Divine Embodiment : What The Bible Says About God's Physical Body
By Bro. Nathan
“ The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.” (D&C 130:22)
Ang Divine Embodiment is a doctrine taught by the church which tells us na God has a physical tangible body just like us. Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ have perfected immortalized physical bodies while the Holy Ghost ay walang physical body for He is a Spirit. God having a corporeal physical tangible body makes this teaching of the church it’s uniqueness among other Christian denominations. many groups question it by asking "sinasabi ba yan ng Bible?". yes, the Bible teaches it. we will study this doctrine in this article using the Bible. we will go through the Hebrew language and the Greek language in this article to understand further how does the Bible teach us na like man, Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ has bodies of flesh and bones.
First, let us review ang commonly used na text ng mga anti-mormons against Divine embodiment which is “God is spirit” in John 4:24. they understand it as reffering to physical qualities but that is not what the text actually says based on the Greek language and context. the verse in Greek reads πνεῦμα ὁ θεός (pneuma ho Theos) na kung saan ay isa itong qualitative nominative predicate. πνεῦμα is a qualitative being placed before the subject θεός. ang qualitative nominative predicate means na ang dinedescribe dito ay hindi ang phsyical psylogogical attributes ng Diyos but ang kanyang qualities. thus this has nothing against divine embodiment. furthermore, if we read John 4:24 as a whole, si Jesus Christ ay nakikipagusap sa isang Samaritan woman na kung saan ay may problem siya sa place of worship. ang mga Jews worship God sa Temple sa Jerusalem while ang Samaritans worship sa Mount Gezirim (v. 20-23). Jesus then tells the woman na hindi importante ang place of worship dahil we can worship God everywhere through our spirit. as Jesus Christ said sa verse 23 na we should worship God “...in spirit and truth” for worshipping God ay spirit to spirit (cf. Phil. 3:3). God is everwhere at hindi sa iisang place lamang (1 Kgs. 8:27; Ps. 139:7-10; Prov. 15:3; Jer. 23:34; Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3) so we can worship him spiritually. if they will use this faulty interpretation sa text and use it against Divine Embodiment, it begs the question na naiiwan ba yung katawan mo when you go to church to worship God? of course not diba? furthermore sinasabi also ng Bible na God is love (1 Jn. 1:5), God is light (1 Jn. 4:8), God is a consuming fire (Dt. 4:24; Heb. 12:29). is God only those things? of course not. these are also understood in a qualitative sense just as John 4:24 is understood.
And now for places in the Bible where Divine embodiment is taught, let’s start with the creation ni Adam and Eve. how did God created Adam and Eve. In Genesis 1:26-27 where God created Adam and Eve, it says :
“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” (Gen. 1:26-27) KJV
Sinasabi sa verses 21-25 with the Hebrew word לְמִינָהּ (lemiyna) reads :
“ And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind [לְמִינָהּ], and every winged fowl after his kind [לְמִינָהּ] : and God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind [לְמִינָהּ], cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind [לְמִינָהּ] : and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind [לְמִינָהּ], and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind [לְמִינָהּ] : and God saw that it was good.” (Gen. 1:21-25) KJV
The Hebrew word לְמִינָהּ ay nagpapakita for 6 times sa Genesis 1:21-25 and in here, God created every living creature and he created them “after his kind” (לְמִינָהּ). it is shown here na hindi ginawa ng Diyos ang mga animals na magkakamukha, i.e hindi ginawa ng Diyos ang pusa na kamukha ng daga at ang isda ay kamukha ng aso, vice-versa etc. with these creatures made after their own kind, they represent their own kind and they are commanded to reproduce. this is a key to understanding ang sinasabi ng verses 26-27 which shows us further kung papaano ba nirerepresent ng tao ang Diyos physically. Genesis 1:26-27 again reads with the Hebrew words צֶלֶם (tselem) at דְּמוּת (demyuth) shown in the text :
“And God said, Let us make man in our image [צֶלֶם], after our likeness [דְּמוּת] : and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image [צֶלֶם], in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” (Gen. 1:26-27) KJV
Scholarls say na ang “after our own image” at “after their our own likeness” suggest na hindi lamang ito used in the sense na ang tao ay isang “representative” but also denotes resemblance na kung saan, ito din ay equivalent to human procreation. this means na it also shows physical resemblance! at furthermore, sinasabi sa Genesis 5:1-3 na nagkaanak si Adam after his own likeness and after his own image and is named Seth. this shows the Hebrew words צֶלֶם (tselem) at דְּמוּת (demyuth) which is the same words used here in Genesis 5:1-3—shows procreation and thus shows resemblance. Meredith Kline comments sa Westminister Theological Journal wrote :
“ In Genesis 1:26 it is the plural form of the creative fiat that links the creation of man in the image of God to the Spirit-Glory of Genesis 1:2. The Glory-cloud curtains the heavenly enthronement of God in the midst of the judicial council of his celestial hosts. Here is the explanation of the “let us” and the “our image” in the Creator’s decree to make man. He was addressing himself to the angelic council of elders, taking them into his deliberative counsel.
This understanding of the first-person-plural fiat is supported by the fact that consistently where this usage occurs in divine speech it is in the context of the heavenly councilor at least of heavenly beings. Especially pertinent for Genesis 1:26 is the nearby instance in Genesis 3:22, a declaration concerned again with man’s image-likeness to God: “Man has become like one of us to know good and evil.” The cherubim mentioned in verse 24 were evidently being addressed. In the cases where God determines to descend and enter into judgment with a city like Babel or Sodom, and a plural form (like “Let us go down”) alternates with a singular, [30] the explanation of the plural is at hand in the angelic figures who accompany the Angel of the Lord on his judicial mission. [31] When, in Isaiah’s call experience, the Lord, enthroned in the Glory-cloud of his temple, asks, “Whom shall I send and who will go for us?” (Isa. 6:8), the plural is again readily accounted for by the seraphim attendants at the throne or (if the seraphim are to be distinguished from the heavenly elders, as are the winged creatures of the throne in Revelation 4) by the divine council, which in any case belongs to the scene. (A similar use of the first person plural is characteristic of address in the assembly of the gods as described in Canaanite texts of the Mosaic age.).........”
“ By setting the image-likeness formula in the context of sonship, Genesis 5:1-3 contradicts the suggestion that the image idea is a matter of representative status rather than of representational likeness or resemblance. For Seth was not Adam's representative, but as Adam's son he did resemble his father. The terminology "in his likeness" serves as the equivalent in human procreation of the phrase "after its kind" which is used for plant and animal reproduction and of course refers to resemblance.” (Meredith G. Kline, “Creation in the Image of the Glory-Spirit” Westminister Theological Journal, 39 [1976/77]: note 34)
Othmar Keel and Silvia Schroer comments on the Hebrew words used :
“ The idea fundamentally laid down in Gen 1:26f., that humans—and only humans, in contradistinction to the animals—are in the image of God must go back to Egyptian influence where especially the ruler appears as the “image of god.” The throne names and epithets of Egyptian kings perpetuate their “image of god-ness.” Tutankhamun (twt-‘nḫ-Ymn) means ‘living likeness of Amun’. New Kingdom seal amulets (scarabs) have been found in Palestine/Israel as well; on them, the name of Thutmoses III and other pharaohs are provided with the annotation tyt R’, tyt Ymn, or tyt Tmn R’ ‘image of Amun/Re’. But being in the image of God could also refer to human creatures in general. According to the Instruction of Merikare, which says of humanity that “They are his images, who came from his body” (snnw.f pw prn m ḥ’w.f), the relationship rests on the fact that humanity came from the body of the god. The connection is clear, and it is clearly suggested in the Egyptian language. The Egyptian numeral snw ‘two’ (Heb. šanah, šenim) is at the core of a broad semantic field to which among others, the following concepts belong: snwy ‘the two’ (dual); šnnw ‘second, companion, associate, colleague’; šn ‘brother’, šnt ‘sister’; šny ‘resemble, copy, imitate’, šnn ‘statue, image, icon’, šnnt ‘similarity’. “Similarity” is accordingly based on physical relationship and actually refers to a sort of “second edition” or “duplicate.”
Additional background for “being in the likeness of God” in Gen 1:26f. is the belief, throughout the Orient, in the potent corporealization that an image repreents. The statue or stela of an Egyptian, Assyrian, or Babylonian king, set up in a distant province of the empire, represents the king’s power on the spot. The image of the god in the temple represents the presence of the god. The Hebrew word ‘image’ (ṣelem) points linguistically to the Mesopotamian cultural area. It can designate sculptures, statues, or reliefs, but primarily emphasizes their representative function. The Akkadian word ṣalmu has a similar semantic spectrum. Like the Egyptian rulers, the Assyrian kings of the ninth to seventh centuries B.C. were often designated “image” (ṣalmu) of a god: it is clear that the notion of “being in the image of God” clearly developed from the conception of a representative image and was then probably abstracted. The word “likeness/form” (demut), which supplements ṣelem in 1:26f., designates the similar connection of the copy with the model. It alludes to the content of the image, and inner similarity in nature between human and God.” (Othmar Keel and Silvia Schroer, Creation: Biblical Theologies in the Context of the Ancient Near East [trans. Peter D. Daniels; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2015], 142-43)
And another passage that shows Divine Embodiment ay ang Acts 7:55-56 where Stephen saw both Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ. the relationship dito ng Father and Son is interpreted as spatial for Christ is sitting at the right hand ni Heavenly Father rather than what other groups claim that inserts their own meaning in the text. Acts 7:55-56 reads :
“ But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:55-56) KJV
Another passage that teaches Divine Embodiment is Hebrews 1:3 which reads :
“ Who being the brightness [απαυγασμα] of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;” (Heb 1:3) KJV
The Greek word na απαυγασμα (apaugasma) is translated in this verse as “radiance”; in the King James Version as “brightness”. Jesus Christ in this verse tells us na siya ay ang exact representation ni Heavenly Father. Jesus Christ is God’s image and he is God’s representative (2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15-17). what was seen in Jesus is seen in the Father (Jn. 14:9) and Jesus Christ himself being both divine and human—possesses a physical body that he partook in his incarnation (Jn. 1:14; Phil. 2:5-11; Heb. 2:7-9). furthermore, the Greek word na απαυγασμα dito ay nasa passive voice rather than sa isang active voice. what we mean by passive voice ay na ang action ay ginagawa to someone at ang active voice naman on the other hand ay ginagawa by someone. some will say na this is understood as an active but we should note na ang Greek coordinating conjuction na καὶ (kai) connects both ang first part at second part ng Hebrews 1:3 and making it a passive. the second part is understood as passive and it was connected by καὶ. with these, the second part tells us that Jesus is the exact representation ng nature ni Heavenly Father at hindi lamang in the sense na ito ay “synonymous”. Jesus is shown here as having all the qualities ni Heavenly Father and that Christ resembles fully who Heavenly Father is. Jesus Christ possesses a physical body and thus Heavenly Father too possesess a physical body. furthermore, one Bible scholar commented :
“ The meaning of απαυγασμα in Heb 1:3 is disputed. Actively, the word can denote radiance or effulgence (Phil, Spec. Leg. iv.123), or passively, reflection or the light that is reflected (Wis 7:26; Philo Op. 146; Plant. 50). The sentence structure in Heb 1:3 favors understanding απαυγασμα and → χαραχτηρ as synonyms and, therefore, interpreting απαυγασμα as pass.: Christ “reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature.” Both predicates characterize the Son as the perfect image of God and thus correspond to the expression → εικων του θεου (Col 1:15; 2 Cor 4:4). (Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, volume 1, eds Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider [Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1990], 118)
3a. The divine Son’s relation to the Father is expressed as a ‘reflection’ (apaugasma) of the Father’s glory and a ‘stamp’ or ‘imprint’ (charaktēr) of his nature. Apaugasma has been variously interpreted in an active sense (‘radiation, emanation’ of light) and in a passive sense (‘reflection’ of a luminary’s light on another surface). The active sense was the one commonly accepted in early exegesis, with conclusions at times orthodox, at times pantheistic or gnostic, but the parallel with charaktēr indicates that it is the passive sense which is intended by our author. Charaktēr is the imprint of a seal, the mark of one thing found in something else. ‘Glory’ is the form of God’s manifestation (Ex 24:16; 33:18; 40:34;cf Jn 1:14), and in late Judaism often meant God himself. Hypostasis is essence, substance, nature; to try to make the clear-cut metaphysical or speculative distinctions of a later theology is out of place; the word is chosen on the basis of theological imagery and metaphor. Without pressing these images further than the author intends, we may say that ‘reflection of his glory’ denotes the Son’s divine origin and perfect similarity to the Father, and ‘stamp of his nature’ that similarity qualified by his distinction from the Father. ‘Upholding the universe by his word of power’: pherōn has the double sense of maintaining the existence of creation and of governing, directing the course of history. The ‘word’ here is the dynamic OT ‘word’ which produces the physical or historical effects, and ‘word of power’, of course, is a Semitism for ‘powerful word’. (Dom Aelred Cody, “Hebrews” in Reginald C. Fuller, Leonard Johnston, and Conleth Kearns, eds. A New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture [London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd., 1969], 1224)
To Conclude, it is clear sa Bible na si Heavenly Father has a body of flesh and bones. Heavenly Father is not just a spirit. both of them has flesh and bones together with the Holy Spirit as a spirit person of the Godhead. just like you and me, Heavenly Father has a body of flesh and bones and his body as a glorified and perfected body. you and i is a son and daughther of God and is created after His own image, and this includes us having a physical body. Heavenly Father wanted us na magkaroon ng physical body and be perfected as he is that we may be immortalized and be glorified as he is. we will get there sa pagiging isang glorified being like him as long as we keep his commandments and keep our covenants. we will be like Him.
Like and support our Facebook page and Message us for your questions and get answers : Facebook.com/ldswarriors2000
Visit our blog : Ldswarriors2000.blogspot.com
Visit my Quora profile : Quora.com/Nathan-Lerr
