Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Nope.
Nope
Nope.
Jesus died physically but the soul of Jesus ascended to heaven, where Jesus continues to live in a spiritual body.
So what was the body Thomas touched in the story?
If the story is even true I believe it had to be a spiritual body, even though it appeared to be physical.
It depends on whether you believe in the Trinity or not, both views are considered Christian ones.
Jesus did die but rose again. If he didn't, then the saying that "he died for our sins" is even more meaningless than it already is.
No, I don't think any Christians believe that, not sure where you got that from?
But if Jesus came back to life he did not really die for our sins.Jesus did die but rose again. If he didn't, then the saying that "he died for our sins" is even more meaningless than it already is.
I believe ‘Jesus’ is alive on earth now and when he dies he will be made new as a young boy along with a new earth. It’s a beautiful endless story imo. If one were to ask when was the first time this happened I would say the answer is now. All things are new each time. It’s difficult to grasp but God gives understanding to this through his infinite physical nature. Nothing is greater than him imo.
Looking past the awfulness of an all-powerful God allowing his son to be sacrificed for something that he himself caused, is pretty immoral.But if Jesus came back to life he did not really die for our sins.
He was only dead for three days, like a person who is in a coma and then wakes up.
NOT what the Bible says.
Yes, Jesus died. And He was resurrected, i.e., given a new life in heaven with God.
The person that Thomas touched was the resurrected Jesus Christ.
What exactly is "a spiritual body"?
Do you expect anyone to respect what you wrote?Looking past the awfulness of an all-powerful God allowing his son to be sacrificed for something that he himself caused, is pretty immoral.
And as you wrote, he rose 3 days later, it's like having a rough weekend.
And if one is in support of the trinity it becomes slightly more strange, as it is basically God himself, so it is not even all that impressive to be honest.
But if one completely removes the "he died" then there is nothing to it at all, so at least to me, a Christian would have to make the argument that he died to give the sacrifice some sort of meaning, because again it is already hanging in a very thin thread in so many ways.
Anyway, the purpose was not to argue against it, simply to give my answer to the question the OP had about it.
Where in the Bible does it say that? The person that appeared to people (on the shore, in Gethsemane, walking along the road, with the apostles, etc.) had a real body.
Baha'is believe that Jesus died and did not rise from the dead, which makes the sacrifice meaningful.
I don't care what the Bible says about the resurrection and the ascension of Jesus. I am not a Christian.
Jesus was not going to return at all. It was the Christ spirit that was going to return, in another man.