Jesus as Lord and God

[3DOP]

Hey longview...thanks for your reply and kind words. I would like to respond but I am still a working guy. I know that heaven is much more positively great than simply "not working". (Eye hath not seen, ear hath not heard, etc.). Not working is a good start! Eternal weekends can sound pretty great. I need to get some sleep. I will try to get back to this in a few days.

God bless,

Rory

[HappyJackWagon]

18 hours ago, longview said:

Thank you for your gracious manner and expressions.  I don't feel scholarly enough to properly address all your points.  Could you help me understand if there is a distinction between state of being and residing in a glorious abode?  In 1 Corinthians 15 Paul asserts that the resurrection will be available to ALL men (Christ being the FIRST to be resurrected).  He teaches that there will be 3 degrees of glory (state of being) in the resurrection:

40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:

This corruption refers to the Fall initiated by Adam and Eve.  Which introduced death into the world and causing the bodies (state of being) of Adam and Eve and all their posterity to have a fallen nature.  Interestingly Jesus affirms that both the righteous and the wicked will be resurrected.  See John 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Good point.  This verse could ensnare us into modalism.  However Jesus did encourage all of us to search the scriptures (in order to obtain a more balanced overview of the doctrines).  It does hinge on the word "SEEN" used twice in this passage.  Maybe some scholar on this board can help us out by analyzing the Greek/Aramaic/Hebrew meaning of the word in depth.  My conviction is that the act of SEEING Jesus as He appears will be the same as SEEING the Father as He appears.  My personal belief is Jesus was half human (through the blood/DNA of Mary who was fully human, not some exalted being as taught by the Catholic Church) and the DNA of God the Father (which was conveyed by the Holy Ghost through the abdominal wall without sexual intercourse).  My inclination is think that Jesus was like an identical twin of the Father.

Many skeptics like to use John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; to deny the First Vision experienced by Joseph Smith.  A better clarification is found in John 6:46 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.  I believe that man can SEE God and comprehend His Image and appearance.  God does have arms, legs and all the features of the human body (except in a glorious state).  Many passages throughout the Old and New Testaments affirm this truth.  Adam/Eve, Enoch, Isaiah and many of the prophets did SEE God.

It is interesting to think of Jesus as a demi-god (which technically he is) but it also feels like a bit of a blasphemy.

I'm curious how others view that issue.

[longview]

3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

It is interesting to think of Jesus as a demi-god (which technically he is) but it also feels like a bit of a blasphemy.

I'm curious how others view that issue.

Many non-LDS consider it blasphemy for the Church to teach Eternal Progression and to embrace this couplet:  "As man now is, God once was:
As God now is, man may be."  Several NT verses seem to point to this concept:

Rev 3:21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Matthew 18:1 At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?
2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,
3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.  (implying that God the Father is childlike so we must be childlike so that we can become like God, other attributes of God we must also acquire and practice, such as meekness, selfless, humility, lovingkindness, etc)

Matthew 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

[3DOP]

On 6/24/2019 at 2:24 PM, longview said:

Thank you for your gracious manner and expressions.  I don't feel scholarly enough to properly address all your points.  Could you help me understand if there is a distinction between state of being and residing in a glorious abode?  In 1 Corinthians 15 Paul asserts that the resurrection will be available to ALL men (Christ being the FIRST to be resurrected).  He teaches that there will be 3 degrees of glory (state of being) in the resurrection:

40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:

This corruption refers to the Fall initiated by Adam and Eve.  Which introduced death into the world and causing the bodies (state of being) of Adam and Eve and all their posterity to have a fallen nature.  Interestingly Jesus affirms that both the righteous and the wicked will be resurrected.  See John 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Good point.  This verse could ensnare us into modalism.  However Jesus did encourage all of us to search the scriptures (in order to obtain a more balanced overview of the doctrines).  It does hinge on the word "SEEN" used twice in this passage.  Maybe some scholar on this board can help us out by analyzing the Greek/Aramaic/Hebrew meaning of the word in depth.  My conviction is that the act of SEEING Jesus as He appears will be the same as SEEING the Father as He appears.  My personal belief is Jesus was half human (through the blood/DNA of Mary who was fully human, not some exalted being as taught by the Catholic Church) and the DNA of God the Father (which was conveyed by the Holy Ghost through the abdominal wall without sexual intercourse).  My inclination is think that Jesus was like an identical twin of the Father.

Many skeptics like to use John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; to deny the First Vision experienced by Joseph Smith.  A better clarification is found in John 6:46 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.  I believe that man can SEE God and comprehend His Image and appearance.  God does have arms, legs and all the features of the human body (except in a glorious state).  Many passages throughout the Old and New Testaments affirm this truth.  Adam/Eve, Enoch, Isaiah and many of the prophets did SEE God.

Hi longview.

This is not intended to persuade but just to set the record correct. According to the Catholic faith, it is absolutely certain that the Mother of God was and is FULLY HUMAN. The Catholic Church teaches that Mary is an exalted being too. Does being "fully human" exclude anybody from being exalted. I thought you guys believed in deification? I know for sure that we do!

We don't think Jesus was half-anything. We believe it is revealed that He was and is fully God and fully man. Like so much else that is revealed, we don't know how. But faith doesn't stagger just because the intellect is stymied. Isn't it great that the "Son of Man" is also the Son of God, and therefore God? If you look at images of Our Lord and His Mother, by the same Catholic artist, you should see reflected the Catholic belief that Jesus received His human features entirely from His mother. 

As for "state of being" distinguished from "residing in a glorious abode", I am not following what you are getting at.

In the post to which you replied, I was merely trying to affirm the Catholic belief in a physical, geographical, maybe "astrographical" place where Jesus said He would be preparing a "place" for those who love Him. If it is named Kolob, so be it. Obviously a place name, other than "heaven", is not revealed in the Former-day revelation. I wished to affirm that I agree, as a Catholic, that our good Lord Jesus has and always will retain His physical body, together with the glorious five wounds of the Cross which He showed to St. Thomas the Apostle...Speculation time...I would never argue about it with anybody...but I tend to think the physical proximity of our dear Saviour is within the orbit of satellites that give us the ability to have global communications. Of course, additionally, and equally substantially, He abides in the tabernacles of Catholic churches where the Blessed Sacrament has been validly consecrated. In spite of us, and our sins, and earthbound weights, His desire is to dwell with the children of men. May Jesus be praised, now and forever.     

   

[pogi]

24 minutes ago, 3DOP said:

We don't think Jesus was half-anything.

I can't speak for all, but I think most Latter-day Saints would agree with you.  I think most would agree that Jesus was 100% human and 100% God (the Great Jehovah).  Unlike HIs Father who is also 100% human and 100% God, Jesus was mortal because of Mary.  

[longview]

1 hour ago, 3DOP said:

This is not intended to persuade but just to set the record correct. According to the Catholic faith, it is absolutely certain that the Mother of God was and is FULLY HUMAN. The Catholic Church teaches that Mary is an exalted being too. Does being "fully human" exclude anybody from being exalted. I thought you guys believed in deification? I know for sure that we do!

Ok.  Mary was born into the world as a natural fully mortal female (not exalted).  At what point did she become exalted?  If you say just before she conceived Jesus in her womb, then we will agree to disagree.  Of course we will be exalted but only after we obtain our resurrections as described in 1 Cor 15.

1 hour ago, 3DOP said:

We don't think Jesus was half-anything. We believe it is revealed that He was and is fully God and fully man. Like so much else that is revealed, we don't know how. But faith doesn't stagger just because the intellect is stymied. Isn't it great that the "Son of Man" is also the Son of God, and therefore God? If you look at images of Our Lord and His Mother, by the same Catholic artist, you should see reflected the Catholic belief that Jesus received His human features entirely from His mother. 

Jesus did not obtain any "features" from God the Father?  How about Immortality?  How would you describe Jesus' physical body that He had between His Birth and the Crucifixion?  Did Jesus have His Spirit Person residing in His physical body?  That Jesus could be subjected to agonies and tortures and piercings but could NOT die?  Only Jesus could allow His Spirit to separate from His physical body (after fully completing the will of His Father).

You do NOT accept at face value the scripture in John 14:9?

2 hours ago, 3DOP said:

As for "state of being" distinguished from "residing in a glorious abode", I am not following what you are getting at.

In the post to which you replied, I was merely trying to affirm the Catholic belief in a physical, geographical, maybe "astrographical" place where Jesus said He would be preparing a "place" for those who love Him. - - -

We were discussing the resurrection.  Do you believe this entails a certain kind of body that we will obtain in the next world?  As described in 1 Cor 15?  I agree that we will go to a glorified PLACE.   But we are talking about obtaining a glorified BODY.  What are your thoughts on the nature of the resurrection?

1 hour ago, pogi said:

I can't speak for all, but I think most Latter-day Saints would agree with you.  I think most would agree that Jesus was 100% human and 100% God (the Great Jehovah).  Unlike HIs Father who is also 100% human and 100% God, Jesus was mortal because of Mary.  

Jesus could not be 100% human physically.  He was definitely 100% God spiritually as He came from the Godhead as a spirit being.  Physically He could NOT die as His Body had to be sufficiently God like to be able to carry out the Infinite Atonement.  As stated above He had to yield His Spirit in order for His physical body to die.  Keep in mind that Mary contributed her egg (fully mortal and human).  And the Holy Ghost conveyed God's DNA.  Those two parts join together to enable the Immaculate Conception to occur.  So 50/50 physically and 100 spiritually.

[pogi]

3 hours ago, longview said:

Jesus could not be 100% human physically.  

He absolutely was 100% human, just like his mother AND his father.   God the Father is 100% human and not some other species of being.  Perhaps you are mixing up mortal/immortal with human/non-human. 

His mortality was unique indeed as he had control over death.  It is not really accurate to say that he was immortal, as it is clear that he could die, but to say that he is equivalent to other mortals doesn't really work either.  I don't think we have a word to describe Christ's mortality. 

 

Edited June 26, 2019 by pogi

[longview]

31 minutes ago, pogi said:

God the Father is 100% human and not some other species of being.  Perhaps you are mixing up mortal/immortal with human/non-human. 

There is a definite distinction between "flesh and blood" (mortal humans subject to corruption) and "flesh and bones" (glorified resurrected beings free from travails and incorruptible).  Jesus had to have God the Father's DNA in order to bear the crushing weight of the Atonement.  No ordinary human could do it.  Not even a million humans could pull it off.

It is true God the Father was 100% human when He went through mortality to keep the Second Estate.  He was just a spirit being during the First Estate.  But God is now Exalted Man.  In every step, He had the form of anthropomorphism, just not the same substance, not the same "technology."

53 minutes ago, pogi said:

His mortality was unique indeed as he had control over death.  It is not really accurate to say that he was immortal, as it is clear that he could die, but to say that he is equivalent to other mortals doesn't really work either.  I don't think we have a word to describe Christ's mortality. 

We probably don't.  If Jesus had not died, my gut feeling is He could have lived longer than Adam and Methuselah combined.

[Stargazer]

On 6/24/2019 at 11:48 PM, 3DOP said:

Hey longview...thanks for your reply and kind words. I would like to respond but I am still a working guy. I know that heaven is much more positively great than simply "not working". (Eye hath not seen, ear hath not heard, etc.). Not working is a good start! Eternal weekends can sound pretty great. I need to get some sleep. I will try to get back to this in a few days.

God bless,

Rory

I'm retired now, and still in relatively good health, and it seems at the moment to be a little slice of heaven, not to have to go to work every weekday.  I do expect what awaits in the eternities to be far better, and far better than I can imagine.

[Stargazer]

23 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

It is interesting to think of Jesus as a demi-god (which technically he is) but it also feels like a bit of a blasphemy.

I'm curious how others view that issue.

Doesn't seem that way to me at all, blasphemous, that is.  If he had not been half mortal, he could not have died.  If he had not been half divine, he could not have endured the Atonement - the pain would have killed him. Half and half is definitely "demi-".  

This state of being half-human and half-divine pertains only to his mortal life, so in the pre-existence and the resurrection he is fully divine.  

[pogi]

13 hours ago, longview said:

There is a definite distinction between "flesh and blood" (mortal humans subject to corruption) and "flesh and bones" (glorified resurrected beings free from travails and incorruptible).  Jesus had to have God the Father's DNA in order to bear the crushing weight of the Atonement.  No ordinary human could do it.  Not even a million humans could pull it off.

It is true God the Father was 100% human when He went through mortality to keep the Second Estate.  He was just a spirit being during the First Estate.  But God is now Exalted Man.  In every step, He had the form of anthropomorphism, just not the same substance, not the same "technology."

We probably don't.  If Jesus had not died, my gut feeling is He could have lived longer than Adam and Methuselah combined.

I agree with the bold part, He is an exalted hu-man.  He is still 100% human, just like us.  He is simply at a further stage of human development. 

It is said that man is God in embryo.  I think it is equally true that God is man (human) in full-maturation.  We don't change species when we are resurrected or exalted, we just change station.

Edited June 26, 2019 by pogi

[longview]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

It is said that man is God in embryo.  I think it is equally true that God is man (human) in full-maturation.  We don't change species when we are resurrected or exalted, we just change station.

So you think Heavenly Beings have the same substance as mortal people?  Maybe something was "added upon" to their "restored" earthly bodies in the reunion of body and spirit in the Resurrection?  What about Terrestrial Beings (those that existed in the Garden of Eden and will exist during the Millennium)?  They are immortal but not as exalted as Heavenly Beings?  How does the expression "Clay Tabernacles" figure in your science of Super Anthropology?

[pogi]

16 minutes ago, longview said:

So you think Heavenly Beings have the same substance as mortal people?  Maybe something was "added upon" to their "restored" earthly bodies in the reunion of body and spirit in the Resurrection?  What about Terrestrial Beings (those that existed in the Garden of Eden and will exist during the Millennium)?  They are immortal but not as exalted as Heavenly Beings?  How does the expression "Clay Tabernacles" figure in your science of Super Anthropology?

I'm not sure what you mean by "same substance."  Are you talking about our elemental make-up like carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, calcium, and phosphorus?   I have no idea what resurrected bodies are composed of, but I imagine it is all some sort of star dust.  It will be composed of elemental material - "clay tabernacles" - just like us.  That is what we are taught anyway - we get our bodies back, only in their perfected form. 

If it helps, think of it like butterflies, they don't really change species as they undergo metamorphosis, but they do undergo significant bodily changes.  Mortal humans, immortal terrestrial bodies, and celestial bodies, etc.  - eternal human development is polymorphic.   

Edited June 26, 2019 by pogi

[3DOP]

On 6/25/2019 at 7:46 PM, longview said:

Ok.  Mary was born into the world as a natural fully mortal female (not exalted).  At what point did she become exalted?  If you say just before she conceived Jesus in her womb, then we will agree to disagree.  Of course we will be exalted but only after we obtain our resurrections as described in 1 Cor 15.

Jesus did not obtain any "features" from God the Father?  How about Immortality?  How would you describe Jesus' physical body that He had between His Birth and the Crucifixion?  Did Jesus have His Spirit Person residing in His physical body?  That Jesus could be subjected to agonies and tortures and piercings but could NOT die?  Only Jesus could allow His Spirit to separate from His physical body (after fully completing the will of His Father).

You do NOT accept at face value the scripture in John 14:9?

We were discussing the resurrection.  Do you believe this entails a certain kind of body that we will obtain in the next world?  As described in 1 Cor 15?  I agree that we will go to a glorified PLACE.   But we are talking about obtaining a glorified BODY.  What are your thoughts on the nature of the resurrection?

Jesus could not be 100% human physically.  He was definitely 100% God spiritually as He came from the Godhead as a spirit being.  Physically He could NOT die as His Body had to be sufficiently God like to be able to carry out the Infinite Atonement.  As stated above He had to yield His Spirit in order for His physical body to die.  Keep in mind that Mary contributed her egg (fully mortal and human).  And the Holy Ghost conveyed God's DNA.  Those two parts join together to enable the Immaculate Conception to occur.  So 50/50 physically and 100 spiritually.

Hello longview, Hopefully I can answer a question or two this afternoon. 

First paragraph:

You should know that Catholics believe that the Mother of God has special privileges. I don't know what you mean exaltation if you seem to think I might say that she was exalted just before the conception of God's Son. I Cor. 15? Yes. For the Blessed Virgin as well. However, as you probably know, we think she is reigning in her glorified body as queen of heaven and earth since being assumed body and soul in to heaven shortly after her dormition.

Second paragraph:

longview, have you forgotten that we do not believe that the Father is corporeal? The physical features of Christ, could not come from the Father. Catholics, therefore, believe that Jesus' humanity was derived entirely from His mother, and for that reason would have a more than usual resemblance to her.

As for the immortality of Jesus, He did not suffer from any of the wounds of Adam, and He never committed actual sin. His continual obedient to the Father. Like Adam, only sin would bring death. You remember, also in I Cor. 15, I think, that St. Paul calls Christ, "the last Adam"? Parallels between Adam and Eve and Jesus and Mary make a remarkable study. One Church Father describes Mary as the Second Eve. Anyway, never sinning goes a long way towards making humans immortal. Even being very holy seems to sanctify the bodies of the saints so that their corruption is unnaturally, or should I say, supernaturally slowed down. That is why we don't like to say that Mary dies, rather that she slept, in a dormant state ("dormition above"), for a few days.

Jesus' necessarily assumed a human body like ours, else He would not have hungered nor slept. Obviously His divine glory was usually hidden. The Transfiguration was an instance where His divinity was allowed to shine through His very human flesh, just as the divinity of the elect will shine though their bodies of human flesh at the Resurrection of the Body.

We do not believe that there were multiple persons in Christ. There is not a person who is spirit and another who is flesh. Rather famously, or infamously perhaps, we hold that Christ is one person in two natures. I agree with your last sentence. Jesus said that no man takes His life from Him, and that it is significant that He gave up the Spirit, after saying, "It is finished".

--------------------------------

Thanks for your interest in my beliefs! I expect that you disagree with a lot of it. (It would be strange indeed if the Restored Church, and an apostate church agreed on everything now wouldn't it?) But hopefully, it can be of use to you or someone lurking to see what the Catholic Church teaches regarding your questions. I want to get to John 14:9 for sure, and your other observations too. I have a great chiropracter, but I wish just now I didn't have to go to an appointment. Maybe I can try to get to the rest tomorrow afternoon. 

Rory

[longview]

4 hours ago, 3DOP said:

You should know that Catholics believe that the Mother of God has special privileges.

Yes.  From random readings over the years.

4 hours ago, 3DOP said:

I Cor. 15? Yes.

That this involves exaltation.  Ok.  It seems peculiar that you appear to be disengaged (or uninterested) in understanding what it means for the human family to obtain a glorious resurrection of their bodies?  Not just a destination to a glorious abode?

4 hours ago, 3DOP said:

For the Blessed Virgin as well. However, as you probably know, we think she is reigning in her glorified body as queen of heaven and earth since being assumed body and soul in to heaven shortly after her dormition.

Very interesting.  I am not that familiar with this Catholic doctrine.  CoJCoLDS believes in Heavenly Mother(s) that has (have) presiding priesthood authority over all spirit children including Eve, Matriarchs, Deborah, Mary Mother of Jesus, etc.

4 hours ago, 3DOP said:

As for the immortality of Jesus, He did not suffer from any of the wounds of Adam, and He never committed actual sin. His continual obedient to the Father. Like Adam, only sin would bring death. You remember, also in I Cor. 15, I think, that St. Paul calls Christ, "the last Adam"? Parallels between Adam and Eve and Jesus and Mary make a remarkable study. One Church Father describes Mary as the Second Eve. Anyway, never sinning goes a long way towards making humans immortal. Even being very holy seems to sanctify the bodies of the saints so that their corruption is unnaturally, or should I say, supernaturally slowed down. That is why we don't like to say that Mary dies, rather that she slept, in a dormant state ("dormition above"), for a few days.

Very interesting.  Again we have our differences.

4 hours ago, 3DOP said:

Jesus' necessarily assumed a human body like ours, else He would not have hungered nor slept. Obviously His divine glory was usually hidden. The Transfiguration was an instance where His divinity was allowed to shine through His very human flesh, just as the divinity of the elect will shine though their bodies of human flesh at the Resurrection of the Body.

We are pretty close here.

4 hours ago, 3DOP said:

We do not believe that there were multiple persons in Christ.

Sorry, not intended as an assertion.  If you are familiar with Jesus' parable of the Rich Man and the Beggar named Lazarus, when a person dies, his spirit person separates from his "clay tabernacle" which decomposes into dust (called sleeping in the grave).  But the spirit person goes to a place of rest (called Paradise) if he was righteous or to a place of torment if he was wicked (called Hell) (see also 1 Peter 3:18-20).  Both groups are waiting for their turn to obtain the resurrection of their bodies (body and spirit reunited into a glorious and immortal body).

Jesus had the same objective.  His Spirit Person was a member of the Godhead.  He had the same kind of body as the Holy Ghost (a third member of the Godhead).  His physical body was the result of fully mortal Mary and the glorious and powerful Corporeal  Body of God the Father (we are in His Image).  This is why Jesus engaged in the Resurrection which ONLY He could provide as a direct result of the Atoning Sacrifice.   He was the firstfruit of the Resurrection.  His Body is also a union of physical body and His spirit person.

5 hours ago, 3DOP said:

Thanks for your interest in my beliefs! I expect that you disagree with a lot of it. (It would be strange indeed if the Restored Church, and an apostate church agreed on everything now wouldn't it?) But hopefully, it can be of use to you or someone lurking to see what the Catholic Church teaches regarding your questions. I want to get to John 14:9 for sure, and your other observations too. I have a great chiropracter, but I wish just now I didn't have to go to an appointment. Maybe I can try to get to the rest tomorrow afternoon. 

I enjoyed the conversation.  Thanks for your patience.  Good luck with the chiropractor.  Looking forward to your take on John 14:9.

[3DOP]

On 6/27/2019 at 8:30 PM, longview said:

I enjoyed the conversation.  Thanks for your patience.  Good luck with the chiropractor.  Looking forward to your take on John 14:9.

Hi longview. I explained the Catholic position as best as I could above:

"Ironically, the John 14:9 passage, if you want to attribute it to physical appearance, could lend itself better to Modalism than Mormonism. Catholics hold that "the image of God" in man is speaking to immaterial realities that are not given to lower creatures. When God made us, He made us with capacities for wisdom, free will, and rational judgment. We call ourselves homo sapiens. We are the only corporal beings that God created with an aptitude to receive sapientia, that is Latin for wisdom. But to reveal Himself to us, the Father sent the Wisdom of God, His Son, and our Lord, Jesus Christ. If Philip was hoping to see something like a supernatural photograph, I am not sure. Jesus sure didn't show Him one though. To see God, is less a function of the ocular nerves, than it is an understanding of an infinite ocean of goodness, worthy of all glory forever."

It doesn't seem to us that the passage demands the kind of message that you are saying it is trying to convey, that Jesus body is in striking resemblance to the Father's body. When you ask me above if I take John 14:9 at "face value", I would have to say that I do not understand it outside of the entire context of Apostolic Tradition. Catholics cannot interpret Scripture with as much conjecture as those who do not believe they need Apostolic Tradition. Here is the whole passage of John 14:6-10 with verse 9 bolded:

"Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me. If you had known me, you would without doubt have known my Father also: and from henceforth you shall know him, and you have seen him. Philip saith to him: Lord, shew us the Father, and it is enough for us. Jesus saith to him: Have I been so long a time with you; and have you not known me? Philip, he that seeth me seeth the Father also. How sayest thou, shew us the Father? Do you not believe, that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I speak to you, I speak not of myself. But the Father who abideth in me, he doth the works."

According to Catholic Tradition, the emphasis in the passage has little to do with physicality. Christ is patiently explaining to His somewhat obtuse disciple that he cannot see the Father with the physical eye. The Father did not send the Son to satisfy the curiosity of mankind to believe in God by virtue of physical sight. Jesus came to show us that we need to develop the "eye" of faith. The Holy Ghost uses words like "see", "hear", and even "taste" to describe our experience of knowing God. Our hearing, seeing, and tasting of God is not by means of the material ear, eye, or tongue. Christ's message is that we cannot see the Father physically, but if we will know Him, see Him, and love Him, it will be through His Son. It is because of the abiding immaterial Presence of the Father in the Son, that the Son does the works of the Father.  

Philip is missing the point. If the disciples have been instructed that the Father has a body, Jesus is avoiding any digression in to a discussion about the corporeality of the Father. If the Father does have a physical body, THAT is not what our Lord was trying to teach the disciples about in John 14:9. He wants His disciples to perceive the Father working in the Son, an immaterial truth. He is trying to show Philip and us, that we can only come to the Father through the Son, and we can only perceive the Father by the eye of faith when we attribute the good works of the Son to the Father. Whether the Father has a body or not, neither Philip nor anybody else gets to see it with the physical eye. The Father's body would be a serious distraction from what Christ was trying to teach here.

I am not suggesting that this interpretation proves that the Father is incorporeal. I think it does prove that the question of the Father's physicality was not as important as the message that Jesus was trying to convey about the necessity of perceiving (seeing with the eye of faith) the Father through the works of the Son. No one can come to the Father, except through the Son. If I did not have Apostolic Tradition as a guide, I might hold that the Father is corporeal, and understand that in John 14:9, that is not the focal point at all. I could not believe that John 14:6-10, taken at face value, conclusively proves the physicality of the Father. 

Thanks for your consideration.

Rory

Edited June 30, 2019 by 3DOP

[longview]

9 hours ago, 3DOP said:

I explained the Catholic position as best as I could above:

"Ironically, the John 14:9 passage, if you want to attribute it to physical appearance, could lend itself better to Modalism than Mormonism. Catholics hold that "the image of God" in man is speaking to immaterial realities that are not given to lower creatures. When God made us, He made us with capacities for wisdom, free will, and rational judgment. We call ourselves homo sapiens. We are the only corporal beings that God created with an aptitude to receive sapientia, that is Latin for wisdom. But to reveal Himself to us, the Father sent the Wisdom of God, His Son, and our Lord, Jesus Christ. If Philip was hoping to see something like a supernatural photograph, I am not sure. Jesus sure didn't show Him one though. To see God, is less a function of the ocular nerves, than it is an understanding of an infinite ocean of goodness, worthy of all glory forever."

You remain disengaged with the fact of Jesus' Resurrection of His Body (being the First Fruit).  It has direct bearing on His physical appearance.  All people born into this world (both righteous and wicked) will obtain this FREE gift of the resurrection as a direct result of His Atonement.  What is NOT free is to reside in the Highest Kingdom and to enjoy a state of being having the glory of the sun (obedience to God is required to obtain His Grace "If you love ME, keep My Commandments").  These blessings are permanent and inseparable and Eternal for Christ and His children.  It would be an insult to God the Father for Him to not have a body just as good as the Son's.  He is not just a blob of energy.  What are your thoughts of numerous OT prophets who testified of having SEEN God.  If you continue to redefine the words SAW, SEE and SEEN, etc then there is not much more I can do for you.

Edited June 30, 2019 by longview

[3DOP]

8 minutes ago, longview said:

You remain disengaged with the fact of Jesus' Resurrection of His Body (being the First Fruit).  It has direct bearing on His physical appearance.  All people born into this world (both righteous and wicked) will obtain this FREE gift of the resurrection as a direct result of His Atonement.  What is NOT free is to reside in the Highest Kingdom and to enjoy a state of being having the glory of the sun (obedience to God is required to obtain His Grace "If you love ME, keep My Commandments").  These blessings are permanent and inseparable and Eternal for Christ and His children.  It would be an insult to God the Father for Him to not have a body just as good as the Son's.  He is not just a blob of energy.  What are your thoughts of numerous OT prophets who testified of having SEEN God.  If you continue to redefine the words SAW, SEE and SEEN, etc then there is not much more I can do for you.

Hi again longview.

I remain disengaged with the fact of Jesus' Resurrection...??? I am afraid that you are correct that there is not much more that you can do for me. I don't understand what you are talking about and I am pretty sure it goes the other way around. Thank you for trying. No hard feelings. You and I speak different languages. Unless someone else can provide a translation, I think we should just agree that we can not understand each other.

Thanks for the discussion.

Rory

[Calm]

1 hour ago, 3DOP said:

Hi again longview.

I remain disengaged with the fact of Jesus' Resurrection...??? I am afraid that you are correct that there is not much more that you can do for me. I don't understand what you are talking about and I am pretty sure it goes the other way around. Thank you for trying. No hard feelings. You and I speak different languages. Unless someone else can provide a translation, I think we should just agree that we can not understand each other.

Thanks for the discussion.

Rory

If I understand him correctly, he sees the fact Jesus has a resurrected body as requiring the Father to have one as well, because having a perfected body in addition to any other divine attributes  would make Christ greater than the Father.  I am assuming when he says "disengaged" he means you are ignoring that.

Quote

These blessings are permanent and inseparable and Eternal for Christ and His children.  It would be an insult to God the Father for Him to not have a body just as good as the Son's.  He is not just a blob of energy

The "blob of energy" is a reference to how many assume what the spirit is, though that would make it physical as energy and matter are part of space-time, is associated with an object or system, etc.  Thus for those who actually believe spirit is immaterial, that would be a faulty description I suspect.

Edited July 1, 2019 by Calm

[MiserereNobis]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Thus for those who actually believe spirit is immaterial, that would be a faulty description I suspect.

Yes, and also a disparaging one. I do not worship a “blob of energy.” 

[longview]

51 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Yes, and also a disparaging one. I do not worship a “blob of energy.” 

Sorry.  What do you say to the many prophets that testify to having "seen" God?  Especially those that provide detailed descriptions?

[longview]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

 I am assuming when he says "disengaged" he means you are ignoring that.

Plus the many scriptural references that describe God as having feelings, passions, tenderness for His children.  Hands, feet, face, walking, etc, etc.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, longview said:

Plus the many scriptural references that describe God as having feelings, passions, tenderness for His children.  Hands, feet, face, walking, etc, etc.

Wings...

[longview]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

Wings...

Implying that all scriptural descriptions of His Appearance are just figurative?  I suppose it depends on how each person searches through the scriptures and arrives at his overall understanding.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, longview said:

Implying that all scriptural descriptions of His Appearance are just figurative?

Suggesting people have options on interpretations depending on what they choose to emphasize.