The Transformation of WHAT Body? A Look at Philippians 3:32-21

The Transformation of WHAT Body?

For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, 21 who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself.

In the still ongoing, at this writing, debate with Edward Stevens on whether there was a rapture in AD 66 or 70, Philippians 3:20-21 was introduced by Stevens as one of the foundations for his doctrine. To be sure, through the ages this text has been appealed to for proof of a future physical resurrection of the dead. But make no mistake, that is a doctrine that Stevens denies, all the while accusing me of being heretical and “unorthodox”! The irony runs deep here!

In the aforementioned debate Stevens offered the following argument based on Philippians 3.

The individual immortal body that Christ has in heaven after the ascension is the very same “glorious body” in which he returned at the parousia (Phil. 3:21). And since it is the PATTERN for the afterlife bodies of all believers including us today (See Philippians 3:21; 1 John 3:2 and 1 Cor. 15:20-23) then it clearly identifies the kind of bodies the saints received when they were raised out of Hades, and the kind of bodies the living saints had after their mortal bodies were changed into immortal bodies and translated into the unseen realm.// (2AFF- #9).

As the reader can see, Stevens applies Philippians 3 to the individual bodies of saints raised out of Hades and the individual mortal physical bodies of the first century saints when they were raptured out of this world. He likewise says that Christ’s individual heavenly body is the pattern today for the bodies of every individual Christian in heaven.

Now, before proceeding, a bit of a Greek lesson. The word translated as transform is μετασχηματίσει, (metaschēmatisei) a future indicative singular, third person singular. Strong’s offers this definition:

#3345 -metasxēmatízō (from 3326 /metá, “with, bringing about change, after-effect” and 4976 /sx ma, “outward shape”) – properly, to change outward appearance after a change.

The word can be used both positively or negatively. But the thing to be noted is that fundamentally, as all translations agree, the idea is in fact transformation. It is not the creation of something new. It is the change, the alteration, the transformation of something. And historically, it has been understood to refer to the alteration, the changing, the transforming of the physical human body at the time of the parousia. (Keep in mind that Stevens rejects this view). It has been applied to the resurrected body that is reconstituted, restored, revived and raised in an incorruptible form. And it has been used to speak of the instantaneous transformation of the physical bodies of the saints living at that moment. Stevens applies it to the first century saints who were raptured, but, not to any other Christians since then.

While Stevens appeals to Philippians 3 to support his rapture theory doctrine, in truth, based on his own words, Philippians 3 destroys his rapture theory! But Stevens has very subtly hidden from his readers what he truly believes. Let’s look closer by examining what he is on record teaching about the various “bodies” of the dead.

The long dead saints, whose bodies have long ago decayed, do not have a body to be transformed. At the parousia they (their spirits) were taken out of Hades and taken to heaven where they received brand new bodies. No transformation for the long dead saints! Philippians 3 thus never applied to them. A brand new body is not a transformed body of humiliation.

When Christians die today our bodies go into the grave and remain there, but we go to heaven where we get a brand new body. There is no transformation for any of the saints who have lived since AD 66 or 70! Philippians 3 thus never applied to us. A brand new body is not a transformed body of humiliation.

Stevens teaches that Christians today never undergo a rapture at which their lowly mortal, physical bodies of humiliation are transformed into a glorious body.

Thus, in Stevens’ rapture theory, for all of his claims about the transformation of the human, physical body of humiliation, (and his claims that those who reject it are false teachers) he literally has no place whatsoever for the transformation of the human physical body of humiliation. In his own view Philippians 3 has NO BEARING, NO APPLICATION to either the dead OT saints, to the dead Christians or to the living Christians since AD 70!

Consistent with all of this, consider that Stevens is on record as saying that physical death is “natural.” It is not part of the Adamic Curse – although he has vacillated incredibly on this, saying on the recent Zach Davis interview that death did enter the day Adam sinned. Well, if physical death entered the day that Adam sinned, then physical death was fundamentally a part of the Adamic Curse. This is hugely problematic for Stevens’ but he plays lots of word games to escape the problem. We may explore that later. But for now, consider the following.

Stevens now tells us that physical death was NEVER the focus of the cross or the parousia! In his fourth negative he said this: Stevens says: “I deny that [GENERIC] physical death was included in the Death of Adam or that it will ever be abolished for anyone while we are in this physical life on earth and separated from the Tree of Life which is in heaven.” (4thNeg-#23). He later said that physical death was never the focus of the parousia of Christ.

Now, I rejoiced when I read that but it is more than apparent that his own teachings falsify his own claims. He has fatally entrapped himself.

If / since, per Stevens, physical death was never the focus of Christ’s work on the cross, then Jesus’ physical death on the cross was not the focus of the cross! I know that sounds redundant but think on it for a moment. Steven’s says that Jesus’ physical death on the cross was substitutionary, ostensibly meaning that he died physically so that those in the power of his substitutionary physical death should never die. (Be sure to read my previous post about Stevens and the susbstitutionary death of Christ). If Jesus’ physical death on the cross was substitutionary that logically DEMANDS that the cross was indeed focused on physical death. This is inescapable. But that is not all.

The resurrection / parousia of Christ was to over come the death introduced by Adam: “As in Adam all men die, even so in Christ shall be made alive.” Thus, the parousia was in fact, indisputably, focused on the Death of Adam. Since Stevens stated that physical death entered the day that Adam sinned, then of necessity, that means that physical death was the focus of the parousia. There is nothing “natural” about the death that entered the day Adam sinned. THAT death was a curse. It was the “wages of sin.”

Whatever death entered the day Adam sinned, it was THAT DEATH that was the focus of both Jesus’ cross and parousia. Since Stevens NOW says physical death is natural, that means that the mortal, human body is NOT a body of humiliation that needs to be transformed! Thus, Stevens’ attempt to apply Philippians 3 to ANYONE is misguided and wrong.

There is literally NO LOWLY HUMAN BODY OF HUMILIATION OF ANYONE, in Steven’s paradigm, that was to be or that will be TRANSFORMED.

Oh, but wait! Stevens tells us that in fact the first century saints were raptured. THEY experienced the miraculous transformation of THEIR lowly physical bodies of humiliation. We today don’t, the long dead saints didn’t, but that first century group of saints DID!

Why?

If physical death was never the focus of the Cross or the parousia / rapture, and since physical death is “natural,” why did the first century saints need to have their lowly mortal bodies of humiliations transformed? Were THEIR bodies actually lowly, mortal bodies of humiliation – needing transformation – but our human bodies today do not need to be transformed?

If the first century saints needed their mortal human bodies transformed then the Cross and the parousia was focused on their mortal bodily transformation, but it was NOT focused on the decomposed bodies of the long dead saints, and was not focused on the transformation of OUR mortal bodies.

Why would Christians today not need our mortal bodies transformed if the first century saints needed their bodies transformed? Keep in mind that Stevens is clear that today, there is no rapture and there is no transformation of our physical bodies that are then taken to heaven. No indeed!

So, the bottom line here is that Stevens’ own words utterly and completely destroy his rapture theory. It is wrong from the ground up. While he claims that Philippians 3 is the pattern for the our heavenly body, in reality, Philippians 3 serves as no pattern for the transformation of any mortal, physical, human body. And to reiterate, Stevens’ own words confirm this. He has destroyed his own rapture theory.