Cheryl Schatz
2012-01-05
gengwall,
Thanks for your comments. You said:
It isn’t even exactly correct to say Jesus went back in time. The resurrected Jesus currently exists simultaneously at every point in our time just as He exists simultaneously at every place in our space.
That may be another way to say it. However what I was trying to communicate was to show that while the “son of man”, the Christ, Jesus the incarnate Word, limited Himself so that He could live as a man here on the earth and lived with all of our limitations, when He was resurrected, His body was no longer under those limitations. It may be hard for some to think through that Jesus is still a man…but a resurrected man, glorified and without our limitations, nevertheless still in the flesh.
I was also trying to communicate that the Lord, in His human body would not have appeared in the Old Testament time without nail holes in His hands, since it was only the resurrected Lord of glory that was free of limitations. He had the DNA of His mother, before the time of His mother, in His resurrected body.
I do think that it is okay to say that He went back in time, just as the OT says that God said that He was going to come to see if all the evil He had heard about was so. God doesn’t need to “come down” when He is omnipresent, but it is a way that God communicates to us so that we understand. In the same way the resurrected Jesus doesn’t need to go “back in time” when His resurrection body is unlimited in time or space, but I think it also helps us to understand His relationship with Abraham and Adam.
Thoughts?
Your Tags
Personal labels you apply to any item — separate from system topics. Tags are shared across all databases. Visit /tags to browse all your tags.
...more
Personal labels you apply to any item — separate from system topics. Tags are shared across all databases. Visit /tags to browse all your tags.
...more