Is the church a LITERAL BODY of Christ?

I’m not sure if I’m posting this in the right place, but just wanted to ask this question because it’s very interesting to see the huge difference between LC and everyone else regarding this matter.

LC claims that the church is a literal body of Christ: meaning that the church represents Christs body in real sense.

I would ask the following questions for those who hold this kind of teaching:

1). If the church is literal body of Christ, what happened to His real body?
2). If Christ actually resurrected with His physical body intact, which what resurrection is, why does He need another body?
3). If church is a literal body of Christ, does that mean we worship our own selves since we are the body?
5). If Christ became a Spirit as taught by the LC, does that mean that His actual body was never raised after 3 days?

Maybe some dumb questions here, but I recently read that there was a group of man in the early centuries who denied that Christ resurrection was literal as with his human body, and He only became a spirit after his death. That’s why all those questions popped up in my head right away.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Dig deep

I’m not sure if I’m posting this in the right place, but just wanted to ask this question because it’s very interesting to see the huge difference between LC and everyone else regarding this matter.

LC claims that the church is a literal body of Christ: meaning that the church represents Christs body in real sense.

I would ask the following questions for those who hold this kind of teaching:

1). If the church is literal body of Christ, what happened to His real body?
2). If Christ actually resurrected with His physical body intact, which what resurrection is, why does He need another body?
3). If church is a literal body of Christ, does that mean we worship our own selves since we are the body?
5). If Christ became a Spirit as taught by the LC, does that mean that His actual body was never raised after 3 days?

Maybe some dumb questions here, but I recently read that there was a group of man in the early centuries who denied that Christ resurrection was literal as with his human body, and He only became a spirit after his death. That’s why all those questions popped up in my head right away.

I think you have the wrong cult. Can you please provide quotes from Witness Lee making these claims? I never heard this taught, so I can't answer your questions.

Thanks—
Nell

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Dig deep

I’m not sure if I’m posting this in the right place, but just wanted to ask this question because it’s very interesting to see the huge difference between LC and everyone else regarding this matter.

LC claims that the church is a literal body of Christ: meaning that the church represents Christs body in real sense.

I would ask the following questions for those who hold this kind of teaching:

1). If the church is literal body of Christ, what happened to His real body?
2). If Christ actually resurrected with His physical body intact, which what resurrection is, why does He need another body?
3). If church is a literal body of Christ, does that mean we worship our own selves since we are the body?
5). If Christ became a Spirit as taught by the LC, does that mean that His actual body was never raised after 3 days?

Maybe some dumb questions here, but I recently read that there was a group of man in the early centuries who denied that Christ resurrection was literal as with his human body, and He only became a spirit after his death. That’s why all those questions popped up in my head right away.

Reminds me of the old Protestant claims (think Martin Luther) that the communion bread was the literal body of Christ.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Dig deep

I’m not sure if I’m posting this in the right place, but just wanted to ask this question because it’s very interesting to see the huge difference between LC and everyone else regarding this matter.

LC claims that the church is a literal body of Christ: meaning that the church represents Christs body in real sense.

I would ask the following questions for those who hold this kind of teaching:

1). If the church is literal body of Christ, what happened to His real body?
2). If Christ actually resurrected with His physical body intact, which what resurrection is, why does He need another body?
3). If church is a literal body of Christ, does that mean we worship our own selves since we are the body?
5). If Christ became a Spirit as taught by the LC, does that mean that His actual body was never raised after 3 days?

Maybe some dumb questions here, but I recently read that there was a group of man in the early centuries who denied that Christ resurrection was literal as with his human body, and He only became a spirit after his death. That’s why all those questions popped up in my head right away.

Dig deep,

You're right, there is a way in which the LC considers the church to be Christ's body in a real sense. They use Saul's road to Damascus experience to point out that he had been persecuting the believers and yet Jesus asked "why are you persecuting Me?" They then claim this shows that "we are Christ", and they use the example of things like if someone punches you in the arm, you ask "why are you punching ME?" They say things like "it's a matter of life" and "your head and your body have the same life in them", etc....

It's hard not to come away from hearing things like that without concluding the church is literally Christ's actual body. However, on the flip side, they also don't go as far as some other places concerning the literalness of Christ's body.

Funnily enough, I had this VERY thought a couple days ago. "wait a minute, if we are His literal body, then it's THE CHURCH who had nails driven through and was pierced on the cross, etc...." which obviously the Bible doesn't teach in that kind of literal way.

There are other ways we use this same word "body" and yet don't have this issue. For example, an author who has a prolific "body of work". The word "corps" (like corpse) just means "a body or group of people engaged in a particular activity....think "the press corps" or "the marine corps". So we are certainly at a minimum "the body of Christ" in that sense, engaged in particular activities - believing Jesus is the Son of God and He resurrected, loving God, loving people, preaching the gospel, doing good works, caring for the needy, etc.

My understanding, and anyone is free to correct me if I'm wrong, is that Christ resurrected bodily, but (based on 1 Cor. 15) was "raised with a spiritual body". For a long time I didn't know what to make of that, but then realized He was still eating and drinking and talking and moving and touchable, so there is some physicalness to His spiritual body.....and yet He could do things a "flesh body" couldn't, like appear through walls in a room with a closed door or "vanish from sight". Can I grasp what that's like? Not really. But that's how it's described.

Trapped

CWWL, 1968, vol. 1, "The Practical Expression of the Church," ch. 2: The Expression of Christ
“Christ is not only the Head, but He is also the Body, because the Body's life is Christ, and the Body's nature is Christ. The Body is Christ, and Christ is the Body.”

CWWL, 1969, vol. 3, "Exercising the Spirit and Walking according to the Spirit to Build Up the Church," ch. 5: The Revelation of God's Purpose to Obtain the Church
“According to the revelation in these two chapters, the goal of God's plan and the issue of Christ's riches are the church. This church, produced out of the riches of Christ, is the Body of Christ, which is the fullness of Christ as the universal One, the One who fills all in all….. God's purpose is to have the church, which is composed of and produced by the riches of Christ. The church, which comes out of Christ, is the Body of Christ.”

CWWL, 1994–1997, vol. 2, "The God-men," ch. 2: The God-men and the Body of Christ
“The fullness of Christ is the Body of Christ (1:23), which has a stature with a measure. As Christ's fullness, the Body is Christ's expression…. Have you seen what the Body of Christ is? The Body of Christ is a constitution, constituted with the believers as the outward frame and with the Triune God as the inward content.”

CWWL, 1963, vol. 2, "The Living That Fulfills God's Eternal Purpose," ch. 6: The Church as the Increase of Christ
This verse, using the human body to typify the mystical Body of Christ, indicates that CHRIST IS THE BODY. THE REALITY OF THE CHURCH

CWWL, 1965, vol. 3, "The Enjoyment of Christ," ch. 2: The Fullness of God and the Riches of Christ
Then of this fullness, we partake of the riches of Christ to become the fullness of Christ. The fullness of Christ is the Body of Christ, which is the full expression of all that Christ is.

CWWL, 1968, vol. 2, "Fighting for the Truth," ch. 3: A Refutation of the Accusations of the Opposers (2)
“Nevertheless, we should all understand that we are the Body of Christ and that as the Body, WE ARE CHRIST and CHRIST IS WE. The opposers nonetheless always try to find fault in such matters.”

Here is for starters, I don’t have a subscription to get you full context of these paragraphs. Is it not clearly states that “we are Christ, and Christ is we”? By we I mean Lords recovery, I guess. I could be wrong, but it sure pretty clearly states those things. There are hundreds of quotes to this extent in their writings, so anyone can read them in theirs publications.

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Dig deep

Here is for starters, I don’t have a subscription to get you full context of these paragraphs. Is it not clearly states that “we are Christ, and Christ is we”? By we I mean Lords recovery, I guess. I could be wrong, but it sure pretty clearly states those things. There are hundreds of quotes to this extent in their writings, so anyone can read them in theirs publications.

LR taught a lot of nonsense, and what you listed is included. It wouldn't take much time to overthrow that nonsense.
For example,
"Christ is not only the Head, but He is also the Body, because the Body's life is Christ, and the Body's nature is Christ. The Body is Christ, and Christ is the Body.”

According to the Bible, the body of Christ is the Church which is the Bride. So in the current time, the body of Christ is an engaged Virgin waiting for her husband's coming.
If Christ Himself is the Body, does it mean that in the ceremony of the marriage of the Lamb, a Body of Christ marries another Body of Christ?
--------
LR's members' problem is that they don't think but accept whatever LR teaches.

[Trapped]

I had forgotten that I asked something similar about this very topic a few years ago and started a thread on it. That thread title was Christ is the Body, "the Body-Christ". In case you are interested in reading through it, Dig deep, here is the link to that thread:

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...ead.php?t=6243

Originally Posted by Trapped

I had forgotten that I asked something similar about this very topic a few years ago and started a thread on it. That thread title was Christ is the Body, "the Body-Christ". In case you are interested in reading through it, Dig deep, here is the link to that thread:

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...ead.php?t=6243

Thank you for the reference to this thread. It was very helpful to confirm my original sense when it came to this subject in the LC. Although some of my questions still remain to the leaders of the LC, at least I know that I’m not the only person who noticed this similarity from what I read awhile back.
Thanks


Also,
Sorry I can’t register here to continue posting.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I had forgotten that I asked something similar about this very topic a few years ago and started a thread on it. That thread title was Christ is the Body, "the Body-Christ". In case you are interested in reading through it, Dig deep, here is the link to that thread:

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...ead.php?t=6243

I remember that thread from 3 years ago - good discussion! It was interesting going back and rereading all that . . .

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Dig deep

Here is for starters, I don’t have a subscription to get you full context of these paragraphs. Is it not clearly states that “we are Christ, and Christ is we”? By we I mean Lords recovery, I guess. I could be wrong, but it sure pretty clearly states those things. There are hundreds of quotes to this extent in their writings, so anyone can read them in theirs publications.

Hi Guest: Dig deep
Please register for a Member ID for this forum! If you want to continue to use "Dig deep", this name is available! We appreciate your contributions and would like to hear what you have to say.

Thanks--
Moderator/Admin