Church is it even biblical

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
5,096
932
113
You're correct, I did confuse you with Maverick, my apology.


I listed 3 heresies above, in post #95... for clarity, please state which of those 3 heresies you support.




Thank you.
...
A. No one has said that believers should not assemble but the discussion is about the setting of churches today being unbiblical. The idea that one or few people have the knowledge and pass it down to a congregation weekly or daily.
B. I do believe there are no genuine teachers/preachers/evangelists/Apostles/healers/prophets today
C. I do believe resurrection is not physical (flesh & Blood) but spiritual.

Which one is a heresy?
 

maxwel

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2013
9,415
2,489
113
A. No one has said that believers should not assemble but the discussion is about the setting of churches today being unbiblical. The idea that one or few people have the knowledge and pass it down to a congregation weekly or daily.
B. I do believe there are no genuine teachers/preachers/evangelists/Apostles/healers/prophets today
C. I do believe resurrection is not physical (flesh & Blood) but spiritual.

Which one is a heresy?
I believe that is precisely what you said.

Post #6
The idea of assemblies as was set out by the apostles is not what we have today and it wasn't meant for today. The apostles were mandated to spread the gospel to all nations and tribes before the end times come and assemblies in different nations and tribes would help them achieve that. When that mandate was achieved, then all those things should have ceased- a continuation of these things in the end times is misleading and satan has found an avenue to spread false gospel through the shepherds of these so called churches.

It seems that you said, very clearly, you do not believe Christian assemblies are for today.
If I'm misunderstanding you, then please clarify.
What EXACTLY is your view on Christian assemblies?

Please clarify your views precisely:
A.
What PRECISELY is the DIFFERENCE between the way you believe the apostles set up assemblies, and the way you believe Christians are currently assembling.
B. What is the precise DIFFERENCE, and what is the precise PROBLEM with this difference?



...
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
I believe that is precisely what you said.

Post #6



It seems that you said, very clearly, you do not believe Christian assemblies are for today.
If I'm misunderstanding you, then please clarify.
What EXACTLY is your view on Christian assemblies?

Please clarify your views precisely:
A.
What PRECISELY is the DIFFERENCE between the way you believe the apostles set up assemblies, and the way you believe Christians are currently assembling.
B. What is the precise DIFFERENCE, and what is the precise PROBLEM with this difference?



...
Its not a contradiction, he just said that the assemblies of apostles are not how today's assemblies should look like. He did not say that the church should not have any assemblies at all.
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
5,096
932
113
I believe that is precisely what you said.

Post #6



It seems that you said, very clearly, you do not believe Christian assemblies are for today.
If I'm misunderstanding you, then please clarify.
What EXACTLY is your view on Christian assemblies?

Please clarify your views precisely:
A.
What PRECISELY is the DIFFERENCE between the way you believe the apostles set up assemblies, and the way you believe Christians are currently assembling.
B. What is the precise DIFFERENCE, and what is the precise PROBLEM with this difference?

...
1. Assemblies as were set by the apostles were for a purpose; to help them fulfill their mandate which was spread the gospel to all nations and tribes as a witness before the end times or we can say, before the antichrist comes to deceive all nations and tribes. The apostles' teachings trickled down through the assembly leadership to the congregations and even reaching more people around through signs that attracted them to the assemblies.

2. The setting within the assemblies was never a one man show. Everyone was equal and some prophesied/ some taught/ some were given knowledge/some could heal. They never met so that one man could give everyone else their piece of mind but everyone had one or two contributions all for the sake of spreading the gospel and building themselves up in the gospel.

3. All that arrangement was by the appointment of God under the leadership of the apostles. All these ends when that mandate is achieved and the end comes. From that moment on every operation is supposed to be within the believers themselves- no outward signs anymore. No more teachings/no more evangelizing/no more prophesying and everything is supposed to be approached fully by faith. Because at this time, satan also is released and he comes with his teachings/signs & wonders/his version of the gospel/self appointments.

It had to end as soon as the new covenant is ratified. In the new covenant, a brother is not supposed to tell another, know the Lord because the Lord is in each one of them.

If today people appoint themselves to be teachers/prophets/evangelists and come up with assemblies, be sure what is being taught or prophesied is not from God. But we can meet and help the needy for example.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
A. No one has said that believers should not assemble but the discussion is about the setting of churches today being unbiblical. The idea that one or few people have the knowledge and pass it down to a congregation weekly or daily.
B. I do believe there are no genuine teachers/preachers/evangelists/Apostles/healers/prophets today
C. I do believe resurrection is not physical (flesh & Blood) but spiritual.

Which one is a heresy?
A. unbiblibal compared to what. I don't see a prescribed format given. Show me in the Bible how church should be held.
B. Why would there be no ministry as prescribed in Ephesians?
And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.
Ephesians 4:11‭-‬13
We have not all attained to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.
C. Didn't Jesus say to Thomas,
Then He said to Thomas, "Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing."

And also with Mary

Jesus said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you seeking?" Supposing Him to be the gardener, she said to Him, "Sir, if you have carried Him away, tell me where you have laid Him, and I will take Him away." Jesus said to her, "Mary!" She turned and said to Him in Hebrew, "Rabboni!" (which means, Teacher). Jesus said to her, "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'"
John 20:15‭-‬17
I don't know how one would cling to a spirit or put their finger into the palms of his hand if he were spirit only and not material.
 

Quantrill

Well-known member
Sep 20, 2018
988
300
63
Matt 27:
45From noon until three in the afternoon darkness came over all the land. 46About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, c lemasabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”). d
47When some of those standing there heard this, they said, “He’s calling Elijah.”
48Immediately one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a staff, and offered it to Jesus to drink. 49The rest said, “Now leave him alone. Let’s see if Elijah comes to save him.”
50And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.

51At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split 52and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and e went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

54When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, “Surely he was the Son of God!”


It is right there highlighted for you- Jesus resurrected immediately after He died because He has power that death can not withstand and with the same power, He brings all those who are asleep in Him. same thing with us today, if we die, there's no waiting, we shall be raised- as Paul put it, to be absent in the body is to be present in the Lord.
Jesus was not resurrected until after three days. The 'And' in each verse of (Matt. 27:51-53) means these things followed. It doesn't mean it happened immediately at that time.

I already told you those were a first fruits to be raised. Not all were raised. And even these were not raised till after Jesus resurrection. As I said, Jesus is the first born of many brethren. And these that were raised were a first fruits of the Israelites to be raised. They did not belong to the Church.

Not only are you confused about what is resurrected, and the time of the resurrections, but you are confused as to who is resurrected.

As I said, resurrection always has to do with the body. Our bodies will be resurrected and joined with our soul and spirit.

Quantrill
 

maxwel

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2013
9,415
2,489
113
Its not a contradiction, he just said that the assemblies of apostles are not how today's assemblies should look like. He did not say that the church should not have any assemblies at all.

Whether or not it's a contradiction will be determined by how he explains his statement.


...
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,091
1,755
113
Resurrection is off topic but allow me.

1 Cor 15:
12But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
20But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27For he “has put everything under his feet.” c Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.

29Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them? 30And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour?31I face death every day—yes, just as surely as I boast about you in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Again, another famous teaching about resurrection and here Paul insists, "..if there's no resurrection..." rather than "if there will be no resurrection..." but the question asked by Paul in v29 is key to understanding the teaching.
I find your argument a bit strange, of course. I am not Greek scholar, and I suspect you are not either. But from I have read the word translated 'is' in the verse you are looking at seems to mean 'exist' in the Greek. Does the resurrection exist. Paul is arguing that the resurrection exists because in the past 'Christ has indeed been raised from the dead," (v. 20.) But that word is in the perfect indicative middle passive. This shows up in his arguments in the passage where he also says, 'if the dead are not raised.' It shows up earlier in the passage where he says that Christ was raised on the third day. It does not seem to be inflected for future or past the way the English word is.

I strongly suspect that you are arguing for the time at which the resurrection occurs based on information not communicated in the Greek words you are discussing. This is a bit more complicated than a concordance will explain. But historically, native speakers of Greek, Latin-speaking believers who read Greek, and the scholars who read Greek saw the resurrection as a future event. Your going up against people who actually have known the language throughout history.

But look at verse 22. There is a word in the future indicative passive, zōopoiēthēsontai. They that are Christ's will be made alive at His coming.

Notice here that the resurrection is a future event and the time it occurs is specified-- at His coming.

In I Thessalonians 4:16, at the Lords' return, the dead in Christ 'will rise first', and that is in the future indicative middle in Greek. It is a future event.

"Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?"

Q. If Paul was talking about 21st century resurrection, why use a 1st century practice(baptism for the dead) to emphasize his point? what restricted him from saying " if there will be no resurrection, what will they do those that will be baptized for the dead in the 21st century?". If Paul indeed taught a distant future resurrection, he would have known those that practiced baptism for the dead would be dead themselves so would not have bothered to use them to emphasize his point.


I do not follow this line of reasoning of yours at all? Baptism for the dead is not a common church practice now. The Mormon cult have something they call baptism for the dead. Why would Paul point to future practices his readers would not understand?

Paul was writing to persuade his audience, and his immediate audience lived in the first century, that there would be a resurrection of the dead and that Christ was the firstfruits of it. He was writing about a future event, but in their own time, some were baptized for the dead. He asked why some did that if there were no resurrection. He might have been pointing out an inconsistency in their beliefs and practices. It doesn't make sense that he discuss 21st century baptism for the dead if the resurrection will occur in this century.
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,091
1,755
113
Do you know why Jesus had to physically resurrect? as a physical evidence for resurrection, if only His unseen soul resurrected, how would people believe in resurrection?
It doesn't mean that everybody else resurrects bodily (flesh & bones)- they are not the gospel so that people can believe in them, but Jesus was so that everything He did was evident.
John says we shall be like Him for we shall see Him as He is. Paul argued before the Sanhedrin that he was on trial because of the resurrection of the dead. Paul and the other Pharisees believed in the resurrection of the body, not being recreated up in heaven somwhere. Paul argued for the existence of the resurrection of the dead because Christ rose from the dead. He's talking about the same thing, bodily resurrection. In Romans 8, he says we await the redemption of our bodies.

I am curious if you are extreme preterist.

Still, flesh and bones can not inherit the kingdom of God.
The Bible does not say that. It says flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom.
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,091
1,755
113
The Lord is here at all times, wherever two or three are gathered together in His name (Matthew 18:20).
It makes me wonder what the sign of the Lord coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory means, when He is already here (Matthew 24:30), and with His power manifesting itself from time to time currently.

Mattherw 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
The Bible also teaches that Jesus will come back. This is very clear. You should have some flexibility in your thinking when it comes to taking things literally and spiritually.
 

maxwel

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2013
9,415
2,489
113
1. Assemblies as were set by the apostles were for a purpose; to help them fulfill their mandate which was spread the gospel to all nations and tribes as a witness before the end times or we can say, before the antichrist comes to deceive all nations and tribes. The apostles' teachings trickled down through the assembly leadership to the congregations and even reaching more people around through signs that attracted them to the assemblies.

2. The setting within the assemblies was never a one man show. Everyone was equal and some prophesied/ some taught/ some were given knowledge/some could heal. They never met so that one man could give everyone else their piece of mind but everyone had one or two contributions all for the sake of spreading the gospel and building themselves up in the gospel.

3. All that arrangement was by the appointment of God under the leadership of the apostles. All these ends when that mandate is achieved and the end comes. From that moment on every operation is supposed to be within the believers themselves- no outward signs anymore. No more teachings/no more evangelizing/no more prophesying and everything is supposed to be approached fully by faith. Because at this time, satan also is released and he comes with his teachings/signs & wonders/his version of the gospel/self appointments.

It had to end as soon as the new covenant is ratified. In the new covenant, a brother is not supposed to tell another, know the Lord because the Lord is in each one of them.

If today people appoint themselves to be teachers/prophets/evangelists and come up with assemblies, be sure what is being taught or prophesied is not from God. But we can meet and help the needy for example.

Let's pursue a bit more clarity.



Please try to address each question specifically:

A. Should Christians assemble?
(A simple yes or no is all that's required.)

B. Is it mandated that Christians assemble?
(A simple yes or no is all that's required.

C. If Christians assemble, what SHOULD THEY DO when assembled?

D. If Christians assemble, what SHOULD THEY NOT DO when assembled?





...
 

maverich

Senior Member
Jun 27, 2017
294
34
28
No, in the time of the apostle's they would have called it a church. Synagogue was for Israel.

The Church was first brought to light in (Matt. 16:18).

The Church is a Body of believers. We do meet in buildings.

So, the Church is most definitely of God.

Quantrill
What is the Hebrew word for church
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,691
13,135
113
Oh my, didn't Jesus come for the lost the least and the last
to 'gather' them unto Himself?

what are you doing 'assembling' with a lot of other believers on the internet, btw? :D
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
No, Jesus rose bodily because He was the first born of many brethren. (Rom. 8:29) We will be just like him with a resurrection body of flesh and bone. (1 John 3:2)

Yes it has and can.

Quantrill

One thing I have observed is many think the demonstration of the work of unseen Spirit was not a demonstration of the lamb of God who had already slain from before the foundation of the world but the actual working out of it . God is not a man as never was never could be.

Christ of His own flesh informs us it did not profit for it is rather the unseen Spirit that does work to quicken our souls as we walk by faith the unseen . It was necessary that he did come incorruptible flesh that aged in a process of dying typified as sinful to put away sin in the flesh..... again as a demonstration of the work already finished from before the foundation of the world

Romans 8:3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

In order to establish a perfect type of the character and nature of the priesthood of the Lord, there was no man who could be a perfect type and so God Himself appeared in the form of a man as that seen . He did not take on a human nature. Melchizedek did not become man as He did when Jesus Christ became man, but He did appear in the form of a man, in the person of Melchizedek, again in order to set up a type, a perfect type of the eternal character of the priesthood of the Jesus .

Seeing God cannot die his corruptible body was kept from corruption for three day .The same body of flesh was raised .He was therefore raised according to the unseen spirit of holiness. There is no such thing as flesh of holiness.(a Catholic idea)

Romans 1:4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

Having finished the demonstration be fore he return to the unseen glot ry he had with the father Jesus left clear instructions, that even though some did know him after the flesh that did not profit from then on we know long look for another fleshly demonstration of the power of the Spirit. We walk by faith the eternal not seen

Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.2 Corinthians 5:16
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,091
1,755
113
1. Assemblies as were set by the apostles were for a purpose; to help them fulfill their mandate which was spread the gospel to all nations and tribes as a witness before the end times or we can say, before the antichrist comes to deceive all nations and tribes. The apostles' teachings trickled down through the assembly leadership to the congregations and even reaching more people around through signs that attracted them to the assemblies.
If that is the case, why do you believe there is no more need for assemblies?

2. The setting within the assemblies was never a one man show. Everyone was equal and some prophesied/ some taught/ some were given knowledge/some could heal. They never met so that one man could give everyone else their piece of mind but everyone had one or two contributions all for the sake of spreading the gospel and building themselves up in the gospel.
I have a similar view of what we are to do in church, but I do not see any reason why we should not continue to assemble. I Corinthians 14, esp. v. 26 and the verses that follow explain what to do in our assemblies. That is the only long passage we have on what to do in church besides communion passages. Hebrews 10:24-25 is another passage that illustrates the point. But why believe we should not continue to do as these passages teach? I Corinthians 1:7 says 'So that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' This indicates the Lord's coming is an actual event, not just something that happened all the time and was a continuous ongoing thing. Also, Paul would explain how to use spiritual gifts in the assembly.

I'm wondering if you have been influenced by Darby's teaching? What about full preterism?

3. All that arrangement was by the appointment of God under the leadership of the apostles. All these ends when that mandate is achieved and the end comes. From that moment on every operation is supposed to be within the believers themselves- no outward signs anymore. No more teachings/no more evangelizing/no more prophesying and everything is supposed to be approached fully by faith. Because at this time, satan also is released and he comes with his teachings/signs & wonders/his version of the gospel/self appointments.
You seem to embrace a false dichotomy-- teaching, evangelizing, prophesying versus being approached fully by faith. Romans 12 says for the one who prophesies to prophesy according to the proportion of faith. So prophesying was done by faith, and is not somehow the opposite of faith.

Satan coming with lying wonders does not do away with legitimate gifts of the Spirit. Jesus warned of false prophets in the last days, but the book of Revelation speaks of prophets and predicts that the two witnesses will prophesy. It also speaks of a false prophet. There were both false and true prophets in Old Testament times as well. The existence of false prophets does not mean that there is no true prophesying going on.

It had to end as soon as the new covenant is ratified. In the new covenant, a brother is not supposed to tell another, know the Lord because the Lord is in each one of them.
That which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. We are in a transition right now. Now, people come to faith through preaching, through evangelism. But we have the firstfruits of the coming age when we receive the Spirit. Nevertheless, we still groan for the adoption, that is the redemption of our bodies. This hasn't happened yet. We will see a fuller realization of what is coming after Christ returns, the dead are raised, then they that are alive and remain shall be caught up to meet the Lord in the air.

If today people appoint themselves to be teachers/prophets/evangelists and come up with assemblies, be sure what is being taught or prophesied is not from God. But we can meet and help the needy for example.
Why do you think the way the Christian faith and the way we are supposed to expressed it changed from what we see in the Bible to this theory you have in your mind? Why would you reject all these gifts and the work of the Spirit of God through them in this current age? The Bible teaches against the idea that one member says to another member who has certain gifts, "I have no need of thee."
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
5,096
932
113
B. Why would there be no ministry as prescribed in Ephesians?
And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.
Ephesians 4:11‭-‬13
We have not all attained to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.
You say there must be apostles/prophets/evangelists/pastors and teachers so that unity in faith is achieved, but what we see today is that with increase in pastors/evangelists, there's increased disunity and confusion. Things that you can only associate with satan and not God.

You have actually proved the op right, thanks for your efforts.
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
5,096
932
113
Let's pursue a bit more clarity.



Please try to address each question specifically:

A. Should Christians assemble?
(A simple yes or no is all that's required.)

B. Is it mandated that Christians assemble?
(A simple yes or no is all that's required.

C. If Christians assemble, what SHOULD THEY DO when assembled?

D. If Christians assemble, what SHOULD THEY NOT DO when assembled?


...
All these questions are vague, it's like asking "should humans breathe?"
Assemble for what course? meeting to sing and try to worship en mass is pointless, God doesn't dwell in buildings.

I also have my set of vague questions:

1. Who is a Christian?
2. By your definition of a Christian, are Christians going to heaven meaning that all these Christian assemblies, every member will make it to heaven?
3. If not every member makes it to heaven, why do you call it an assembly? will it be an assembly of righteous and unrighteous together?
4. If real believers are spread across the world and they don't know each other yet they are one in faith within Christ, is this not an assembly?

Heb 12:22But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

Assembly means unity in faith, something that is hardly found in churches.
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
5,096
932
113
Jesus was not resurrected until after three days. The 'And' in each verse of (Matt. 27:51-53) means these things followed. It doesn't mean it happened immediately at that time.

I already told you those were a first fruits to be raised. Not all were raised. And even these were not raised till after Jesus resurrection. As I said, Jesus is the first born of many brethren. And these that were raised were a first fruits of the Israelites to be raised. They did not belong to the Church.

Not only are you confused about what is resurrected, and the time of the resurrections, but you are confused as to who is resurrected.

As I said, resurrection always has to do with the body. Our bodies will be resurrected and joined with our soul and spirit.

Quantrill
Nobody resurrects before Jesus, let your pastor know that.