LDS Teaching that God has a Body & Hebrews i.3?

There's an excellent Discussion Board on CARM. I was recently involved in a discussion on the LDS doctrine of God having a body. LDS members were using Hebrews i.3, giving the argument that, "Because Jesus has a body, and Jesus is the express image of God's person (that wording based on the KJV translation), therefore God must have a body." I decided to post a thread which would prove usage of Heb. i.3 was faulty, that you could not find any support, explicitly or imlpicitly, for such a doctrine in that specific text. So, I got a thread going. In one of my posts I discussed the Greek, but for some reason, I originally saw language in the text that simply was not there. So, I made a correction. Below is the correction I posted yesterday.

I must confess I was wrong about something I posted in another thread, specifically some information I talked about in the thread I created on whether God has a body and the LDS (mis)use of Hebrews i.3.

To start, so there is no confusion or calls that I am trying to mislead people, this is a genuine messup I had and this correction I am posting does not help the LDS position, but confirms and affirms the right teaching and exposition of the passage.

Originally, for some reason, I saw in the Greek 3 kai's--translated "and" most all the time--connecting the three phrases "radiance of His glory," "express image of His nature" (BTW "person" is a horrible translation because it leads to people thinking about God having a physical body. If you knew the Greek word used, hupostasis, you would distinguish the difference.), and "upholds all things by the word of His power." I don't know where I got that idea.

Sorry.

Let me give you the literal, word for word translation so you see what the Greek really says. The reading would look like this: "Who being radiance of the glory and express image of the nature of Him, upholds and so all things by the word of the power of Him." There is only one kai in there, between glory and express image. And this is more significant than you think. But even more so is the first "of Him.

"The "of Him" is from the possessive pronoun, autou. Notice where you find that word: at the end of the first clause, following "radiance of the glory and express image of the nature." Possessive pronouns 99% of the time follow (in Greek) the object being possessed (this falls within the 99%). However, when you see two specific phrases, connected by the kai, followed by the possessive pronoun, then you find objects in both phrases being possessed by the one pronoun. That is why although "radiance of the glory" is not directly followed by the possessive pronoun, the autou still possesses "the glory." Hence, the English translation, "radiance of His glory and express image of His nature."

"So what?" you ask? Thanks for asking.

The fact that you have these two phrases connected by the shared possessive pronoun indicates Paul (I believe Paul wrote Hebrews) had one thought in mind when he talked about Christ being the radiance of God's glory and the express image of God's nature. Recall verse 2, when Paul said that God has soken to us by the Son, by Christ. Paul is talking about how God has spoken to His people: by Christ, "Who being the radiance of God's glory and the express image of God's nature..." Contrary to LDS teaching, these two phrases are talking about the same thing: how God is expressing outwardly or
visibly His glory and nature.

There is no mention explicitly or implicitly of God being a physical being, having a body. Despite LDS attempts to have the passage say, "Because Christ has a body and Christ is the express image of God, therefore God must have a body," the text simply does not say that. Paul said God used Christ to speak to His people and reveal visibly His glory and His nature.