Steve, it is the issue at hand. It deals with how one defines biblical terms and views them from their own perspective of thought. If you don't know what it is just say "I don't know." There are tons of things we all are still learning. If you do understand it then let me know so we can move on to the delineation of the proper perspective on Christ's ascension body. It's almost as if you are fearful of saying you do not know or understand something, which is exactly the point of this original thread. We all need to be sitting at the feet of older men in the Lord so we can learn.
There is nothing wrong with saying I do not know and then taking the time to examine the new ideas one is not familiar with. Your issue of over the proper way to see Christ and his body is directly related to which way one leans in regard to this. This is the art of learning and growing. We all need to be learning from those who have gone further and deeper in the Word, which is the point of discipleship. I'm hoping I can be a disciple of someone or several people until the day I die. Even among us here, men like John Whitten, Doc, Bill Luck, Nathan provide me with invaluable discipleship, and then even beyond men who have trained me in the educational classrooms as well as in other areas of life too have much to offer when we are willing to learn and walk through new concepts.
You have asked some questions and I'll be glad to share with you some theological answers but the questions you have raised and the resolutions are often determined by the prior set of presuppositions or ideas that one goes into the discussion with. If a person embraces the ideas as set forth by Philo and Origen, or others or even something else, or if one embraces something known as a duality or holistic view of man's body, those prior ideas often if not always in this subject set the person as to where they will be in regard to this subject. Much of the confusion in that can be resolved by examining those preliminary issues. Your view as it stands has some presuppositions to it that need to be brought out on the table so the presuppositions that exist can be seen. Even contentions between the Lutherans and the Presbyterians over the Lord's Supper, the consubstantiation view versus the memorial or spiritual view is rooted in this very issue here.
Since you affirm, if I recall correctly a future earthly millennial reign, then you are already in that doctrine on the opposite side of Christoplatonism. But it is possible that your views of Christ's body have been influenced by the Christoplatonic thought which would in turn, because all theological doctrines are interconnected, cause confusion for you on how to view apostleship because of a position that builds itself upon the connection to Christ. To get to "C" we have to back up to walk through "A" and "B."
