Falling Short of Understanding

Man: Spirit, Body, and Soul Part 2

After my posting my Blog David Green Responded with:

“You do realize of course that you have Jesus ceasing to be “man” for three days and three nights. That is just plain weird,”

It took me a moment to understand how he came to this illogical conclusion he reached here. So, let me spell it out and provide a more in depth theological analysis.

I argued that AFTER the Resurrection Jesus ascended in his body he was raised in, the selfsame body he lived in but now glorified, Immortal and imperishable, Death no longer has power over him.  Christ being fully man and fully God and becoming a man implies that Christ must maintain having a body in order to be still fully man. (Christology) Christ was not always a man, but existed as a “spirit” before his incarnation.

David took the implication that if a man does not have a body he can not be a man, therefore Jesus did not have his body for three days therefore he was not a man for three days.

He confuses ontology with a Christology.

Man was created both body and Spirit, a man cannot be just a Spirit as he was not a created being without a body. The ontological reality of being for man.

Christ having a body and two natures (Christology) makes him ontologically different from man. As he is fully God and Fully man. Christ did exist without the human nature or Body. Man being made to be both body and spirit cannot. Once Christ took on his human nature and body he can no longer return to a “spirit” being alone.

Christ who was not created, nor created as a man, took on, became a man. He existed as a “spirit” being before his incarnation. Christ became like man and subject to physical death and experienced life and death as a man.

So if I defined Christ as being fully man it has to do with the human nature, Christ had both a spirit nature and a human nature both existed with in him. The spirit nature is what God is, fully God, of the same essence as God, which includes the divine attributes alongside and with a fully human nature. (Orthodox position: the two are not fused together, but two natures in one body.)

Man being both spirit and body, two parts, while divided at death the nature of his being remains fully human. As did Christ after his death while the body was in the grave. His human nature did not cease to exist.

In preterist theology death ends the union of Body and Spirit as the flesh turns to dust in the ground and is no more. After death the spirit remained in Hades until the resurrection when the believer was raised into a new spiritual body (not flesh and blood but of some other “spiritual” substance they have no answer as to what), but in essence they contend they are “spirit beings” and still men, just with out a physical body. Therefore, they can be men with out a body. In the same way Jesus also does not have a body of flesh and bones after his ascension but a “spirit” body but is also still fully man.

IF the theologian demands that in order for Christ to be fully man, he must have a body, Then if he did not have his body for three days does that no longer make him a man? And a man must have a body and spirt united, so when the spirit and body divided does that make man and Christ no longer a man while separated?

In Christian Theology, (not preterist theology) If the resurrection has not happened then the men are still separated from their body and yet they are still men. Why would Christ no longer be a man IF he does not have human body of flesh and bone in heaven? He did not have one for three days and nights did that make him not a man since it is the same idea of separation of body and spirit?

The temporary separation with three days or six thousand years never negates God’s intent in creating man body and spirit or stops the plans God has to unite the body with the Spirit, through resurrection, a return to what man was created to be by the nature of his being. It is the hope of the resurrection that fixes what sin has separated by introducing death into God’s design.

It is God’s purpose, intent, and design that declares man and Christ to be still fully man while spirit and body is divided, the design of resurrection is to restore the intent. Preterist theology denies the intent and hope of resurrection. The redemption of the body.

The resurrection of the dead is the intent of God to reunite the body of flesh, raised immortal and imperishable, with the spirit of man, and restore man to what he created him to be. Just as Christ resurrection restored Christ with his body so that he can be fully the God-man he became in his incarnation.

His resurrection restored what death sought to destroy. To get rid of his body after his resurrection is to undo what Resurrection is.

Resurrection is not getting a different created body, but the same body now glorified.

It is the preterist theology that claims God does not reunite the spirit with the body Christ was born in and that man or Christ can still be man without the body of flesh and bone. It is God who said I created man to be both Body and Spirit and I will reunite them both in the resurrection and restore what was lost by sin death.

In preterist theology Jesus remains eternal without the physical body he was born in and raised with, he returns to a sprit nature and no longer with a “human” body. (seeing the foolishness of a position that Jesus no longer has a body, they compromise and say he has a “spirit” body which is not physical without one verse to support such a position) but a “spirit” body that is not physical since flesh and blood can not inherit the kingdom.

It is the preterist theology that denies God’s intent for man to remain body and spirit. If Jesus loses his body after his resurrection, then he is no longer “fully” man. Man being by nature both body and spirit. After resurrection man will be restored to being fully man.

The resurrection of the dead is the intent of God to reunite the body of flesh, raised immortal and imperishable, with the spirit of man, and restore man to what he created him to be. Just as Christ resurrection restored Christ with his body so that he can be fully the God-man he became in his incarnation. Resurrection is not getting a different created body, but the same body now glorified.

Preterist theology removes the hope and intent of the Resurrection.

No theology is easy to grasp or comes naturally to a person even for one who thinks he has been studying for years especially with out a solid foundation of hermeneutical principles.  The reflexive nature of preterism will cause a knee jerk reaction of rejection simply because it comes from a “futurist” but if I was to say I was a full preterist serious consideration would be given to what has been written here but we both know preterist are selective. They only accept from futurist what they think supports their view never comprehending the consequences or implication it has on the rest of their beliefs.

David Green is a perfect example of this short coming.

Stephen Whitsett M.Div