 |
|
|
"We do not have to sift through Paul's thorn, Job's boils, or Timothy's sick stomach to try to understand the perfect will of God. You must realize Paul's infirmity was not in his flesh; it was his soulish man - his mind, his will, and emotions. We know this because he told us the thorn was a messenger of Satan sent to buffet him....It is time preachers stop trying to make excuses for their lack of faith and understanding of the Word of God."
-- Rod Parsley
|
|
| |
by Jerel Kratt
When Paul writes about “flesh and blood” not being able to inherit the kingdom of God, what does he mean? The purpose of this essay is to explore this question and hopefully present some answers. A natural part of this question would also involve answering the question, “what is the kingdom of God?” I will not set out to answer that question here, presuming that the reader will have some background already on the “kingdom of God”; I only wish to discuss the concept of “flesh and blood”. Let’s start with 1 Corinthians 15. Unless otherwise noted, all quotations of Scripture will be from Young’s Literal Translation.
1 Cor 15:50-57 YLT And this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood the reign of God is not able to inherit, nor doth the corruption inherit the incorruption; (51) lo, I tell you a secret; we indeed shall not all sleep, and we all shall be changed; (52) in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, in the last trumpet, for it shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we--we shall be changed: (53) for it behoveth this corruptible to put on incorruption, and this mortal to put on immortality; (54) and when this corruptible may have put on incorruption, and this mortal may have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the word that hath been written, `The Death was swallowed up--to victory; (55) where, O Death, thy sting? where, O Hades, thy victory?' (56) and the sting of the death is the sin, and the power of the sin the law; (57) and to God--thanks, to Him who is giving us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ;
First, what comes to my mind is what Jesus told “Nic at night”:
John 3:3-12 YLT Jesus answered and said to him, `Verily, verily, I say to thee, If any one may not be born from above, he is not able to see the reign of God;' (4) Nicodemus saith unto him, `How is a man able to be born, being old? is he able into the womb of his mother a second time to enter, and to be born?' (5) Jesus answered, `Verily, verily, I say to thee, If any one may not be born of water, and the Spirit, he is not able to enter into the reign of God; (6) that which hath been born of the flesh is flesh, and that which hath been born of the Spirit is spirit. (7) `Thou mayest not wonder that I said to thee, It behoveth you to be born from above; (8) the Spirit where he willeth doth blow, and his voice thou dost hear, but thou hast not known whence he cometh, and whither he goeth; thus is every one who hath been born of the Spirit.' (9) Nicodemus answered and said to him, `How are these things able to happen?' (10) Jesus answered and said to him, `Thou art the teacher of Israel--and these things thou dost not know! (11) `Verily, verily, I say to thee--What we have known we speak, and what we have seen we testify, and our testimony ye do not receive; (12) if the earthly things I said to you, and ye do not believe, how, if I shall say to you the heavenly things, will ye believe?
It is interesting to me that Jesus, like Paul, tells us of the necessity to change from the fleshly to the spiritual, or from the “earthly” to the “heavenly”. Of course, few people I know apply John 3 to the resurrection of 1 Cor. 15; it is typically applied to one’s “entrance” into the spiritual kingdom, upon their baptism into Christ, or so we are told. So, for some apparent reason, being born “not of the flesh but of the Spirit” in John 3 puts us into the kingdom of God (the church), but being transformed “from the fleshly to the spiritual” in 1 Cor. 15 puts us into the kingdom of God (heaven, not the church). Does anyone other than me see a problem here?
Click here to read the entire article
|
| |
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Re: Flesh and Blood (Score: 1)
 by davo on Tuesday, August 19 @ 21:27:21 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) |
This article makes a good case concerning the "flesh" – I think it was a little light on regarding the "blood".
As I see it… when Paul speaks in 1Cor 15:50 of "flesh and blood" he is referencing the two elements wherein the Judaizers of Israel were making their boast, i.e., what they were trusting in as their righteousness, at least as they saw it – keeping Torah, and their claim to Abrahamic heritage. Thus Flesh and Blood equates to Law and Linage, as per:
Jn 5:45 Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you—Moses [Torah], in whom you trust.
Jn 8:39 They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham.
This whole issue of blood-linage crops up not infrequently in Jesus' dealings with the religious elites:
Lk 20:27-36 Then some of the Sadducees, who deny that there is a resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, saying: “Teacher, Moses wrote to us that if a man’s brother dies, having a wife, and he dies without children, his brother should take his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. Now there were seven brothers. And the first took a wife, and died without children. And the second took her as wife, and he died childless. Then the third took her, and in like manner the seven also; and they left no children, and died. Last of all the woman died also. Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife does she become? For all seven had her as wife.” Jesus answered and said to them, “The sons of this age [Mosaic old covenant age] marry and are given in marriage. But those who are counted worthy to attain that age [of new covenant righteousness], and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.
The understanding of this passage becomes much clearer when viewed in its larger context: the soon coming new covenant age would not be like the old covenant nationalistic age where ethnic purity through the birth-marriage-birth cycle was the badge of covenant membership. Unlike the passing old order the coming new covenant age would no longer be established according to nationalistic identity, as per Israel only, but was to be truly inter-national through Gentile inclusion, and so no longer limited to or determined by natural or national progeny. Thus "neither marry nor are given in marriage" ceases to be an issue; but where all who were called "are equal to the angels and are sons of God" – showing that what was considered as the natural birth rite was no longer the qualifier for being the people of God.
Thus "inheriting" the kingdom spoke not to right rituals or right relatives – but rather coming into the reign of God. The very thing Paul says Israel was awaiting, though inherently misunderstanding. To "inherit" was/is to "reign in life" – something requiring neither "flesh" nor "blood" but rather the life of Christ:
Rom 5:17 For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive [actively grasp] abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
davo – pantelism.com –
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Starlight on Wednesday, August 20 @ 04:24:20 PDT
- by davo on Wednesday, August 20 @ 17:32:54 PDT
Flesh & Blood & Biological Adam? (Score: 1)
 by Starlight on Thursday, August 21 @ 06:05:48 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | I believe this article has properly identified the definition of “flesh and blood” according to NT writers such as Paul. Many continue to hold onto a literal physical or biological fleshly interpretation and I believe can end up with some erroneous understandings of Paul’s discussion. There is a tendency to take the fleshly as a biological story only all the way back to Adam who was the original “earthy” or “fleshly” works oriented covenant man. As we can see from the author’s discussion that is not the intent of the scriptures concerning Adam’s fleshly or earthy nature. This misunderstanding is what sometimes leads some to a physical bodily resurrection view instead of the correct corporate bodily spiritual understanding. Also there are “some” who come to a universal biological understanding of redemption because they also tend to read the scriptures as biological fleshly instead of the definition that Paul is presenting to us.
Taking the discussion now back to Genesis we see that Adam is indeed described as Earthy in connection with his creation and covenant with God. We know that his earthy works were cursed when he was expelled from the Garden and the fruits of his labor would result in thorns and thistles. This is exactly the same picture/imagery that the Hebrew writer (probably Paul) uses to describe the impending end of the Old Covenant of works in Heb 6:7-8.
Heb 6: 7 Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8 But LAND THAT PRODUCES THORNS AND THISTLES IS WORTHLESS and is in danger of being CURSED. IN THE END IT WILL BE BURNED.
Just as the author has correctly deduced from scripture the proper understanding of fleshly/earthy so can we use the same procedure to identify that it goes back to Adam originally and the “futility” that he was originally cursed with concerning his works of attaining relationship with God. Fleshly originated with Adam and was passed on neither because of biology nor because of agricultural ramifications but because “all” men who proceeded to call upon the name of the Lord were doomed to ineptitude in this manner of spiritual pursuit. In fact immediately after Cain murdered Abel he was given a curse that was even more severe than even Adam and Eve and their seed progeny.
Gen 4: 10 The LORD said, … 11 Now YOU ARE UNDER A CURSE AND DRIVEN FROM THE GROUND, which opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand. 12 WHEN YOU WORK THE GROUND, IT WILL NO LONGER YIELD ITS CROPS FOR YOU.
Notice the contrast with Adams curse as Cain would receive absolutely no benefit derived from his works. This is a prophetic picture of the time of the end when those who followed the way of Cain were doomed to outer darkness outside the presence of God and they would no longer benefit from even the meagerness that Adam previously received through his works.
Gen 3: 17 To Adam he said,… "CURSED IS THE GROUND because of you; through painful toil YOU WILL EAT OF IT all the days of your life. It will PRODUCE THORNS AND THISTLES for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.
Adam though is entirely a picture of the first covenant of inept works and represents the embodiment of the Old Covenant (fleshly) while Christ is the picture of the second covenant and is the body of Christ (spiritual). The fleshly works of Adam give way to the spiritual blessings of Christ.
Another misconception that falls into a discussion of earthy Adam is whether he was already created in God’s image and simply lost that image at the fall. Isn’t the Image of God in Gen 1:26 the same as the Image which only came to us through Christ bestowed upon faithful men? I propose that the Image of God under discussion in Gen 1 is of the Heavenly and can only be spiritual since it puts us in the realm of God and could not have been given and lost in the Garden, otherwise we could lose our Image today through th
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by tom-g on Thursday, August 21 @ 10:38:38 PDT
- by Starlight on Thursday, August 21 @ 10:46:10 PDT
- by tom-g on Thursday, August 21 @ 12:09:38 PDT
- by Starlight on Thursday, August 21 @ 12:42:59 PDT
- by mazuur on Thursday, August 21 @ 15:33:35 PDT
- by tom-g on Friday, August 22 @ 13:23:44 PDT
- by mazuur on Saturday, August 23 @ 19:27:44 PDT
- by tom-g on Sunday, August 24 @ 05:23:45 PDT
- by mazuur on Sunday, August 24 @ 08:58:28 PDT
- by mazuur on Thursday, August 21 @ 15:29:35 PDT
- by Ed on Thursday, August 21 @ 18:03:44 PDT
- by tom-g on Friday, August 22 @ 13:35:11 PDT
- by mazuur on Thursday, August 21 @ 18:54:03 PDT
- by Starlight on Thursday, August 21 @ 21:10:26 PDT
- by mazuur on Friday, August 22 @ 04:58:44 PDT
- by tom-g on Friday, August 22 @ 14:14:31 PDT
- by davo on Friday, August 22 @ 23:35:56 PDT
- by tom-g on Saturday, August 23 @ 08:18:57 PDT
- by davo on Saturday, August 23 @ 19:31:58 PDT
- by mazuur on Saturday, August 23 @ 19:26:06 PDT
- by mazuur on Saturday, August 23 @ 19:40:43 PDT
- by tom-g on Sunday, August 24 @ 06:34:24 PDT
- by mazuur on Sunday, August 24 @ 09:14:54 PDT
- by mazuur on Sunday, August 24 @ 10:16:28 PDT
- by tom-g on Sunday, August 24 @ 14:22:41 PDT
- by Starlight on Sunday, August 24 @ 19:47:22 PDT
- by tom-g on Monday, August 25 @ 05:52:14 PDT
- by Starlight on Monday, August 25 @ 06:52:56 PDT
- by tom-g on Monday, August 25 @ 11:53:47 PDT
- by Starlight on Monday, August 25 @ 09:46:05 PDT
- by mazuur on Monday, August 25 @ 10:34:00 PDT
- by Starlight on Monday, August 25 @ 11:06:55 PDT
- by mazuur on Monday, August 25 @ 19:41:04 PDT
- by Virgil on Monday, August 25 @ 19:49:20 PDT
- by tom-g on Monday, August 25 @ 21:16:18 PDT
- by mazuur on Tuesday, August 26 @ 05:29:37 PDT
- by Starlight on Monday, August 25 @ 21:57:29 PDT
- by mazuur on Tuesday, August 26 @ 05:54:16 PDT
- by tom-g on Tuesday, August 26 @ 11:39:02 PDT
- by Starlight on Tuesday, August 26 @ 12:11:11 PDT
- by tom-g on Tuesday, August 26 @ 14:53:23 PDT
- by davo on Wednesday, August 27 @ 23:50:43 PDT
- by Starlight on Thursday, August 28 @ 06:18:54 PDT
- by davo on Thursday, August 28 @ 21:59:27 PDT
- by Starlight on Friday, August 29 @ 06:47:18 PDT
| 
|
