In heaven we will have a body of flesh and blood. Very interesting because angels can take on human form

I guess I’m taking a practical approach…
Jesus said… Destroy this temple (body) and I will raise it.. What body? The body He was in when He spoke those words…

And He did because He had the “scars” to prove this is the same body that hung on the cross..

So Jesus rose with an immortal flesh body, resurrected body that still had imperfections.

That sucks for someone who lost a arm in war, for they will be raised in the exact same body they had when they died..

i mean for some reason translations all say 'of men' instead of 'Adam' - gotta at some point accept the people who made those decisions were more qualified than me-with-access-to-google.

I find it simpler and easier to just grunt.

Paul didn't say that. The immortal body is flesh as confirmed by Christ's own resurrection body.

Php_3:21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

He also healed all kinds of people - in a time where many of those blind were blind because an enemy had literally scooped their eyeballs out with a spoon. spitting to to make mud, remember? is He playing Potter there, making a whole new eye?

so, couple things,

1. Did He regrow missing cellular flesh when He healed - isn't that absolutely implied from a physical standpoint?
2. did those physically healed by Him also have scars or were His scars a specific testimony?
3. why is He healing physical ailments at all if salvation and redemption is purely spiritual? wouldn't that make Him sending the wrong message, being deceitful in His actions?

When Lazarus rose was that an immortal body too?
Was Christ body immortal before He resurrected?

@Truthnightmare

doesn't your position imply He should have said, oh your leprosy is only physical, your spirit is cool, so go on your way...?

instead He healed the physical body. why?
what's the allegorical message of this literally true event?

No. He was likely raised back to mortal life.



No. His body was resurrected and changed into immortal. That's why it retained scars.

And the Eucharist? If being raised only in an spiritual state who will partake of the body and blood?

Doesn’t that go against His very words?
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

But you seem to be saying He raised up a different temple.. “changed” means not the same. So He did not raise up “this” temple.
He raised up a “changed” temple.

So we will resurrect the same way?

why do we drink His blood and eat His flesh if human meat is not kosher and eating blood is specifically forbidden in Torah?

is our sin-stained blood to be replaced with His sinless blood, and our corrupt flesh to be replaced with His incorruptible?

"you are what you eat" is the human proverb, but He says "not what goes into the mouth but what comes out"!!!

these are the questions to ask! Thanks!

changed is fundamentally different than replaced

I don’t think so….
Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.

God wants us to be healthy.. as we were told what we should consume for our health.

But He gave us a reason why He healed the physical body..

9Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? 10But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) 11I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. 12And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.

Why heal the body?

that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins,

one implies retention of something of the original, while the other implies annihilation and complete recreation with no relationship to the first instance.
much like salvation/redemption vs.. damnation. if nothing about me. is retained, it is no different than me being damned. but if i am preserved, i am redeemed



He describes Himself as a Potter, and what a potter does is recycle clay that hasn't been fired.

i practiced pottery for 6 years in university. when something is malformed, you put it in water, and after time it is reduced to elements again and you can reform it.
when it has been tried by fire already though, if it is imperfect, it is lost.

amen

so why destroy the body of those being redeemed?
is He not mighty to save?
or is all creation irrevocably lost to Satan, checkmate...?

to me this is the crux. mankind is created with will, and then fallen in the sight of all the angels, after Satan's sin. we are God's response.
What does He do?
destroy us?

we are a witness to them
this is the heart of the book of Job - Satan accuses God of putting up a hedge, and God forces Satan to confess where he has been. Job, a man, is entered as evidence to the heavenly court.

Satan is allowed to corrupt but not to destroy Jobs earthly body.

that's evidence. all of Job is a judicial setting.

Well not that I suggest that this is to be regarded as Scripture but rather as if "an post" in an long Christian thread that has now spanned most near two thousand years. There was an man whose screen name was Irenaeus who posted an post long ago on the same matter of the resurrection of the flesh and gave examples of who saw it differently. I find it quite compelling in that he instead of reading translations of translations like us in 2023 had the opportunity to have read the actual autographs(original letters) written by the Apostles and it is striking that he would come to the conclusion after reading them and hearing those who actually knew the Apostles that he thought we would be raised in an flesh that would no longer see corruption(decay)... Anyway this is no new thing that Christians have pondered but instead something spoken of in even the early days of Christianity. Here is what he said about it almost two thousand years ago, I would read two or three chapters into it to access his understanding of how he thought the Church saw the matter... https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103501.htm https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103502.htm https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103503.htm

I believe he resurrected in the old body, then was changed into immortal. Even if he resurrected in an immortal body, it was still his body so what he said was still true, metaphorically speaking.

Either way, it has been proven he was in a physical body after resurrection, and that our bodies will be fashioned like his.



No.

The last enemy is death....