1000 Year Reign

[4WD]

Romans 6:5
For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection,

Was our Lord's resurrection spiritual or physical?

I believe that Jesus' true resurrection occurred at His ascension into heaven.  His body was raised on the early on the first day of the week following his death on the cross; His resurrection was at His ascension. That is the reason that in the Greek speaks of his raising [GR - ἔγερσις ,egersis] (Matt 27:53), not his resurrection [GR - ἀνάστασις, anastasis].

I believe His raising from the grave was physical, while His resurrection into heaven was spiritual.  There nothing in the whole of Scripture that would lead anyone to believe that there is anything in or about heaven that is physical.  So far as we have been told, only this created universe is physical.

Rob, I know that is not the standard view of things and I don't really expect you to agree with me.  But I believe my view is consistent with NT Scripture.

[DaveW]

There nothing in the whole of Scripture that would lead anyone to believe that there is anything in or about heaven that is physical.

That kinda sums up the ancient heresy of gnosticism.

[Rob]

We are not born into spiritual death.  We become spiritually dead when we sin.  The only death we are born into is physical death.  Physical death is an integral part of the physical creation.  Nothing physical was created to exist in eternity.No, Enoch's body did not die.  But beyond that we have no idea what actually became of Enoch's body.  Just as we have no idea what actually became of Jesus' body.  Jesus prayed   "Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed" (John 17:5).  That glory was not in the form of the human being that He left heaven to take on.  I have no doubt at all that God, the Father, answered and honored Jesus' prayer.

I'll come back to the spiritual death in another post.

Heb 11:13  These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. 

"These all" is a list of people who:

• Died in faith.
• Did not receive the promises.
• Were persuaded of the promises.
• Confessed they were stranger and pilgrims on the earth.
  

How do you figure Enoch's body didn't die when he's on that list?

[4WD]

I'll come back to the spiritual death in another post.

Heb 11:13  These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

"These all" is a list of people who:

• Died in faith.
• Did not receive the promises.
• Were persuaded of the promises.
• Confessed they were stranger and pilgrims on the earth.
  

How do you figure Enoch's body didn't die when he's on that list?

Genesis 5:22-24 and Hebrews 11:5.

[DaveW]

How do you figure Enoch's body didn't die when he's on that list?

You are thinking like a modern greek rather than a first century Jew.  The book of Hebrews was written BY a Jew to Jewish believers. 

"All" is taken more generally rather than necessarily applying to each individually. 

The late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks summed up the difference in Greek and Jewish culture and mindset (as evidenced in linguistic terms) is that Greeks divide things out for analysis, and Jews put things together for meaning.

[4WD]

That kinda sums up the ancient heresy of gnosticism.

No, that is not quite right. However maybe Gnosticism isn't 100% wrong about everything.

[DaveW]

Reconcile these:

Hebrews 9:27
And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,

1 Corinthians 15:51
Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed,

Impossible under Aristotelian logic, but perfectly fine under Hebraic logic.

[DaveW]

No, that is not quite right. However maybe Gnosticism isn't 100% wrong about everything.

I said "kinda."  Yes it is not a perfect summary.

But gnosticim being right?  No way. Not even a little.  Yes I do understand that gnostic mindset has been in the church since the first century; and that where Paul and Peter use the phrase "TRUE knowledge" they are combating it.

There is nothing right in gnosticism.

[Rob]

Genesis 5:22-24 and Hebrews 11:5.

Gen 5:24  And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.
Who is Enoch, the soul or Enoch's body?

Heb 11:5  By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. 
Same question here. But by far the most important part of that verse is "should not SEE death". It does not say that Enoch's body would not die.

I know you've had enough of this topic lol so I will let it go.

[Rob]

You are thinking like a modern greek rather than a first century Jew.  The book of Hebrews was written BY a Jew to Jewish believers. 

"All" is taken more generally rather than necessarily applying to each individually. 

The late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks summed up the difference in Greek and Jewish culture and mindset (as evidenced in linguistic terms) is that Greeks divide things out for analysis, and Jews put things together for meaning.

Even in the English language and western culture there are many times when all doesn't literally mean all, it's a generalization. This verse is an example.

Mat_2:3  When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.

The difference between this verse and the verse in Hebrews is that Hebrews isn't a generalization, it targets a very specific group of people - those who died, without receiving the promises as strangers on the earth. That description fits every single person who died before Christ came.

Also keep in mind that it doesn't say Enoch's body never died, it only says Enoch never saw his death. Again I'm not going to keep beating a dead horse, I have made my points and I can agree to disagree.

[DaveW]

Gen 5:24  And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.
Who is Enoch, the soul or Enoch's body?

Wrong question.  Again, based in the gnostic concept of dualism.

1 Thessalonians 5:23
Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

As reflected here in the words of Paul, the Jewish thought is that all parts of a person are equally him/her.  Spirit soul and body.  The whole person requires all the parts to be there. 

[Rob]

Reconcile these:

Hebrews 9:27
And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,

1 Corinthians 15:51
Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed,

Impossible under Aristotelian logic, but perfectly fine under Hebraic logic.

It's basically the same thing Jesus said, "he who liveth and believeth in me shall never die". Believers are taken out of these mortal bodies when it's time to leave this existence and the body goes the way of all the earth.

This is why I keep stressing Enoch. What happened to Enoch is the same thing that happens to all believers. Enoch was chosen to illustrate this because he was the 7th from Adam which represents the "perfect man", perfected because of Christ.

The rapture verses apply to all Christians, not just to a specific group of Christians alive at the "right time".

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

WS, that is a very good question.  It is a question that is difficult to answer, though perhaps it is not that it is so difficult to answer; rather it is difficult to understand the answer.  That is because in the resurrection we are raised to a spiritual body (1 Cor 15:44). The problem here is that we simply do not know, nor can we comprehend precisely, what a spiritual body is.  We have nothing in our experience to guide us to an understanding.  Not even Paul was ready to answer that question.  All he said about it was that it was not the body that died. Paul described it as being "sown",i.e., buried. Paul said, "what you sow is not the body that is to be" (1 Cor 15:37), . He says that there are earthly bodies and heavenly bodies and in the resurrection we will receive a heavenly body, that is, a spiritual body.  Imagine that spiritual body to be however you wish, but do not think of it as your revived earthly body.

As far as I can tell, "resurrection" means a couple different things, depending on context.

Within the gospels, it seems to me to be a referent back to the Ezekiel 37 prophecy of dry bones.  Within the prophecy, Israel was "dead" but predicted to be "resurrected."  This re-instatement of Israel was accomplished through water baptism.  From the nations where Israel had once been scattered, converts were drawn, and adopted back into Israel, causing it to live and exist again, though it had been dead.  Ephesians 2 likewise draws out this doctrine... the Ephesians were said to have been "dead in sins" but now had been "quickened."  The first meaning of resurrection is what we typically call regeneration or conversion.

But in the passage you pointed out, 1Cor 15, Paul certainly deals with the question of a yet-future resurrection, that pertains to those who are already believers.  While I don't agree with your reading of the chapter, I can agree that it's a hard to understand.  I read the words translated natural and spiritual are Greek psychic and pneumatic, like this:

It is sown a psychic body; it is raised a pneumatic body.

This leads me to believe that what is described is not a different form of body, but rather a different mode of movement - a change in raison d'etre.

Jarrod

[Rob]

Wrong question.  Again, based in the gnostic concept of dualism.

1 Thessalonians 5:23
Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

As reflected here in the words of Paul, the Jewish thought is that all parts of a person are equally him/her.  Spirit soul and body.  The whole person requires all the parts to be there.

I think this verse is talking about us submitting each part of ourselves, the body, soul and sprits to the Lord. I don't believe this is defining "us" as the complete package the body, soul and spirit. In other words 1 Thessalonians 5:23 is a repeat of Mark 12:30.

Mar_12:30  And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

There nothing in the whole of Scripture that would lead anyone to believe that there is anything in or about heaven that is physical.

That kinda sums up the ancient heresy of gnosticism.

No, no it doesn't.  That sums up Neo-platonism.  While gnosticism and platonism are both Greek thought, they're actually opposed.

The leading idea of Platonism is abstraction - everything physical has a heavenly counterpart (the 'form'), and if one can understand that form, they can then apply that understanding to other situations, things, people, etc.

Gnosticism instead posits that knowledge is obtained experientially.  The gnostic initiate is guided through a series of events in which he is meant to experience the essence of a "god," often in sexual terms.

Platonism eventually leads to science and education.  Gnosticism leads to a proliferation of rituals and rites.

Jarrod

[4WD]

I read the words translated natural and spiritual are Greek psychic and pneumatic, like this:

It is sown a psychic body; it is raised a pneumatic body.

This leads me to believe that what is described is not a different form of body, but rather a different mode of movement - a change in raison d'etre.

To be honest, I don't know what you mean by that.  The spiritual is the non carnal, the non fleshly, the non bodily.

[DaveW]

That kinda sums up the ancient heresy of gnosticism.
No, no it doesn't.  That sums up Neo-platonism.  While gnosticism and platonism are both Greek thought, they're actually opposed.

The leading idea of Platonism is abstraction - everything physical has a heavenly counterpart (the 'form'), and if one can understand that form, they can then apply that understanding to other situations, things, people, etc.

Gnosticism instead posits that knowledge is obtained experientially.  The gnostic initiate is guided through a series of events in which he is meant to experience the essence of a "god," often in sexual terms.

Platonism eventually leads to science and education.  Gnosticism leads to a proliferation of rituals and rites.

Jarrod

the "knowledge" of gnosticism is that "Spirit" is good, while "physical" is evil.  It has led to all kinds of error in the church from extreme asceticism in some monastic orders all out hedonism in some other parts of the church.

the first century Jewish mindset is strongly flavored by Deut 6.5:

And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.

That was considered the whole person.

[Rella]

Believers are taken out of these mortal bodies when it's time to leave this existence and the body goes the way of all the earth.

My heartfelt and deepest apologies to the one who was not expecting to see me here. This is a one time posting, of need.

Rob, you are correct. Paul said things like this. 2 Cor 5

6 Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:

7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)

8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

9 Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.

[DaveW]

We are resurrected to be judged IN THE BODY for what we did IN THE BODY.  And if we are not saved, the body gets thrown into hell:

2 Corinthians 5:10
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

Matthew 10:28
Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

[DaveW]

6 Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:
7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)
8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

Paul is describing the time between our physical life here and the resurrection where everyone gets judged.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

To be honest, I don't know what you mean by that.  The spiritual is the non carnal, the non fleshly, the non bodily.

I gave you the literal words.  The Greek word translated "natural" is psychikos - psychic.  The Greek word translated spiritual is pnuematikos - pneumatic.

These suggest that your definition is flawed.  Pneumatic does not mean "non-bodily."

Also, by that definition, a spiritual body would be a "non-bodily body."  (I think the checksum failed on that one.)

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

the "knowledge" of gnosticism is that "Spirit" is good, while "physical" is evil.  It has led to all kinds of error in the church from extreme asceticism in some monastic orders all out hedonism in some other parts of the church.

the first century Jewish mindset is strongly flavored by Deut 6.5:

And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.

That was considered the whole person.

I gave you a nuanced view of two competing Greek ideas, and you have immediately simplified it back to the point where it isn't even correct at a basic level.  Are you so set on teaching that you cannot learn?

Good vs. Evil is not a Greek idea. (It comes from Persia.)

Material vs Spiritual is a Greek idea.  It comes from platonism, not gnosticism.

The Bible contradicts Greek arguments against the idea that Christ came in the flesh, suffered, and died.  That Greek idea does not spring from the logic that everything material must be evil.  It springs from the idea that all gods are impassible.

Jarrod

[Rob]

My heartfelt and deepest apologies to the one who was not expecting to see me here. This is a one time posting, of need.

Rob, you are correct. Paul said things like this. 2 Cor 5

6 Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:

7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)

8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

9 Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.

Yes its very clear and I'm surprised there's debate against it. I was hoping to discuss how the resurrection being on the last day affects the 1000 year reign rather than discussing what the resurrection is.

[RB]

I really don't know what spiritual death is 4WD other than the state that we are born into. What is your view on Enoch, did Enoch's body die?

I'll give my thoughts since 4WD has spoken.  We have no record that Enoch's or Elijah's body tasted of death, other than dying with the Lord Jesus' death which we ALL DID. So many scriptures could be provided, for now, consider:

Galatians 2:19,20~"For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."

The law of God has judged every believer IN CHRIST and has found them to be RIGHTEOUS, nothing worthy of death, so, we all are dead to the law of God in this sense, it has NO POWER over us because of the spirit of HOLINESS we rendered unto the law IN CHRIST!

What we do not know is this: at what point did God shed them of their earthly bodies and cause them to be able to appear with him in glory~these things are hidden from us and we cannot particularly speak of them at the moment.

[4WD]

I gave you the literal words.  The Greek word translated "natural" is psychikos - psychic.  The Greek word translated spiritual is pnuematikos - pneumatic.

These suggest that your definition is flawed.  Pneumatic does not mean "non-bodily."

Also, by that definition, a spiritual body would be a "non-bodily body."  (I think the checksum failed on that one.)

The definition of ψυχικός [psuchikos] which is translated as "natural" according to Strong's is

From G5590; sensitive that is, animate (in distinction on the one hand from G4152, which is the higher or renovated nature; and on the other from G5446, which is the lower or bestial nature): - natural, sensual.


And from Thayer it is

1) of or belonging to breath
1a) having the nature and characteristics of the breath
1a1) the principal of animal life, which men have in common with the brutes
1b) governed by breath
1b1) the sensuous nature with its subjection to appetite and passion


The definition of πνευματικός [pneumatikos] which is translated as "spiritual" from Strong's is

From G4151; non-carnal, that is, (humanly) ethereal (as opposed to gross), or (daemoniacally) a spirit (concretely), or (divinely) supernatural, regenerate, religious: - spiritual.

and from Thayer

1) relating to the human spirit, or rational soul, as part of the man which is akin to God and serves as his instrument or organ
1a) that which possesses the nature of the rational soul
2) belonging to a spirit, or a being higher than man but inferior to God
3) belonging to the Divine Spirit
3a) of God the Holy Spirit
3b) one who is filled with and governed by the Spirit of God
4) pertaining to the wind or breath; windy, exposed to the wind, blowing


I don't know the source for your translations/interpretations but you need a better one. I will stick with mine and the resulting meaning of the passage in 1 Corinthians.

[4WD]

Yes its very clear and I'm surprised there's debate against it. I was hoping to discuss how the resurrection being on the last day affects the 1000 year reign rather than discussing what the resurrection is.

The 1000 year reign is now; it is the entire period between the first and second comings of Jesus Christ.  That is the Amillennial view which I think is the correct view and the one which I subscribe to.  Thus the effect the resurrection on the last day affects the 1000 year reign by ending it.

[4WD]

We are resurrected to be judged IN THE BODY for what we did IN THE BODY.  And if we are not saved, the body gets thrown into hell:

2 Corinthians 5:10
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

Matthew 10:28
Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Neither of those say anything about being judged IN THE BODY.  Moreover, as Rella so aptly pointed out, the several verses leading up to verse 10 say, "So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, for we walk by faith, not by sight. Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him" (2Co 5:6-9).

The clear implication from those verses is that when we appear at the judgment seat of Christ we will NOT be IN THE BODY.  Clearly from that passage to be at home with Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, is to be away from the body.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

I don't know the source for your translations/interpretations but you need a better one. I will stick with mine and the resulting meaning of the passage in 1 Corinthians.

My main source is the same as yours - Thayer's is a good lexicon.

I wonder why you think those definitions contradict what I said, though?

[4WD]

Because your words "psychic" and "pneumatic" do not appear Thayer or Strong's.  And those English words are not even close to the meaning implied in the Greek words.  In fact, psychic as given in the Dictionary.com presents just the opposite of "natural" implying more spiritual than natural;  and there is nothing implying the spiritual in the English word pneumatic or pneumatics whatsoever.  I'm not sure what sort of strange move you are trying to make here.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Because your words "psychic" and "pneumatic" do not appear Thayer or Strong's.

Yes they do... they are literally the Greek words - ψυχικόν (psuchikon) and πνευματικόν (pneumatikon).

And those English words are not even close to the meaning implied in the Greek words.

Are you saying that the English words which are etymologically derived from these Greek words no longer are related to them in meaning?  I disagree...

In fact, psychic as given in the Dictionary.com presents just the opposite of "natural" implying more spiritual than natural;

Psychic - of or relating to the psyche/mind.

Try not to focus on the specialized modern meaning of "hucksters defrauding people by claiming special mental powers."

...and there is nothing implying the spiritual in the English word pneumatic or pneumatics whatsoever.

The English word pneumatic carries the same sense as the Greek word πνευματικ (pneumatik).  Both indicate that something is moved/powered by air.

A spiritual body is a body that is moved/powered by spirit (rather than psyche).

It doesn't actually have to be difficult.

[4WD]

Wycliffes_Shillelagh,
All of that us such a reach that I can't believe that you have engaged in it.  I gave you both Strong's and Thayer and your claims are simply not there either explicitly or implicitly.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Wycliffes_Shillelagh,

All of that us such a reach that I can't believe that you have engaged in it.  I gave you both Strong's and Thayer and your claims are simply not there either explicitly or implicitly.

Yeah, major reach to think that that psyche means psyche and pneumatic means pneumatic.

Good thing we have your clear definition of a "non-bodily" body to fall back on.

[4WD]

Yeah, major reach to think that that psyche means psyche and pneumatic means pneumatic.

We are not trying to determine the meaning of the English words psyche and pneumatic.  But you have tried to turn it into that. Not only weird, but manifestly devious and dishonest.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

We are not trying to determine the meaning of the English words psyche and pneumatic.  But you have tried to turn it into that. Not only weird, but manifestly devious and dishonest.

We're trying to determine the meaning of the GREEK words psychic and pneumatic.

There's nothing dishonest about pointing out that the English words that descended from them, have basically the same meanings.

Jarrod

[4WD]

We're trying to determine the meaning of the GREEK words psychic and pneumatic.

There's nothing dishonest about pointing out that the English words that descended from them, have basically the same meanings.

Jarrod

Psychic and pneumatic are NOT GREEK words they are ENGLISH words. But you know that and so does everyone else.