Just a thought, does that mean that we will retain our wounds and scars? Scripture says we will be like Him. This is an honest question.

He sure acts like a girly, just like his dear mama...bigDugly...

Can't we cool the personal insults? I don't like Bigd either---in fact I have him blocked---but sheesh!

"Take your girly panties off" and ckucking like a chicken while saying "b,b,bigd" are personal insults and are not Christian things to say. Refute Bigd's arguments in their merits, something easy to do because he is almost always wrong.

He still has scars? Blemishes?
Spots?

Looptex, you are denying in your last post that Christ rose from the dead. But his rising from the dead is a principal tenet of Christianity. And the Bible, which you pretend is your sole authority, does NOT say he did not rise from the dead. Perhaps you misspoke?

Louie

Loop, I didn't understand you to say that Jesus didn't rise from the dead (how did Louie get that?) but would Jesus' scars, gained as they were, be blemishes? Don't His scars, gained as they were, make Him that much more beautiful?

You might be right about Jesus' scars dissapearing as He ascended. That's an interesting theory I never thought of before. I guess we won't know for sure unless/until we get to Heaven.

And let's never say so-and-so doesn't love God---we cannot read each other's souls, only God can do that.

Is that too much to ask?

The argument of him having scars hinges on the fact he showed himself and the scars were seen.
Yet this argument has two problems to deal with.
1st, he had not yet ascended
2nd, flesh and blood cannot enter

The biblical evidence doesn't even suggest he has a body "that we could describe"

His post resurrection Body was described by those that were given the joy of seeing it, touching it, and sharing a meal with Him...He tells Thomas to touch and believe, a 'Spirit' does not have flesh and bones, yet post resurrection ( a resurrection of the Body), our Lord does.

Call it a Spiritual Body, or a Glorified Body, call this Body what you'd like from what we've been told but it maintained the trophy of a great victory over sin.

Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven as it is right now. The resurrected Body is quite different.

I understand what you are saying Looptex (in your last post on the last page): following Paul, who was stumbling all over his own feet to reconcile things in Rom 8:3, you preach that Jesus Christ inhabited “sinful flesh and sin”. But that is false, Jesus Christ was sinless, and his flesh was sinless. Paul was not a prophet, and he was not taught by Christ or his original apostles and he often contradicted Christ and his apostles and even himself as he stumbled over his own feet trying to explain things. Who are you going to follow, Looptex, Paul or Jesus Christ and his original apostles? Since you lack discernment Looptex, play it safe and stick with Christ and his original apostles.

Louie

I understand what you are saying Looptex (in your last post on the last page): following Paul, who was stumbling all over his own feet to reconcile things in Rom 8:3, you preach that Jesus Christ inhabited “sinful flesh and sin”. But that is false, Jesus Christ was sinless, and his flesh was sinless. Paul was not a prophet, and he was not taught by Christ or his original apostles and he often contradicted Christ and his apostles and even himself as he stumbled over his own feet trying to explain things. Who are you going to follow, Looptex, Paul or Jesus Christ and his original apostles? Since you lack discernment Looptex, play it safe and stick with Christ and his original apostles.

Louie

Human flesh was originally pure but became impure when Adam and Eve sinned. Mary was born without original sin by a miracle from God, so Jesus, Who was born unto her, was free of original sin as well.

Revelations 7
9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

I'm guessing your wondering what scientific data I'm speaking of.

well, let's look closely at what John has seen here.
We know the previous verses speak of the 144000 sealed from the tribes of Israel.

then we have this vision John sees, a great multitude, so great that they can't even be numbered.

Does anyone know what the highest number known to man is?
Is there such a number?
Maybe, maybe not, but let's just look at what we numbers we do have.
according to scientific estimates, the total number of humans ever born from Adam and eve, until now, is between 108-125 billion.
now, no doubt that is a great number, and would be a great multitude.
But the fact that man can number it presents a problem.

John saw a multitude that no man could number, it's impossible.
so already, if everyone that had ever lived was counted, John still seen more in the vision.

So to be clear here, in 4-7000 years, there has not been enough people born to be such a great multitude.

let's go deeper.
let's look at the number 250 or 300 billion.
still, a number than man can attain, Count, number if needed..
If it took 4-7000 years to get to the number of 125 billion born, could we safely say it would take another 4-7000 to reach the 250-300 billion mark?
And even then, if the 300 billion mark was reached, it has not surpassed a number no man can number.

let's go deeper
The 300 billion, is counting all of the human race ever born.
but John seen not the whole human race, but those who had washed their robes in the blood of the lamb.
so immediately, we have to assume that 200-250 billion of the 300 billion are not part of john's vision.
why?
Because Jesus said that there were FEW that would enter.
and many that would not enter.

well few of 300 billion may be 50-100 billion, few certainly wouldn't be 250 billion.

so now in the year 9016, we have 300 billion born since the beginning of time, and an estimated 50-100 billion available to be part of john's vision.
50-100 billion is a long ways from innumerable, and this estimated number wouldn't be reached for another 7000 years.
so much for "soon"

If the Urantia Book teaches that Jesus didn't literally bodily rise from the grave, the Urantia Book is teaching colossal error.

The three Marys and the apostles Peter and John saw with their very eyes that Jesus was not in the tomb---they didn't have some spiritual awakening to this.

Why are people afraid to believe that Jesus literally rose from the dead,

or that He was literally born of a virgin,

or that He literally walked on water, or any of His other miracles?

Jesus is God, just like the Father and the Holy Spirit, and He has the power to work miracles.

If Jesus created human life, the human birth process, water, and other things in nature, if He has that much power, then He can suspend the laws of nature to do something wonderful like rising from the dead. If we really believe that Jesus is God Incarnate, why is it hard for us to believe in His miracles?

Mary and Joseph were told by an angel to name the Messiah, not “Michael”, but “Jesus”.

Furthermore, the Urantia book assertion that Jesus is Michael the Archangel reincarnated contradicts the revelations that God gave to his Church through the Catholic prophets that he is the only begotten son of God.

And they reveal that Michael the Archangel was an angel,

and that God created the angels. This is inconsistent with what the Urantia Book is saying.

The Urantia Book says that the body of Jesus became corrupt, that is, rotted, fell to dust, in an accelerated process, instantly.

But in the Catholic Church are found the bodies of Saints that remain incorrupt in the grave indefinitely (you can find lists of them from an Internet search), these bodies are pliable, maintain the color of living flesh, do not rot, even have red blood in wounds, give off a fragrance, etc.

I have understood that this phenomenon is exhibited by Saints who remained virgins (sexually pure) all their lives.

The Urantia Book (189:2:4) is asking us to believe that the body of Jesus fell instantly to dust (presumably as soon as the tomb was sealed), which implies that he was not a saint who remained a virgin all his life, and that his body was a pile of dust when the tomb was found open less than three days later. We have no record of such a pile of dust being found, what was found was the shroud in which his body had been wrapped, and it was not full of dust. And God has given revelations to the Catholic prophets that confirm that his physical body remained incorrupt, and that it rose from the dead incorrupt.

Louie, do you think that the 700,000 "creator sons" of the Urantia Book make the Urantia Book pantheistic and therefore pagan?