RE: [TruthTalk] Definition of Mormon Please

[ShieldsFamily]

DaveH, Jesus is the physical manifestation of the Father who is Spirit. That’s the way I see it, anyway.  He came as one of us so we could see Him and He could die for us.  Is that easy enough to understand? Izzy   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 11:51 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Definition of Mormon Please   DAVEH:  This is where I fail to understand the Protestant (forgive me if I'm lumping too many people together on this one, DavidM) perspective.  IF Jesus and the Father are one, does it not seem a little contratidictive that Jesus has a physical body, and his Father does not?  As two separate Gods, each having different characteristics might make sense, but most Christians want to tie them together in a oneness theory, that seems conflicting to me.  Can Jesus and God be separate and distinctly different persons/Gods from a Protestant perspective? Just because they are ONE does not mean they have to have a body. The bible says that a married couple are ONE Flesh. Does this ONENESS ThEORY CONFUSE YOU also? Do you have all the equipment she has? Does it seem as U say "a little contratidictive" that she has a _________ and you do not? Details in the Holy Bible. Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: David Miller wrote: Dave Hansen wrote:   So....as I'm understanding this, Protestantismteaches that Jesus' (who is God) spirit is nowclothed in a body of flesh and bones....is thatcorrect?  ... Do you believe God has a physicalbody as well?     Dave, most Protestant scholars would accept the view that Jesus Christ has a physical body. DAVEH:  Would you say the same about the lay people?   Would most agree?   I believe this and would make a case with those who would try and argue that Jesus is only a ghost right now. The question of the Father's physical presence is another matter entirely. John Calvin took a very strong stand on this issue, and because of the influence of his writings on this subject, most Protestants probably favor the view that the Father does not have a physical body.  In fact, many of them would consider anyone a heretic who would think that the Father has a body.  DAVEH:  This is where I fail to understand the Protestant (forgive me if I'm lumping too many people together on this one, DavidM) perspective.  IF Jesus and the Father are one, does it not seem a little contratidictive that Jesus has a physical body, and his Father does not?  As two separate Gods, each having different characteristics might make sense, but most Christians want to tie them together in a oneness theory, that seems conflicting to me.  Can Jesus and God be separate and distinctly different persons/Gods from a Protestant perspective? This view, however, like the eternal sonship view discussed before, is not universal.  Nor is it considered orthodoxy by all Protestants.  Personally, based upon my study of Scripture, I think that the Father does have a physical body, DAVEH:  I do find that interesting, as I thought I'd never hear it from a relatively mainstream (forgive me for that one, DavidM) Christian.  Do you get a lot of negative feedback on your stance?  but it is not an issue that I would fight anyone over.  I do not feel the same way about those who perceive Jesus not to have a physical body.  Those who would claim that Jesus does not have a physical body would be attacking the doctrine of the resurrection.  DAVEH:  Yeah....that's the way I see it, but it seems to be a common misconception in Protestantism, as far as I can see.      BTW.......Thank you for sharing your honest thoughts about this. Peace be with you.David Miller.    -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'