**There is still the question; how do you reconcile your statement that the Word is not flesh with what is written in Holy Scripture, that the Word became flesh?**
How do you reconcile your wanting God to literally be flesh, when Jesus Christ and his aposltes declare God to be a Spirit and invisible? (John 1:18, 5:37, Col.1:15, 1Tim. 1:17, Heb. 11:27, 1John 4:12)
After his teaching on the ‘bread of life’, Jesus Christ declared that it wasn’t literally the flesh that gives life, but the Spirit:
“It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” John 6:63
Your words don’t come from your flesh, but from your mind, and are inseparable from your very being. Your mind is in a fleshly body, designed by God, and is the method you use to express yourself. Your body is not your mind.
Jesus Christ is the express image of the invisible God. God is invisible. The scriptures are complete when teaching doctrine. When Jesus Christ said that God is a Spirit, he was giving as basic of a description as he could to the person he was talking to.
He claimed that all of his words of testamony were not his, but the Father’s. He claimed the Father was in him doing the works. I don’t know how clearer he could be to enquiring minds.
(I’d have answered sooner, but Sat. morn the wife and I were greeted, when turning on the PC, to a welcome to Winndoze 10. We didn’t ask for it, but there it was. So we delayed taking any action, and enjoyed the nice weekend, and asked friends what to do. We decided to just learn to use the new OS. Still kinda ticked off that it was loaded without our permission.)
How do you reconcile your wanting God to literally be flesh, when Jesus Christ and his aposltes declare God to be a Spirit and invisible? (John 1:18, 5:37, Col.1:15, 1Tim. 1:17, Heb. 11:27, 1John 4:12)
You use the word literally. Is this how you resolve your difference with what is written in Scripture? That when John wrote the Word became flesh, he did not mean that the Word literally became flesh?
It's not a matter of "wanting" one thing or another. It's simply that "the word became flesh" signifies that reality of the Divine taking on human form; God in the flesh.
And it is true that no man has seen the Father in His heavenly Glory. But is also true that "Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father." (John 14:9). The Scriptures are replete with paradoxes on these points. The correct answer accepts that, rather than simply favoring one set of verses over the others.
After his teaching on the ‘bread of life’, Jesus Christ declared that it wasn’t literally the flesh that gives life, but the Spirit:
“It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” John 6:63
But back up 12 verses:
"51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” John 6:51
"My flesh . . which I will give for the life of the world?" Who else can redeem the world but God? And how can that "flesh" give life to the world if it is merely an earthly. carnal thing? It has to be Divine as well or else the efficacy of the Redemption is called into question.
(What does "flesh" refer to in verse 63? Hint: it's not Jesus's flesh; to read it that way leads to contradiction, a flesh that "gives life to the world" that also "profits nothing.")