Quote:
Originally Posted by bearbear
In Ephesians 2:1 it says "we were dead in our transgressions". Paul is speaking in spiritual terms, not physical terms as he is writing to people who are not physically dead but alive. We were spiritually dead in our sins, but then God's grace through Jesus Christ paved the way for us to be born again in the Holy Spirit. We were once dead in the spirit but then God made us alive in the spirit.
Henceforth Ephesians 2:5-6 isn't referring to the resurrection of our bodies which will happen at the last trumpet (1 Thess 4:16), but it's talking in spiritual terms. Though that's not to say that the author isn't also pointing to our eventual receiving of our inheritance in Christ which includes reigning with him (2 Tim 2:12) and receiving new bodies (1 Cor 15:52).
Although Jesus is in heaven, spiritually speaking, we can be where Jesus is just as when Jesus said we could remain in him and he in us (John 15:5), and he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit (1 Cor 6:17).
|
You should read those verses again. That is exactly my point. The Corinthian's passage is saying we have "not" spiritually been raised with Christ yet (Paul was trying to address the gnostic point which indicated that we have been raised spiritually with Christ and therefore our bodies are not important). Ephesians is saying we have been raised with Christ, spiritually, as you say. There is a clear contradiction. The only thing you can say is that he is addressing two issues from different perspectives but I believe my original point was that Ephesians was written by a different person which maybe in the scheme of things doesn't mean anything if it is scripture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bearbear
I am afraid that by you devoting yourself to this kind of research rather than the word of God which gives you growth in your salvation (1 Peter 2:2, Acts 20:32), you're straining a gnat but swallowing whole camels.
|
I notice that you quote from different translations of the Bible EV and RSV and maybe others. I don't seem to understand why you consider them better than the oldest Codex' manuscripts. Having been trained in Greek I go back to them to double check the closest manuscripts to the originals since i do not have the confidence you do in various translations. When I read one passage from the KJV and compare it RSV or EV or NSRV I find there are discrepancies. I keep a number of versions at my finger tips to include the oldest Codex as well as a Greek interlinear NT. I Thess 5:21 "...test everything" (NSRV). Do you just accept everything as it is in one or two versions?