woman in heaven clothed with the sun, is called our "mother." The saints, her yet unborn children, are called her "seed," Rev. 12:17.

Rev. 12:2
And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

The resurrection of the saints is referred to here:

Isaiah 66:8
Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

Doug, the "church" (Eve) is made up of both men and women, right? And "she" (according to Paul) "shall be saved in childbearing", right?

It is "we" who must be "delivered of the child", then, isn't it? Just as Paul was?

The book of Revelation is about "the revelation of Jesus Christ", right? Do you see that as only a future/physical event that has yet to take place? That has nothing to do with Christ coming in the flesh to die on the cross and coming "the second time" unto them that look for Him (Christ IN YOU, the hope of glory)? Do you see it being fulfilled physically, rather than spiritually?

Isaiah 25:7-8

And he will destroy in this mountain the face of the covering cast over all people, and the vail that is spread over all nations.
He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD hath spoken it.

And that cannot be accomplished without physical death? Or without 'soul sleep'?

Paul quotes the above verse from Isaiah in 1 Cor 15, and he indicates it can indeed be accomplished without dying, by a "change," that converts living mortal bodies of the saints to immortal ones, at the time when the saints who have previously died are also raised up, i.e. the "last trump."

1 Corinthians 15:51-53
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

I disagree with your assessment of this passage, in that I don't believe that it speaks of physically dead corpses being resurrected back to life at all. As I understand it, "the dead in Christ" (those who "sleep") are among those who remain, those who are physically alive, yet dead in sin. The dead in Christ are not physically dead saints, but "the tares" who are, according to both Christ and Paul, harvested first.

In the above quoted passage, [i.e., 1 Corinthians 15:51-53] Paul is telling us about the resurrection of the saints at the last trump. This is the same trumpet we read of in Rev. 11, the seventh trumpet. Consider the context:

1 Corinthians 15:20-22
20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

I'm not disagreeing. Christ is the first-fruits of them that slept. He "is" THE RESURRECTION and THE LIFE. Right? And that life is hid with Christ in God, until such time as Christ (in us, who "is" our life) is made manifest. Right?

You seem to see this in a linear fashion. That we live a natural life in a body of flesh and then we die a physical death (as a result of sin?) and then we are resurrected from a physical death with a (more or less) physical body of flesh that is "glorified" by being given immortality? Would that be an accurate summary?

I don't see it that way. I don't see "physical death" being the result of sin. If this is the case, then Adam had immortality first and apart from Christ and only lost it as a result of sin.

Were life and immortality ever supposed to come through the first Adam (man)?

I see the "death" that is "the penalty for sin" relative to a spiritual truth. And because all have sinned "all are dead" (not "all are going to die" - a physical death). It is this "death" (that we suffer while we live - physically) that Christ came to redeem us from. Christ who was, and is and is to come, who comes "the second time" unto them that look for him – without sin unto salvation (even the salvation of our souls).

Again, it is Christ IN YOU that is the hope of glory. Right?

In Adam we are all mortal. We eventually die. Death came because of the sin of Adam, according to the scripture. This is the problem that Christ has fixed. He rose from the dead, and is the first human to obtain immortality. That is why he is called "the firstfruits of them that slept."

But he is not the first human to obtain immortality if the first Adam was immortal to begin with and "became" mortal because of sin, if that is what you are saying? Are you saying that physical death is a result of sin?

As I see it, Adam/man has always been mortal. It is not physical death that resulted from sin. Adam DIED (after a spiritual truth) "in the day" that he sinned. And through sin (as all men have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God) all men have "died" (are "dead", after a spiritual truth).  It has nothing to do with our eventual physical death, as our physical death has nothing to do with sin; it is the result of our mortality.

Yet, that which is physical (that can be seen - physical death) is meant to reveal to us that which is spiritual (that cannot be seen – death, according to a spiritual truth). We know what it means to be "dead" after a spiritual truth because we can see what it means to be "dead" after a carnal truth. But we are to look on those things that are not seen, rather than upon those things that are seen – if we are to understand the spiritual truths that they reveal. Correct?

In this chapter, Paul explains more about the resurrection from the dead, that Christians seek to obtain. In verse 35:

1 Corinthians 15:35-37
35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:

Paul uses sowing wheat in the ground as an analogy for burial of dead people. Both our dead bodies, and wheat, are buried in the ground; he then shows there are various kinds of creatures, human, animal, fish, birds, and various types of stars, and if he were writing today, he might also have mentioned planets, and asteroids. He mentions the sun and moon; we know the moon orbits the earth, and both the earth and the moon together, and all the planets orbit the sun. Paul compares their light intensity; some bodies shine more brightly than others; some, like the moon, only reflect light from elsewhere. These are mentioned to illustrate the variety of bodies that will be raised up in the resurrection. We won't all be the same.

Paul is describing the difference between the natural and the spiritual, yes. I agree. But who are "the stars" (these "celestial" bodies), Doug? Who are "the stars" that Christ holds in His right hand in the book of Revelation? Are they not "the angels of the churches"? And wasn't Paul received "as an angel of God"? Isn't it "an angel" that is seen "flying in the midst of heaven having the everlasting gospel to preach"? Isn't it "the angels" that Christ said he would send to reap? Who did Christ send "to reap"?

Why do you believe that Paul answers this question that he says some will ask saying: "how are the dead raised up and with what body do they come" with "thou fool"? It is that hard to understand "the resurrection of the dead" according to a physical/natural truth?  Or is it because this is how they were trying to understand it and that is not how it is to be understood?

Why do you supposes Christ told the Pharisees that they erred, not understanding the power of God when they asked him about the resurrection according to a carnal understanding? Why did he respond by telling them that "in the resurrection of dead they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are as the angels of God in heaven" (keeping in mind that "the angels of the churches" are "the stars" that He holds in His right hand and it is "the hosts of heaven" that praise, worship and glorify Him)?

1 Corinthians 15:42-46
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.


Everything here refers to the contrast between the human state, and the future glorified state, that the saints will have in the resurrection. Our present state is the natural one, subject to corruption, disease, growing old, weakness, etc. The future glorified state is one of incorruption, power, and a spiritual body like that of Jesus.

Well, as I see it, it is a dividing between the flesh and the spirit, between the outward man and the inward man, between that which perishes and that which is renewed day by day, between the first man (the first Adam) and the second man (the last Adam) that is the Lord from heaven (whose body we are – joined together by one spirit).

1 Corinthians 15:47-50
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
 
Paul contrasts our present human, "earthy" condition with the future state, which he calls "heavenly." It is an incorruptible body, like that of Jesus. Nothing in the verses quoted refers to death metaphorically, as a person who does not know or believe the gospel. It is all describing the great contrast between the mortal, human condition, and the glorious type of life which those in the resurrection will receive.

The second man is the last Adam. So if the last Adam was made a quickening spirit why are you insisting on a glorified natural body?

Everything that Paul says here is about the natural vs the spiritual; the flesh vs the spirit; that which is sewn vs that which is reaped and "thou sowest NOT that body that shall be", right?

Why do you believe Paul likens that "body" that will be to "wheat" or to "some other grain"?

According to scripture, that which is born of the flesh IS FLESH and that which is born of the spirit IS SPIRIT. So why do we insist of mixing the two in order to make "the spiritual" more tangible by making it almost "natural"? But by calling it "glorified" in order to maintain its "spirituality"?

When Paul speaks of "the end" he says that those who sleep (the "dead" in Christ) shall be caught up into the air and then those who are "alive" and remain will be caught up together with them in the air, and then they ALL shall be "forever be with Lord". Where? How? In what "state"? In what "world"? Do the scriptures even say? Are we even told what eternity with the Father will be like? What our lives will be like? What we will be doing? What our existence will consist of? I don't believe that we are.

1 Corinthians 15:51-53
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

The same is true of these verses. "Sleep" refers to death. Jesus spoke of both the 12 year old girl who he raised to life, and Lazarus who he brought back from the grave as "asleep" Paul describes the saints who remain alive when Christ comes being suddenly changed to an immortal, glorious state, and those who have previously died in Christ being raised up, in a similar condition.

Not as I understand it. As I understand it, Paul is not talking about those who "previously died". He is talking about those who "are dead" (who are "asleep", after a spiritual truth). They, too, are among those who "remain" who are caught up to be with the Lord.

Who is it that Christ said would be harvested first? Was it not "the tares"? So then shouldn't "the tares" spoken of by Christ correlate in some way to "the dead" spoken of by Paul, who are gathered first?

We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed!! We have been changed, Doug. We are a new creation, a new creature, one new man created IN CHRIST (both "the living" and 'the dead")…. But SOME SLEEP! It is a spiritual truth, as far as I can tell; not one that speaks to rotting flesh in physical graves. 

Paul speaks about many things in the future tense. He also speaks of many of those same things in the present tense. As I see it, it is not because all of these things are "yet future" and it's not because they are "past" but it's because Christ was, and is and is to come and he comes "the second time" unto them that look for him. And he comes "as a thief in the night" (because he comes "to those who sleep" and those who sleep sleep "in the night")

1 Corinthians 15:54-58
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.
57 But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.

These things are for our encouragement. Our eternal state is to be glorious. No one but Jesus has yet obtained that state. When the resurrection occurs, the whole world will be judged by the saints, Paul said.   

1 Corinthians 6:2
Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?

Doug

John 12:31  NOW is the judgment of this world: NOW shall the prince of this world be cast out.

2Cr 6:2 (For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, NOW [is] the accepted time; behold, now [is] the day of salvation.)

Compare that to:

Rev 12:10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, NOW is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

The book of Revelation is not (to me) a book of future events. These things have been, are now and will continue to be fulfilled in the lives of the saints until the consummation of all things.

Christ came ONCE (in the end of the world) TO DIE (as it is appointed unto men) and to take away sin (and death) by the sacrifice of himself AND AFTER THIS THE JUDGMENT…. NOW is the judgment of this world. NOW is the day of salvation.

And (TODAY) when we hear His voice and harden not our hearts we are given right to THE TREE OF LIFE which is in THE PARADISE OF GOD. Amen?

For me, I am seeing more and more that to rightly divide the word of truth, comparing spiritual things with spiritual is a matter of being able to divide between the natural (that which is seen) and the spiritual (that which is not), which seems to come down to a division between the flesh and the spirit.

[Chris]

....why would it be any different for those who die physically before that time comes when all flesh will be destroyed and all things have been fully recinciled to God such that the kingdom is turned over to the Father, who will be all in all?

so even with your "view; you still look to a time when all "flesh" will be destroyed??  do you mean literal flesh here??

why would there need to be an end all, when it is happening indiviudually, either "while alive-eternal life", or at physical death when every one will see "him as he is"??

I'm not sure I understand your question. Can you rephrase it? What "end all" are you referring to?

All "flesh" will be destroyed. Do I mean that only "literally"? Is that the quesiton? No, I don't. In the sense that "the flesh" is man's carnal nature (not his epidermis), I see this happening individually. So, then, does the "literal" destruction of "the flesh" happen individually, too, right? It rots and returns to dust after we physically die, right?

But what of those who "remain" when the time comes for this world to come to and and for all men to enter into the kingdom of God, into eternity with the Father? That is the only "end all" that I can see, if you want to call it that. Is that what you are asking me?

[Tony N]

Molly, when I read your thought here, the thought I had right behind it, was that it was thru their blood. The life of the soul is in the blood also, so like a spiritual "blood guiltiness" pattern of the OT? Just thinking out loud here.......Blessings...

The bible does not say "the life of the soul is in the blood." Rather, it just says "the soul is in the blood."

  Tony, you know I respect your opinion a great deal, and glean a lot from what you write, but we are not always on the same page as far as looking at/for the natural things that are bearing witness for the spiritual.

So, that said, I guess that would depend on which blood you're talking about. He breathed (which is Spirit and HIS blood) into Adam and he became a living soul, or a soul that had life. So if the soul is in the blood (natural blood) and the life (His blood which is Spirit) is in the soul........unless of course you think natural blood is what was taken into heaven, seeing how flesh and blood cannot enter the kingdom. Blessings....

Hi Cardinal,
Where in the bible does it state that He breathed blood into Adam?

Where in the bible does it state that "His blood which is Spirit"?

Christ did not ascend into heaven with blood but just as flesh and bones and spirit. He shed His blood, remember?

[Molly]

What "end all" are you referring to?

There is going to be one end all because his kingdom is coming to this earth and will fill the whole earth, not just little pockets here and there. 



35Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.

--Daniel 2



2In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

 3And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:

 4And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.

--Rev 22




...and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.


--Dan 2

[Zeek]

....why would it be any different for those who die physically before that time comes when all flesh will be destroyed and all things have been fully recinciled to God such that the kingdom is turned over to the Father, who will be all in all?

so even with your "view; you still look to a time when all "flesh" will be destroyed??  do you mean literal flesh here??

why would there need to be an end all, when it is happening indiviudually, either "while alive-eternal life", or at physical death when every one will see "him as he is"??

I'm not sure I understand your question. Can you rephrase it? What "end all" are you referring to?

All "flesh" will be destroyed. Do I mean that only "literally"? Is that the quesiton? No, I don't. In the sense that "the flesh" is man's carnal nature (not his epidermis), I see this happening individually. So, then, does the "literal" destruction of "the flesh" happen individually, too, right? It rots and returns to dust after we physically die, right?

But what of those who "remain" when the time comes for this world to come to and and for all men to enter into the kingdom of God, into eternity with the Father? That is the only "end all" that I can see, if you want to call it that. Is that what you are asking me?

yes, so you see an end to the literal world??  earth??  and an end to all human life??  and you see this in scripture??  even though, it appears to me that you are "spiritualizing" those scriptures that might refer to an end to the "world". 

or another angle, you still see this "literal world/and physical flesh" from limiting us from "eternity" and entering "the kingdom of God"?? 

[martincisneros]

Christ did not ascent into heaven with blood but just as flesh and bones and spirit. He shed His blood, remember?

There's the implication of multiple ascensions in the New Testament.  For one thing, if He fulfilled the type of the High Priest of ancient Israel, as the book of Hebrews and Acts and other parts of the New Testament seem to strongly support, then the High Priest couldn't be touched as he was taking the sacrificial blood into the holy of holies of Israel.  The book of Hebrews says that so also Christ Jesus entered not into the holy of holies in heaven with the blood of animals, but with His own Blood having obtained salvation eonian.  It says in Hebrews that the earthly Temple was simply a photocopy of the true Temple in heaven.  There's two heavenly Temples.  The one where Christ Jesus took His Blood and then sprinkled all of the people as Moses did with blood in saying that this is the blood of the Covenant which God has enjoined to you, and then there's obviously the Temple that we are according to Paul's, Peter's, and John's writings when we're told that our bodies are that sacred Temple.  If He fulfilled the type of the High Priest of Israel, then He couldn't be touched after His resurrection 'til He'd taken His Blood before God.  One of the Gospel accounts has Him forbidding a woman from touching Him because He had not yet ascended to His God and Father and her God and Father.  Later, however, He emphatically commands all to touch Him for a spirit hath not flesh and bone.  Obviously, He'd made a deposit and was back with the breath of God to breath upon them telling them to receive the Holy Spirit and then the reality of the beginning of that which was spoken by the prophet Joel came on Pentecost of that year.  We've got the disciples on the road to Emmaus that when their eyes were opened by the Word of God He was teaching them, suddenly He vanished.  Where'd He go?  There's nothing that limits His ascension after His resurrection to only the Acts chapter 1 event.  That was more the triumphal entry into New Jerusalem for all of the faithful to His teachings at that time to have seen.

As to the other that Cardinal said, hoping she adds to what she said, but I'll just say that at first I was just as thrown by her comments as you were, like "where is she getting that??" roflol.  However, it IS spiritual in that it cries out, but it's physical in that it can be applied, and the anointing is a type of blood of the Spirit, but there's a slight difference although they go together as in the anointing of the Leper in Leviticus, I'm thinking chapter 14 but don't have a Bible handy to be sure.   Where you've got the Blood and the Oil being applied at the same time. The same thing going on in 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Ephesians, Hebrews, James, 1John, and Revelation.  The Blood speaking of Christ Jesus while the Oil representing the crushing of the Spirit of God as well.

Lord Jesus was crushed for our alienation, darkness, expansion, fears, illnesses, infirmities, iniquities, poverty, restitution, restoration, sanctification, and solidarity with one another, but the grapes and wine imagery of the Scriptures regarding the Spirit can't be ignored and it says in Hebrews that thru the Spirit He made His offering, while on the other hand it can equally be argued that by Himself He purged our sins.  It's hard to argue with the fact that wine in covenant ceremony is often considered the blood of the grape, although in paganism it's combined with the human blood of the fallen individuals making the pact.  However, there's an original kernal of truth of the original revelation of God to man shortly after the fall that got distored as the eons progressed and the nations became more numerous throughout the earth and more individualized in their sins, understandings, and the darkening of their thinking.  And the wine, while being the Blood of Jesus in the last supper is likewise a Biblical imagery of the Holy Spirit, i.e. "the Spirit, the Word, and the Blood agree."

All of this imagery from both the Bible and pagan sources indicates that the anointing is a type of Blood of the Spirit, yet it's the very Blood of Jesus Himself, His physical Blood, that the New Testament is repeatedly speaking of [most often].  Yet, the places where the Blood and Oil are mixed in the Old Testament, Hebrews, James, and John's implications and imagery can't be ignored.  What Cardinal's saying is just a deeper way of looking at it that looks at the whole thing, from a Hebraic perspective, rather than oversimplified doctrinal outlines of it that sometimes go a bit far in "rightly cutting it" until it's no longer recognizeable in the imagery, context, and setting that God gave with all of the precepts.  I personally wish everyone would be a bit more careful in genuinely pouring out everything that's dwelling in their hearts in all wisdom, as they've been endeavoring to do already in accordance with Colossians 3:16, but before hitting the "post" button that folks would stop and look at their post and be like St. Peter who says that it's not burdensome for me to remind you of what you already know, but I'll endeavor to keep on doing it while I'm in this Tabernacle.  And then to simply from their minds add to what their hearts have said with an extra sentence or paragraph [as and where applicable] to remind folks of an extra Scriptural reference for what things are being based upon in addition to the illumination of His Holy Spirit, so that those around here that would sincerely be Bereans, [but might not recognize the Scriptural allusion,] could have something to refer back to that they may not have previously considered within the Written Word.

[Doug]

Passing from "death" to "life" when we believe in Christ is like conception, the resurrection from the dead is like a birth. That is why the church, represented by the woman in heaven clothed with the sun, is called our "mother." The saints, her yet unborn children, are called her "seed," Rev. 12:17.

Rev. 12:2
And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

The resurrection of the saints is referred to here:

Isaiah 66:8
Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

Doug, the "church" (Eve) is made up of both men and women, right? And "she" (according to Paul) "shall be saved in childbearing", right?

It is "we" who must be "delivered of the child", then, isn't it? Just as Paul was?

1 Timothy 2:9-15
9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Paul is not referring to the church here, I think; he is teaching that women need to be modest and in subjection to their husbands, bear children, and continue in faith and holiness etc. 

Eve was made for Adam, who said she was "bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh," whereas the church is being prepared to be the bride of Christ. And Paul said:

Ephesians 5:30
For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
   
Eve was the mother of all, according to Genesis 3:20; in that sense she was a type of the church. The church is also pictured by Sarah, who is the "mother" of all those who are of faith. Believing women are called daughters of Sarah [1 Pet. 3:6]; that would imply believing men are sons of Sarah. So Sarah represents the church. Similarly, other women who were wives of the patriarchs were types of the church.

Jacob worked 7 years for his bride Rachel; I suggest this is typical of the "seven times" for which Christ confirms his covenant, the "week" of Daniel 9:26, fulfilled by the earthly ministry of Jesus plus the symbolic "time, times and a half," which represents the entire church age, or the remaining part of it.

The serpent pictured in heaven in Rev. 12:4 and verses following represents Satan; the prophecy describes a war in heaven, between angels. Eventually, the angels of Satan are overcome, and the dragon is cast out, with his angels, a cause for rejoicing, for the saints, but woe to those in the earth and sea, because the devil has come down to them, having great wrath at that time.

This war continues today, and involves our understanding of prophecy, including this one.

The woman is clothed with the sun, which represents the gospel, but the sun has been darkened, according to other prophecies, and the moon has been turned to blood, both prophetic symbols. The sun turning to darkness pictures the gospel being obscured by false teachings.

In the parable of the tares, Jesus said when the tares are removed, at the end of the world, the righteous will "shine like the sun in the kingdom of their father." [Matthew 13:43]

Doug

[Chris]

John 6:63
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

The saying of Jesus was obviously a deep one, that requires interpretation, which is partly given in the last verse quoted. He was talking about spiritual things. "Eating his flesh" meant understanding his words. Some of them, we need to "chew" on a little.

So what does it mean to you that it is THE SPIRIT that quickeneth while the flesh profits nothing?

I already suggested an explanation. It was to explain this previous statement of Jesus that gave the disciples so much trouble:

John 6:56
He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

Here is what John Wesley said:

Verse 63. It is the Spirit - The spiritual meaning of these words, by which God giveth life. The flesh - The bare, carnal, literal meaning, profiteth nothing. The words which I have spoken, they are spirit - Are to be taken in a spiritual sense and, when they are so understood, they are life - That is, a means of spiritual life to the hearers.

J. B. Coffman commented:

This was Jesus' way of saying, "Look, with regard to what I said about eating my flesh and drinking my blood, you must not take that literally, but spiritually. `The flesh profiteth nothing ...' Of course, eating my literal flesh would be to no profit; but my words are spirit and are life. It is my teaching which you must assimilate."

These both give the sense, I think. It has nothing to do with explaining what the eternal state is to be, or the resurrection; it is telling us how to understand the words of Jesus, and also the words of the prophets, which are similar in that they too are to be spiritually understood. They are given to us as parables, figures, visions, "similitudes," etc.

Hosea 12:10
I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets.

I absolutely agree that God speaks in parables/figures/types/similitudes/visions and that His words are to be understood spiritually. But I'm still not seeing the connection you are trying to make here between "the flesh profits nothing" and "He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him" needing to be understood spiritually. Surely this is to be understood spiritually and not literally, but to mix the two messages that way, doesn't make sense to me. Do you believe that His disciples took him literally?

Christ was talking about ascending to where he was before and we know that the last Adam was made "a quickening spirit".

And it is not our spirit that is quickened by the spirit of God, buy the spirit of Christ that dwells in us?

John 6:56   He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

Jhn 6:63   It is THE SPIRIT that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life.

That is the connection that I see.

If it were true that all the saints who lived before, had received their rewards already, some would have lived for many centuries, presumably in heaven, and in all that time, they would have learned much, having been given greatly superior immortal bodies and intellects, not having to take any time to sleep, etc., so it is hard to see why they would not have become much more learned than us, when we finally receive our rewards.

Being so much more qualified, would they not be much better suited for the best positions in the Kingdom, like ruling cities and nations, (or galaxies, or whatever) when Christ assigns those rewards? We, OTOH, would be fit for only the inferior positions. 

What "positions" are you talking about? What "cities and nations" are you desiring to rule over? Are you looking for a physical kingdom?

It is from the parable of the talents:

Matthew 25:14-29
14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.
15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.
16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.
17 And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.
18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.
19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.
20 And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.
21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
22 He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.
23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
24 Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:
25 And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.
26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:
27 Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.
28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.
29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.

So you see this as a future event? Where are cities mentioned? Do you see the "talents" as "cities"?

Whether or not they are literal cities, which are given to those servants who are profitable, and who do the will of God, the point I was making is that the scripture shows the saints are to be raised up together, at the coming of Christ, and the last trump. Until then, the saints who have died wait in their graves, like Job.

Job 14:14
If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come.
 

The scriptures say "every man in his own order". Where does it say that all of the saints are raise together, at once?

Do you believe that there in only one resurrection or, as I once did, that the saints are resurrected together in "the first resurrection" which comes before the thousand year reign of Christ which is followed by the general (second) resurrection and "the great white throne judgment"? If you believe that the saints are resurrected "first" in "the first resurrection" can you please explain that in light of Christ's claim that in the time of harvest he would send forth his angels, telling them together "first the tares", which fits perfectly with what Paul said about "the dead in Christ shall rise first" – if we understand "the dead" after a spiritual truth, rather than a carnal one, right? But if we don't then the words of Paul contradict the words of Christ and everyone who believes that the saints are resurrected "first" (as I once did) also believe contrary to the words of Christ. Or how do you explain the words of Christ in light of the most common understanding of "the first resurrection"?

Yes, there is an appointed time. As I see it, it is called "today" (when we hear his voice and harden not our hearts).

Why do you think that your appointed time does not come until after you physically die? Espeically when we know that if Christ dwells in us we "have" eternal life?

The parable indicates that Jesus "reaps where he sowed not, and gathers where he has not strawed." It may indicate that even with incorrect or literal interpretations, people can still believe the gospel, and have faith in Christ, with limited understanding. There is a great range in the lifestyle of saints in the OT, for example. And in the history of the church.

Doug

I agree that there is a wide range of understanding among believers and even various levels of faith, etc. We are to add to both, but can only do so by the grace of God, right?

How do you see that relating to the resurrection of the dead in the way that you see it?

[Chris]

....why would it be any different for those who die physically before that time comes when all flesh will be destroyed and all things have been fully recinciled to God such that the kingdom is turned over to the Father, who will be all in all?

so even with your "view; you still look to a time when all "flesh" will be destroyed??  do you mean literal flesh here??

why would there need to be an end all, when it is happening indiviudually, either "while alive-eternal life", or at physical death when every one will see "him as he is"??

I'm not sure I understand your question. Can you rephrase it? What "end all" are you referring to?

All "flesh" will be destroyed. Do I mean that only "literally"? Is that the quesiton? No, I don't. In the sense that "the flesh" is man's carnal nature (not his epidermis), I see this happening individually. So, then, does the "literal" destruction of "the flesh" happen individually, too, right? It rots and returns to dust after we physically die, right?

But what of those who "remain" when the time comes for this world to come to and and for all men to enter into the kingdom of God, into eternity with the Father? That is the only "end all" that I can see, if you want to call it that. Is that what you are asking me?

yes, so you see an end to the literal world??  earth??  and an end to all human life??  and you see this in scripture??  even though, it appears to me that you are "spiritualizing" those scriptures that might refer to an end to the "world". 

or another angle, you still see this "literal world/and physical flesh" from limiting us from "eternity" and entering "the kingdom of God"?? 

Zeek, I am having a hard time understanding your questions or maybe just the way you phrase them, so please bear with me as I try to answer what I 'think' you are asking. 

Yes, I see an end to the literal world/earth and an end to human life (as we know it). I certianly do not believe that we cease to exist, though.

I'm not sure what you mean about me "spiritualizing" those verses that might refer to "the end of the world"... if you are claiming that the verses exist? Am I not supposed to take them "literally" if I am the one claiming that the world does cease to exist and this is what the scriptures say? Or am I "spiritualizing" them by taking them literally when I shouldn't? Or are you saying they do not exist?  I am confused? (honestly) 

Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, yet the kingdom of God is within, right? So how does flesh and blood prohibit us from entering into the kingdom?

I see that entrance as spiritual. Do you see it as physical?

[Chris]

Passing from "death" to "life" when we believe in Christ is like conception, the resurrection from the dead is like a birth. That is why the church, represented by the woman in heaven clothed with the sun, is called our "mother." The saints, her yet unborn children, are called her "seed," Rev. 12:17.

Rev. 12:2
And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

The resurrection of the saints is referred to here:

Isaiah 66:8
Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

Doug, the "church" (Eve) is made up of both men and women, right? And "she" (according to Paul) "shall be saved in childbearing", right?

It is "we" who must be "delivered of the child", then, isn't it? Just as Paul was?

1 Timothy 2:9-15
9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Paul is not referring to the church here, I think; he is teaching that women need to be modest and in subjection to their husbands, bear children, and continue in faith and holiness etc. 

Eve was made for Adam, who said she was "bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh," whereas the church is being prepared to be the bride of Christ. And Paul said:

Ephesians 5:30
For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
   
Eve was the mother of all, according to Genesis 3:20; in that sense she was a type of the church. The church is also pictured by Sarah, who is the "mother" of all those who are of faith. Believing women are called daughters of Sarah [1 Pet. 3:6]; that would imply believing men are sons of Sarah. So Sarah represents the church. Similarly, other women who were wives of the patriarchs were types of the church.

Jacob worked 7 years for his bride Rachel; I suggest this is typical of the "seven times" for which Christ confirms his covenant, the "week" of Daniel 9:26, fulfilled by the earthly ministry of Jesus plus the symbolic "time, times and a half," which represents the entire church age, or the remaining part of it.

The serpent pictured in heaven in Rev. 12:4 and verses following represents Satan; the prophecy describes a war in heaven, between angels. Eventually, the angels of Satan are overcome, and the dragon is cast out, with his angels, a cause for rejoicing, for the saints, but woe to those in the earth and sea, because the devil has come down to them, having great wrath at that time.

This war continues today, and involves our understanding of prophecy, including this one.

The woman is clothed with the sun, which represents the gospel, but the sun has been darkened, according to other prophecies, and the moon has been turned to blood, both prophetic symbols. The sun turning to darkness pictures the gospel being obscured by false teachings.

In the parable of the tares, Jesus said when the tares are removed, at the end of the world, the righteous will "shine like the sun in the kingdom of their father." [Matthew 13:43]

Doug

You mention so many other "similitudes" even in your response here to tell me that Paul is not talking about the church and yet you can't see "the woman" as a figure of "the church" (made up of both male and female)?

Paul even ends the passage with a direct reference to Adam and Eve (a figure of Christ and the church) and how "she" (being deceived) "shall be saved in childbearing".

You see no connection to that and Christ's words to His disciples about "a woman in travial" and Paul's own experience of "travailing in birth" (and being delieverd of the child... ie putting away childish things)?

Well, I won't say any more about that here as that will take us way off topic, but it is an interesting study.  Maybe we can address it on another thread some other time. 

[Doug]

If it were true that all the saints who lived before, had received their rewards already, some would have lived for many centuries, presumably in heaven, and in all that time, they would have learned much, having been given greatly superior immortal bodies and intellects, not having to take any time to sleep, etc., so it is hard to see why they would not have become much more learned than us, when we finally receive our rewards.

Being so much more qualified, would they not be much better suited for the best positions in the Kingdom, like ruling cities and nations, (or galaxies, or whatever) when Christ assigns those rewards? We, OTOH, would be fit for only the inferior positions.   

What "positions" are you talking about? What "cities and nations" are you desiring to rule over? Are you looking for a physical kingdom?

It is from the parable of the talents:

Matthew 25:14-29
14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.
15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.
16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.
17 And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.
18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.
19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.
20 And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.
21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
22 He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.
23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
24 Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:
25 And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.
26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:
27 Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.
28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.
29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.

So you see this as a future event?

The parable above is included in the Olivet Discourse. I think Christ meant us to see his words and the prophecies of scripture as "talents" that are committed to our stewardship. These may provide us with light and understanding, and bear fruit, depending on how we interpret them. Some may find them too obscure, and pay them no attention at all. Others may obtain some light and guidance, and then there are those who find deep meaning that they can act upon, and become very fruitful for the kingdom of God.

I think literalists tend to be in the less fruitful category; literalism is like burying a talent in the ground. The most fruitful category would be those who discover the true meaning of Christ's words and take appropriate action.  IMO.

Where are cities mentioned? Do you see the "talents" as "cities"?

Oops, the cities are mentioned in Luke's version, sorry. Here it is:

11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.
12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.
13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.
14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.
15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.
16 Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds.
17 And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.
18 And the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five pounds.
19 And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five cities.
20 And another came, saying, Lord, behold, here is thy pound, which I have kept laid up in a napkin:
21 For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.
22 And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow:
23 Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?
24 And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give it to him that hath ten pounds.
25 (And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)
26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.
27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

Whether or not they are literal cities, which are given to those servants who are profitable, and who do the will of God, the point I was making is that the scripture shows the saints are to be raised up together, at the coming of Christ, and the last trump. Until then, the saints who have died wait in their graves, like Job.

Job 14:14
If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come.

The scriptures say "every man in his own order". Where does it say that all of the saints are raise together, at once?

Isaiah 66:6-13
6 A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of the LORD that rendereth recompence to his enemies.
7 Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child.
8 Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.
9 Shall I bring to the birth, and not cause to bring forth? saith the LORD: shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb? saith thy God.
10 Rejoice ye with Jerusalem, and be glad with her, all ye that love her: rejoice for joy with her, all ye that mourn for her:
11 That ye may suck, and be satisfied with the breasts of her consolations; that ye may milk out, and be delighted with the abundance of her glory.
12 For thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will extend peace to her like a river, and the glory of the Gentiles like a flowing stream: then shall ye suck, ye shall be borne upon her sides, and be dandled upon her knees.
13 As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you; and ye shall be comforted in Jerusalem.

Compare the above prophecy with Rev. 12:1-6. Do you see any similarities? In verse 7, the man child corresponds to the man child in Rev. 12:5, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron. This is referring to Christ.

Verses 8-9 refer to the resurrection, I think; the time when the saints who died are raised up from their graves, and those who are alive are suddenly changed to immortality as described by Paul in 1 Cor. 15.

Doug

[Tony N]

Hi Martin ole buddy ole pal,
I agree completely with you that Christ ascended into heaven after he met Miriam who He told not to touch Him, and then came back and told Thomas to handle Him and see that a spirit has not flesh and bones as you perceive Me having.

Now then, as you suggest there are types in the OT such as the high priest taking the blood into the holy of holies. However, just because the high priest did that, this does not mean Christ somehow went back to the cross and found some of His blood and took it to heaven into the celestial holy of holies (Lev.16:15-22 etc). I mean, The priests the day they crucified Jesus did not really turn Jesus into a goat, literally, and let another goat run free with the sins of the people into the wilderness. They may have put the sins of the people on a hairy goat and chased it out into the wilderness that day but Jesus was not a hairy goat. Somewhere the type has to stop.

I believe what Jesus did was to present Himself to the Father and say, Look! I've shed all my blood for the sin of the world. Look at the gaping hole in my side and the holes in my hands and feet. The Father was satisfied. Probably on the way to the holy of holies in the heavenlies Christ heralded to the spirits in prison that He was now the suzereign of the universe.

Tony

Christ did not ascent into heaven with blood but just as flesh and bones and spirit. He shed His blood, remember?

There's the implication of multiple ascensions in the New Testament.  For one thing, if He fulfilled the type of the High Priest of ancient Israel, as the book of Hebrews and Acts and other parts of the New Testament seem to strongly support, then the High Priest couldn't be touched as he was taking the sacrificial blood into the holy of holies of Israel.  The book of Hebrews says that so also Christ Jesus entered not into the holy of holies in heaven with the blood of animals, but with His own Blood having obtained salvation eonian.  It says in Hebrews that the earthly Temple was simply a photocopy of the true Temple in heaven.  There's two heavenly Temples.  The one where Christ Jesus took His Blood and then sprinkled all of the people as Moses did with blood in saying that this is the blood of the Covenant which God has enjoined to you, and then there's obviously the Temple that we are according to Paul's, Peter's, and John's writings when we're told that our bodies are that sacred Temple.  If He fulfilled the type of the High Priest of Israel, then He couldn't be touched after His resurrection 'til He'd taken His Blood before God.  One of the Gospel accounts has Him forbidding a woman from touching Him because He had not yet ascended to His God and Father and her God and Father.  Later, however, He emphatically commands all to touch Him for a spirit hath not flesh and bone.  Obviously, He'd made a deposit and was back with the breath of God to breath upon them telling them to receive the Holy Spirit and then the reality of the beginning of that which was spoken by the prophet Joel came on Pentecost of that year.  We've got the disciples on the road to Emmaus that when their eyes were opened by the Word of God He was teaching them, suddenly He vanished.  Where'd He go?  There's nothing that limits His ascension after His resurrection to only the Acts chapter 1 event.  That was more the triumphal entry into New Jerusalem for all of the faithful to His teachings at that time to have seen.

As to the other that Cardinal said, hoping she adds to what she said, but I'll just say that at first I was just as thrown by her comments as you were, like "where is she getting that??" roflol.  However, it IS spiritual in that it cries out, but it's physical in that it can be applied, and the anointing is a type of blood of the Spirit, but there's a slight difference although they go together as in the anointing of the Leper in Leviticus, I'm thinking chapter 14 but don't have a Bible handy to be sure.   Where you've got the Blood and the Oil being applied at the same time. The same thing going on in 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Ephesians, Hebrews, James, 1John, and Revelation.  The Blood speaking of Christ Jesus while the Oil representing the crushing of the Spirit of God as well.

Lord Jesus was crushed for our alienation, darkness, expansion, fears, illnesses, infirmities, iniquities, poverty, restitution, restoration, sanctification, and solidarity with one another, but the grapes and wine imagery of the Scriptures regarding the Spirit can't be ignored and it says in Hebrews that thru the Spirit He made His offering, while on the other hand it can equally be argued that by Himself He purged our sins.  It's hard to argue with the fact that wine in covenant ceremony is often considered the blood of the grape, although in paganism it's combined with the human blood of the fallen individuals making the pact.  However, there's an original kernal of truth of the original revelation of God to man shortly after the fall that got distored as the eons progressed and the nations became more numerous throughout the earth and more individualized in their sins, understandings, and the darkening of their thinking.  And the wine, while being the Blood of Jesus in the last supper is likewise a Biblical imagery of the Holy Spirit, i.e. "the Spirit, the Word, and the Blood agree."

All of this imagery from both the Bible and pagan sources indicates that the anointing is a type of Blood of the Spirit, yet it's the very Blood of Jesus Himself, His physical Blood, that the New Testament is repeatedly speaking of [most often].  Yet, the places where the Blood and Oil are mixed in the Old Testament, Hebrews, James, and John's implications and imagery can't be ignored.  What Cardinal's saying is just a deeper way of looking at it that looks at the whole thing, from a Hebraic perspective, rather than oversimplified doctrinal outlines of it that sometimes go a bit far in "rightly cutting it" until it's no longer recognizeable in the imagery, context, and setting that God gave with all of the precepts.  I personally wish everyone would be a bit more careful in genuinely pouring out everything that's dwelling in their hearts in all wisdom, as they've been endeavoring to do already in accordance with Colossians 3:16, but before hitting the "post" button that folks would stop and look at their post and be like St. Peter who says that it's not burdensome for me to remind you of what you already know, but I'll endeavor to keep on doing it while I'm in this Tabernacle.  And then to simply from their minds add to what their hearts have said with an extra sentence or paragraph [as and where applicable] to remind folks of an extra Scriptural reference for what things are being based upon in addition to the illumination of His Holy Spirit, so that those around here that would sincerely be Bereans, [but might not recognize the Scriptural allusion,] could have something to refer back to that they may not have previously considered within the Written Word.

[sparrow]

Molly, when I read your thought here, the thought I had right behind it, was that it was thru their blood. The life of the soul is in the blood also, so like a spiritual "blood guiltiness" pattern of the OT? Just thinking out loud here.......Blessings...

The bible does not say "the life of the soul is in the blood." Rather, it just says "the soul is in the blood."

  Tony, you know I respect your opinion a great deal, and glean a lot from what you write, but we are not always on the same page as far as looking at/for the natural things that are bearing witness for the spiritual.

So, that said, I guess that would depend on which blood you're talking about. He breathed (which is Spirit and HIS blood) into Adam and he became a living soul, or a soul that had life. So if the soul is in the blood (natural blood) and the life (His blood which is Spirit) is in the soul........unless of course you think natural blood is what was taken into heaven, seeing how flesh and blood cannot enter the kingdom. Blessings....

Wait..you said..
He breathed spirit and blood into Adam and Adam became a living soul.
Then you say the soul is in the blood. So really, what you meant to say was that He breathed spirit and SOUL into Adam. Then you say the blood which is spirit.. which means you then really meant that He breathed spirt and spirit into Adam.

Cardinal, huh? 

[Doug]

Who is it that Christ said would be harvested first? Was it not "the tares"? So then shouldn't "the tares" spoken of by Christ correlate in some way to "the dead" spoken of by Paul, who are gathered first?

No, I don't think there is a connection.

Doug