Does God the Father Have a Body? Why or Why Not?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheosisM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TheosisM

Guest
One of the unique claims of Mormonism is the belief that the Father is corporeal, having a body of flesh and bones (like Jesus does due to the Resurrection and Ascension). I am wondering how to respond to this from a Trinitarian perspective, and will begin by giving the LDS argument as I have read it. I have read the CAF article on this issue, which really focuses on ECF writings, however I would like to focus on what the Bible says (which is why I’m posting in this sub-forum 😉 ).

Mormons interpret Genesis 1:26 as referring, not only to a figurative image and likeness (i.e. rational soul) to God, but also a physical likeness.

**Genesis 1:26 (KJV)
26And 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.

Genesis 1:26 (NAB)
Then God said: “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and the cattle, and over all the wild animals and all the creatures that crawl on the ground.”
**

Mormons will continue the focus on what “image, after our likeness” by referring to Genesis 5:3-
**
Genesis 5:3 (KJV)
3And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:

Genesis 5:3 (NAB)
Adam was one hundred and thirty years old when he begot a son in his likeness, after his image; and he named him Seth.**

So, here we see that Adam begets a son “in his likeness, after his image”, which clearly (according to the argument) is referring to physicality. So, Mormons wonder why these two instances of the same phrase are interpreted differently (i.e. referring to two different things).

A common objection is that if we interpret the Bible as literally talking about God having a body, then we also have to believe that God has wings (Ps. 91:4), for example. Mormons respond that it is clear what the metaphor of “wings” means (Matt 23:37), while the Bible gives no clues as to the metaphorical interpretation of seeing God’s back parts, for example (Ex 33:23), or Stephen’s vision of God (Acts 7:55-56).

The final main part of the Mormon argument is on John 4:24-

**John 4:24 (KJV)
24God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

John 4:24 (NAB)
God is Spirit, and those who worship him must worship in Spirit and truth."**

Trinitarians state that if God is a spirit, then He can’t have a body of flesh and bones, since Jesus says that a spirit does not have flesh and bones (Luke 24:39)

Now, the Mormon argument identifies that ancient Greek did not have indefinite articles such as “a” and “an”, therefore the NAB translation is correct, and leads to a parallel structure with 1 John 1:5 (“God is light”) and 1 John 4:8 (“God is love”). So, it seems that it is more likely that John 4:24 is not talking about the “physical” nature of God, but a characteristic of His…personality and “activity towards men”, such as “love” and “light”. They refer to 1 Cor 6:17 to show that he who is joined unto the Lord is one spirit, yet we also have bodies, so there is no contradiction. They also refer to Jesus’ Resurrection and Ascension, where He clearly still has a body of flesh and bones, yet He did not cease being a Spirit, if we accept that God is a spirit only.

Also, a curious philosophical question is where does the idea that spirits are incorporeal come from? Do we really believe that those in Heaven have no form (since this is pre-resurrection)?

Thanks for any responses, as this is a topic that I find fascinating, and find the Mormon argument very intriguing. I simply would like to understand this issue from a Trinitarian Biblical perspective.

I would like to close with this painting from the Sistene Chapel, with an interesting caption on the Vatican website:
mv.vatican.va/3_EN/pages/x-Schede/CSNs/CSNs_V_StCentr_06.html
"

*Creation of Adam

(Genesis 1: 26-27)
“God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him” (Genesis 1: 27).

The focal point of the episode of the Creation of man is the contact between the fingers of the Creator and those of Adam, through which the breath of life is transmitted. God, supported by angels in flight and wrapped in a mantle, leans towards Adam, shown as a resting athlete, whose beauty seems to confirm the words of the Old Testament, according to which man was created to the image and likeness of God."*
 
God is pure spirit. God is simple, meaning He cannot be separated into parts. My understanding is that having a body is limiting where God is unlimited.
 
One of the unique claims of Mormonism is the belief that the Father is corporeal, having a body of flesh and bones (like Jesus does due to the Resurrection and Ascension). I am wondering how to respond to this from a Trinitarian perspective, and will begin by giving the LDS argument as I have read it. I have read the CAF article on this issue, which really focuses on ECF writings, however I would like to focus on what the Bible says (which is why I’m posting in this sub-forum 😉 ).

Mormons interpret Genesis 1:26 as referring, not only to a figurative image and likeness (i.e. rational soul) to God, but also a physical likeness.

Genesis 1:26 (KJV)
26And 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.

Genesis 1:26 (NAB)
Then God said: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and the cattle, and over all the wild animals and all the creatures that crawl on the ground."


Mormons will continue the focus on what “image, after our likeness” by referring to Genesis 5:3-

Genesis 5:3 (KJV)
3And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:

Genesis 5:3 (NAB)
Adam was one hundred and thirty years old when he begot a son in his likeness, after his image; and he named him Seth.


So, here we see that Adam begets a son “in his likeness, after his image”, which clearly (according to the argument) is referring to physicality. So, Mormons wonder why these two instances of the same phrase are interpreted differently (i.e. referring to two different things).

A common objection is that if we interpret the Bible as literally talking about God having a body, then we also have to believe that God has wings (Ps. 91:4), for example. Mormons respond that it is clear what the metaphor of “wings” means (Matt 23:37), while the Bible gives no clues as to the metaphorical interpretation of seeing God’s back parts, for example (Ex 33:23), or Stephen’s vision of God (Acts 7:55-56).

The final main part of the Mormon argument is on John 4:24-

John 4:24 (KJV)
24God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

John 4:24 (NAB)
God is Spirit, and those who worship him must worship in Spirit and truth."


Trinitarians state that if God is a spirit, then He can’t have a body of flesh and bones, since Jesus says that a spirit does not have flesh and bones (Luke 24:39)

Now, the Mormon argument identifies that ancient Greek did not have indefinite articles such as “a” and “an”, therefore the NAB translation is correct, and leads to a parallel structure with 1 John 1:5 (“God is light”) and 1 John 4:8 (“God is love”). So, it seems that it is more likely that John 4:24 is not talking about the “physical” nature of God, but a characteristic of His…personality and “activity towards men”, such as “love” and “light”. They refer to 1 Cor 6:17 to show that he who is joined unto the Lord is one spirit, yet we also have bodies, so there is no contradiction. They also refer to Jesus’ Resurrection and Ascension, where He clearly still has a body of flesh and bones, yet He did not cease being a Spirit, if we accept that God is a spirit only.

Also, a curious philosophical question is where does the idea that spirits are incorporeal come from? Do we really believe that those in Heaven have no form (since this is pre-resurrection)?

Thanks for any responses, as this is a topic that I find fascinating, and find the Mormon argument very intriguing. I simply would like to understand this issue from a Trinitarian Biblical perspective.

I would like to close with this painting from the Sistene Chapel, with an interesting caption on the Vatican website:
mv.vatican.va/3_EN/pages/x-Schede/CSNs/CSNs_V_StCentr_06.html
"

Creation of Adam

(Genesis 1: 26-27)
“God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him” (Genesis 1: 27).

The focal point of the episode of the Creation of man is the contact between the fingers of the Creator and those of Adam, through which the breath of life is transmitted. God, supported by angels in flight and wrapped in a mantle, leans towards Adam, shown as a resting athlete, whose beauty seems to confirm the words of the Old Testament, according to which man was created to the image and likeness of God."
You post quite an argument if I may use that word. For me I believe that God is pure spirit. That is the way I was taught and I never questioned it. Sorry for the simplistic answer.
 
The mormons would be incorrect on this issue, God the father is in fact pure spirit, and we in fact are creatures with a dual nature. We are both spirit and flesh, we were created in spirit, in the image and likeness of God the Father, we are recreated in baptism as the Image and likness of Jesus Christ, durring which time we receive the holy spirit.

There are plenty of clues in Revelation, for instance the only time God the Father Speaks:
Ch 21:
3 And I heard a great voice from the throne, saying: Behold the tabernacle of God with men, and he will dwell with them. And they shall be his people; and God himself with them shall be their God.
As a disembodies voice, compare this to the Christ as opposed to the many visions of Christ, here is one from Ch 14:
14 And I saw, and behold a white cloud; and upon the cloud one sitting like to the Son of man, having on his head a crown of gold, and in his hand a sharp sickle.
15 And another angel came out from the temple crying with a loud voice to him that sat upon the cloud: Thrust in thy sickle, and reap, because the hour is come to reap: for the harvest of the earth is ripe.
16 And he that sat on the cloud thrust his sickle into the earth, and the earth was reaped.
 
One of the unique claims of Mormonism is the belief that the Father is corporeal, having a body of flesh and bones (like Jesus does due to the Resurrection and Ascension). I am wondering how to respond to this from a Trinitarian perspective, and will begin by giving the LDS argument as I have read it. I have read the CAF article on this issue, which really focuses on ECF writings, however I would like to focus on what the Bible says (which is why I’m posting in this sub-forum 😉 ).
IMHO, it seems to me most of the Biblical passages already cited lend more “evidence” to God the Father not having a corporeal, flesh and bones body. Yes, there are the “made in His image” lines. However, please bear with me. I know this is a lame analogy! 🙂 A photograph or portrait of someone is an “image” of that person. But a 2-dimensional “image” is not anywhere close to the living, breathing, 3-dimensional real person.
I would be interested to know if there are any differences in the original language of the words (image and likeness) used for the creation of Adam and the passages where “Adam begat…”?
Also, a curious philosophical question is where does the idea that spirits are incorporeal come from? Do we really believe that those in Heaven have no form (since this is pre-resurrection)?
I can only offer this from Frank Sheed’s book, “Theology and Sanity”.

“Briefly, spirit is the being which has its own nature so firmly in its grasp that it can never become some other thing. Any material thing is in the constant peril of becoming something else: wood is burnt and becomes ash, oxygen meets hydrogen and becomes water, hay is eaten and becomes cow.”

You’d probably have to go back to Aristotle or Plato or earlier to find the origin of this idea. 🤷
 
Image and likeness is in the Old Testament so that Jesus could show the Saducees their error. When the Saducees ask Jesus whether it is proper to pay tax to Caeser they wish to trap him-say yes and you are against the Jews, say no and you are a rebel to the Romans. He answers “Whose image and likeness is on the coin” -render unto Caeser etc, “but render unto God which is God’s”

What did he mean- he was telling the Saducees that they were not seeking or giving themselves to God- a harsh indictment in those times. He was saying that man is made in God’s image and likeness and you should give yourself up to God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top