My own life is extremely busy and intense right now and I am not in a position to contribute more to this discussion right now. I hope you will appreciate that.

Thanks for taking the time to participate in the dialogue.

Best wishes,

Stephen

Now you claim “You are disagreeing with Jesus here since He said that, “for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.”
This simply ignores everything I said on the subject and makes a false claim as regards to me and what I have stated. I am not disagreeing with Christ, but with you.
The term “Flesh and Blood” refers to mortality with all its weaknesses. Peter’s revelation did not come through any mortal medium, but from a divine eternal medium. All this statement from Christ proves is that the Father is not mortal, and we agree with that completely. And, since Christ describes His resurrected body as having ‘Flesh and Bone” your use of that term becomes contradictory. You are making ‘flesh and blood’ synonymous with ‘flesh and bones’ when Christ clearly made a distinction between them.

I am sorry if you think that I am being argumentative but after all you, as you explained in “get to know the team” you have now left the LDS Church and no longer believe any of the teachings of Mormonism and feel you have been deceived. Then you will have to expect that the Calvinist teachings that this web site advocates is also very open to criticism too……….

Let me respond to your two points:

1) You are the one who keeps using the word revelation as it suits your LDS perspective. I am not using it as your comment suggests. My emphasis is that this passage is about the fact that Peter correctly understands that Jesus is not just a great man or extraordinary rabbi, he is the one and only Son of God. It is this true understanding of who Jesus is that is key when Jesus speaks to Peter here. Jesus is not talking about a principle of receiving revelation.

2) You assert that: “Clearly Christ has a body of flesh and bones, and so we can conclude that the Father does as well. ” Why? You are disagreeing with Jesus here since He said that, “for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.” It is obvious that Jesus is not aiming to describe some notion that God has a body of flesh and bone here, but rather that it is not a physical being who told Peter who Jesus really is, but rather ‘my Father which is in heaven’. The point being made is that God the Father, who is Spirit, as John 4:24 tells us, is the one who told Peter who Jesus truly was. The focus on some kind of distinction between ‘flesh and blood’ and ‘flesh and bone’ is a distinctly LDS preoccupation.

As to the Father not having flesh and bones, you should read the verse again. Jesus says that “flesh and blood” hath not revealed it. There is a distinction here. When Christ appeared to his Apostles after his resurrection he told them “A spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have.” Clearly Christ has a body of flesh and bones, and so we can conclude that the Father does as well. However, they are not flesh and blood, because a resurrected body does not have blood in it. So, it was not flesh and blood (mortal understanding) that revealed that truth to Peter, but flesh and bones, or immortal understanding.

I do think that the point I made above in response to shematwater’s comments addresses some of what you were saying in terms of my take on the point in the Bible when Jesus asked Peter, “But whom say ye that I am?”. The way Jesus responds to Peter’s answer is quite revealing, and shows that Jesus did not regard the Father as having ‘flesh and bone.’