Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassidy
Any particular topic or verse in the Bible may be literal, may be metaphorical, or may be both. It must be determined in its context.
For instance, the bread that Jesus broke and gave to his disciples was not His physical body. The bread was a symbol as was the cup. Yet, the symbol speaks to the literal body and blood being broken and the partaking of the life and ever-efficacious blood by His believers. That is the organic reality behind the symbols of the bread and blood.
In Cor 12 there are both metaphor and literal explanations about the Body of Christ. The metaphor is the human body Paul talks about and the literal is when he says:
...so also [is] the Christ, "
Though Christ is the Head, He is also, according to this plain statement, the Body.
|
Well, such an argument is certainly not decisive, it's quite tenuous in fact. The bottom line is that 1 Cor 12:12 is not enough to go around making the claim that the Body becomes God.
I believe the Body is Christ in the sense that it is the extension of Christ as our own bodies are extensions of us. But no one believes his body is him in the same way our soul/spirit is. In like manner, we should not think the Body is Christ in the same way Christ is Himself. Which is what Lee seemed to believe and what you seem to be defending.
But again, the tenuous scriptural support for this belief, along with its controversial and fringe nature is enough to label it as "bad Lee." Only fringe groups, and I would consider Eastern Orthodox fringe, defend such ideas. You know someone by the company he keeps.