Cremation or Burial

[Pizzaguy]

One more time.

Jesus further illustrated a perspective towards the disposal of the body when he spoke to one who would follow Him: Luke 9:59-60 says, “He said to another man, ‘Follow me.’ But the man replied, ‘Lord, first let me go and bury my father.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and proclaim the kingdom of God.’†At first, this appears to be a harsh and unfeeling response, but Jesus was determined that those who followed Him would give Him their full attention; disposing of the body of the dead was obviously of very low priority. If the Bible renders a low priority to this issue then it would seem that the method of disposal may be left to individual taste and, perhaps, other societal and environmental dictates.
Christian Views on Cremation

 

[Drew]

disposing of the body of the dead was obviously of very low priority. If the Bible renders a low priority to this issue then it would seem that the method of disposal may be left to individual taste and, perhaps, other societal and environmental dictates.

I have never suggested that what we do with our dead bodies is exceedingly important - I have merely argued that choosing cremation sends an arguably less than ideal message to the rest of the world about how we Christians view our embodied physicality.

In any event, the text does not really support the position for which you seem to be advocating. The fact that how we live is more important than what we do with our dead bodies does not mean that what we do with our dead bodies is entirely irrelevant.

 

[Drew]

I agree that there are some things that Christians consider unethical even though the Bible may not speak directly on it. In these cases from what we know the Bible says on other issues, we can infer what may be a good position to take on ones where the Bible is more unclear. In this case, I have not seen that we are to either bury or cremate. I think it is one's personal choice. If you decide to be buried, that's your choice and I have nothing against it.

You are really ignoring the argument I have made. Please engage the argument - the one about how cremation sends a less than ideal message to the world about how we think of our embodied physicality. If you do not think the argument is valid, explain why and perhaps we can agree to disagree. But, if I may suggest, you probably should at least say something about that argument. Perhaps I can expand on it, if it is less than clear.

In regards to your speeding analogy, that is a different situation. Driving at fast speeds I do not think is a sin. Consider the autobahns in Germany. There is often no speed limit, and cars can be seen driving at over 200km/h. If a driver can safely drive at that speed, then what's the problem?

Forget the speeding example. We agree don't we: There are cases where we can properly conclude that "X" is sinful, even if there is no "thou shalt not do X" command in the Bible.

 

[Lewis]

Drew Wrote
In any event, the text does not really support the position for which you seem to be advocating.

Yes it does Drew, it shows that cremation is lawful, for Christians.

 

[Pizzaguy]

I have merely argued that choosing cremation sends an arguably less than ideal message to the rest of the world about how we Christians view our embodied physicality.

Yes, you have.

And you have lost the argument. Lewis' post ends the discussion. Christ's words on their own ends the discussion.

 

[Drew]

Yes it does Drew, it shows that cremation is lawful, for Christians.

I see nothing in the text in question that suggests "cremation is lawful". All the text does is suggest that the matter of "disposing" of the body is of secondary importance - I have never denied this. The text is silent on the matter of "how" the body is best dealt with.

And in a similar vein, I never suggested that cremation was "now lawful".

 

[Lewis]

Drew let me ask you this, is an autopsy and donating your body for research out of the question too. If Jesus placed a low priority on a dead body, then why would burning a dead body raise His eyebrows. Now I hear some say that we are to mirror the resurrection, by getting buried. Jesus was not buried and He was not put in a box, like we do today. so to mirror Him we should carve out a cave and get put in there, and then have a large stone rolled in front of it. I am not trying to be a smart alec here.

 

[Drew]

Drew let me ask you this, is an autopsy and donating your body for research out of the question too.

First of all, I really wish people would take care to represent my position fairly. I believe that I have never asserted that cremation is "sinful". I have merely argued that it sends a less than desirable message to the world, and, all other things being equal, I think that conventional burial is better from a strictly symbolic point of view.

Now to your question: Both an autopsy and donating your body have good justifications, so I would suggest neither of these choices are problematic. The problem with cremation is that it implicitly endorses the position that we (Christians) believe that our body is merely a "shell" for our "spirit", a non-Biblical position, I would suggest. When we burn up a body, we are implicitly suggesting that we consider the body to be "disposable". Now, please, I am not a fool! I know full well that when you put a body in the ground, it will decompose. The point is that when we choose "hasten the decomposition", we are arguably saying "our physicality is not that important. As I have repeatedly stated, there may be all sorts of reasons to choose cremation anyway. But I still think it sends an unfortunate message.

If Jesus placed a low priority on a dead body, then why would burning a dead body raise His eyebrows.

You are going beyond what Jesus said. Yes, what we do with our dead bodies is far less important than how we choose to live our lives. But that does not mean that what we do with a dead body is devoid of significance.

Now I hear some say that we are to mirror the resurrection, by getting buried. Jesus was not buried and He was not put in a box, like we do today. so to mirror Him we should carve out a cave and get put in there, and then have a large stone rolled in front of it. I am not trying to be a smart alec here.

I have not made this argument (about mirroring) but I do think it has some merit. Ideally, we want to tell the following message to the world: Although my body is "dead", it will be resurrected someday. By simply putting the body in the ground, or even in a tomb like the one Jesus was placed in, we say "here is my body, awaiting resurrection". This is a powerful symbolic message. If we immediately burn it away, we are sending arguably the wrong message.

 

[Lewis]

But Drew, the body is going to waste away anyway, on top of the ground or under it. Dogs dig up bones out of old rotted wood caskets, and spread them all over the place. People get blown up and on and on. and yes your body is the house that you live in, and upon death you move out, and that body is not any good to you anymore. During autopsies when you are being cut up and organs removed you don't feel a thing, reason' because you are not in there anymore. Flesh and blood will not enter into heaven. Now when Jesus comes back the dead in Christ will rise first. And it is nothing to put us back together for Him. Say that a dog digs up your bones and takes a fibula 30 miles away and this person that died was saved, do you think that this would be a problem for God. Saved people in war get blown to bits, and there is nothing to send home, but a toe, do you think that this will be a problem for God. Even though my body won't know it, I don't want my body down there. I was going to be a mortician at one time and I know the stages that a body goes through upon death above and under the ground. And I don't want that, so I choose to be cremated. I don't think that cremation sends the wrong message at all, it is a choice. But it is not the choice for you Drew.

 

[handy]

You are going beyond what Jesus said...

We'd never want to do that now would we! ( Sorry, couldn't resist.)

In regards to post #73, there's really not all that much to say except that my point was and still is we cannot always make a "logical progression" from 1 to 2 to 3...and irregardless of what Jesus was trying to accomplish, (I disagree with your premise, but that yet another thread) the example of my point still stands. We can rely upon 1 and we can rely upon 2, but to automatically go to 3 very often leads us right into "going beyond what Jesus said".

First of all, I really wish people would take care to represent my position fairly. I believe that I have never asserted that cremation is "sinful". I have merely argued that it sends a less than desirable message to the world, and, all other things being equal, I think that conventional burial is better from a strictly symbolic point of view.

Now to your question: Both an autopsy and donating your body have good justifications, so I would suggest neither of these choices are problematic. The problem with cremation is that it implicitly endorses the position that we (Christians) believe that our body is merely a "shell" for our "spirit", a non-Biblical position, I would suggest. When we burn up a body, we are implicitly suggesting that we consider the body to be "disposable". Now, please, I am not a fool! I know full well that when you put a body in the ground, it will decompose. The point is that when we choose "hasten the decomposition", we are arguably saying "our physicality is not that important. As I have repeatedly stated, there may be all sorts of reasons to choose cremation anyway. But I still think it sends an unfortunate message.

I think I made this point earlier this morning but I'll make it again...this might be what you think of when you think of cremation...but I'm not sure that everyone else...especially people in the world think think this way. Most secular people believe there is no difference between "soul" and "body"...they pretty much believe that the body is "it" and once it's dead, that's it. If we are going to use our funeral as our last witness to Christ (and I believe we should) then our funeral will testify our belief in the resurrection, whether there is a casket with a body or an urn with the body's ashes. Both send the message "here is my body, awaiting resurrection".

To this end, Drew, I do tend to agree with you that there is importance of how we inter our remains, and tend to shy away from the idea of scattering ashes. However, I still maintain this is surely an area of Christian liberty...one has the freedom to bury their dead however they see fit. Even with cremation and scattering, I believe that Christians can testify to the resurrection, depending upon how their funeral is conducted.

Another thought on this thread is that we should probably consider where we are at and who our neighbor's are in making the decision of how our funeral will be a testimony. If one lives in an area where burning the body is commonly viewed as "releasing the disembodied spirit to the other world" (a common Hindu belief) then burying a body could be a testament to the resurrection.

We have to be careful about that though...because if one's Hindu neighbor's are offended by the idea of burying a body...so offended that it causes them to not listen to the gospel (I would never want to be a Christian! They trap their dead in rotting bodies...how can anyone do that!?!) then it would be better to cremate then bury an urn with the testimony "here is my body, awaiting resurrection".

I believe this is why God give no command as to what we do with our remains...because He knew that the gospel would spread throughout the world and Christians would encounter many different beliefs...and how to best testify to the gospel would be different for someone living amongst uber sophisticated Manhattanites than for someone living with pariahs of India.

 

[Drew]

But Drew, the body is going to waste away anyway, on top of the ground or under it. Dogs dig up bones out of old rotted wood caskets, and spread them all over the place. People get blown up and on and on. and yes your body is the house that you live in, and upon death you move out, and that body is not any good to you anymore. During autopsies when you are being cut up and organs removed you don't feel a thing, reason' because you are not in there anymore. Flesh and blood will not enter into heaven. Now when Jesus comes back the dead in Christ will rise first. And it is nothing to put us back together for Him. Say that a dog digs up your bones and takes a fibula 30 miles away and this person that died was saved, do you think that this would be a problem for God. Saved people in war get blown to bits, and there is nothing to send home, but a toe, do you think that this will be a problem for God. Even though my body won't know it, I don't want my body down there. I was going to be a mortician at one time and I know the stages that a body goes through upon death above and under the ground. And I don't want that, so I choose to be cremated. I don't think that cremation sends the wrong message at all, it is a choice. But it is not the choice for you Drew.

The content of this argument shows that you have either not read my posts carefully, or that I did not clearly communicate my point.

Since I cannot control the former, and since I have done the best I can in respect to the latter, I guess we will have to "agree to disagree".

 

[Drew]

I did, post #65...."Not the thread for the smoking debate...just want to discuss the principle of not burdening others with our own convictions..."

Please answer the questions. I politely suggest that you know that the answer to both is "yes":

1. The body is the temple of the Holy Spirit;
2. Smoking does nothing but damage the body.

I suggest that if you were to actually answer these questions, you would be forced to concede that smoking must indeed be sin, precisely because it is clearly sin to knowingly and needlessly damage the residence of the Holy Spirit.

Handy, remember what happened in the other thread. I repeatedly, and I mean repeatedly presented a clear 6 point argument about the sin status of smoking. With perhaps one exception, a whole slew of posters simply ignored that argument.

Look. I am not placing myself in a position of authority as if people have no right to challenge my interpretation, but what am I to do when people simply ignore the relevant Biblical arguments? You are not being impolite like many of the rest. But you are ignoring my argument nonetheless (at least about the smoking analogy).

The point of my two questions was to challenge your position that my take on the smoking matter (and, by extension, on other matters) is merely a matter of personal conviction.

 

[Lewis]

The content of this argument shows that you have either not read my posts carefully, or that I did not clearly communicate my point.

Since I cannot control the former, and since I have done the best I can in respect to the latter, I guess we will have to "agree to disagree".

Drew I love you and I mean that, you have been here for a long time now. And you have every right to see it the way that you do, and I still think that you are a great person and a great asset to this board even when I don't agree with you.

 

[Drew]

Drew I love you and I mean that, you have been here for a long time now. And you have every right to see it the way that you do, and I still think that you are a great person and a great asset to this board even when I don't agree with you.

Thanks, I really do appreciate this. It is probably clear to you and others that I enjoy "debating". It may be easy for others to mistake my passion for this activity as my being "argumentative". And I have, no doubt, at times, been less than perfectly cordial in my style and have otherwise crossed the line from "respectful disagreement" to something less desirable. Again, thanks.

 

[Drew]

Here is something I have shamelessly pooched from some unknown person on the web:

Cremation symbolizes a lot of things that we Christians do not believe, and burial symbolizes a hope that we do cling to. Cremation is a destructive act symbolizes the annihilation of the person as an individual unit, and a merging with the great wide world. Burial is a passive act that accepts the corruption of nature, but hopes that one day resurrection will occur. In one practice you actively (and violently – grinding up the bones) destroy the body, in the other you passively submit it to the corruption that is bound to happen.

Now, full disclosure here, my father in law died a couple months ago, and he wanted to be cremated. We respected his wishes, and I understand his reasons (not wanting his family ripped off by the corrupt funeral establishment, etc…though he was a rich man). I love him, and obviously don’t think it will cost him eternity or anything silly like that. But I do think it was the wrong choice.

I think the Christian acceptance of cremation is a symptom of a much bigger problem. Imagine that Jesus’ disciples had cremated him, scattering his ashes where he used to live. They could then rest knowing that his spirit was with God in heaven, and that they had the Holy Spirit in them. I really don’t see the practical difference that would take place if many Evangelicals believed this – they have such a neo-platonic semi-gnostic anti-creational worldview anyway. But it should make all the difference in the world if you believe in a bodily resurrection – that means that our created reality now has a future!

I’ve blogged before about the burial of Sarah. Abraham, knew that her body and his would decay. But he bought a plot of land in Canaan and buried her there, as a symbolic act of faith in the God who one day would give the entire land to his offspring. We need to think long and hard about why we do what we do.

This person has expressed the point I am trying to make far more eloquently than I did.

 

[Simon]

I learned something interesting, though somber, the other day in light of the Japan Tsunami. The Japanese, it turns out, almost exclusively practice cremation. The body count was such that they were concerned they might ''have to'' resort to burials (their crematoriums were fully occupied).

I was wondering, is burial viewed as a more traditionally christian, or European method of disposal?

 

[Drew]

Since insider knowledge is used to defraud others out of money, I think the bible covers this: “You shall not steal; you shall not deal falsely; you shall not lie to one another." Lev 19:11

I do not think this is correct. When you perform insider trading, you are not stealing from someone, or dealing "falsely" with them. You are, instead, leveraging special knowledge, known only to you, to gain an advantage.

But in any case, there are many other examples. Driving while blindfolded, for one. There is no Biblical admonition against driving while blindfolded. On the line of reasoning you seem to be pursuing, deciding that driving while blindfolded is sinful is a "mater of personal conviction". Do you really believe this?

And please do not try "its illegal and we are told to obey the law, so you see it is there in the Bible" argument.

That's not the point. I would then reframe the question as follows: "In a country where driving while blindfolded is legal, would it be sin for the Christian to drive drunk?"

My answer: yes, its still sin, even if its not explicitly prohibited in the Bible.

What is your answer, handy? Would it be sin? Or just a matter of personal conviction?

 

[handy]

OK, Drew...I'll go ahead, even though this isn't the "smoking" thread, I'll answer but let's keep to the principle being discussed.

1. The body is the temple of the Holy Spirit;
Yes
2. Smoking does nothing but damage the body.
Yes

I suggest that if you were to actually answer these questions, you would be forced to concede that smoking must indeed be sin, precisely because it is clearly sin to knowingly and needlessly damage the residence of the Holy Spirit.

No, I do not concede that smoking must indeed be a sin. Again, we are back to going beyond what Jesus said...or the Holy Spirit said. Again, I point to my previous, and I thought quite valid answer...we cannot make progressions from point 1 to point 2 to point 3...to do so very often does take us beyond what the Scriptures (ie the Holy Spirit) calls upon us to do.

The Scriptures tell us that the body is the temple of the Spirit. I don't believe that there are any scriptures that tell us not to damage our bodies, but nonetheless the scriptures do tell us that our body is for the Lord. However, it was the Lord Himself who said that it's not what goes into the body that defiles it.

You have made the connection between the body being the temple, smoking being damaging therefore, for you, smoking is sinful. Others do not make that connection, seeing instead that all things are lawful and it's not what goes into the body that defiles it. In the case of smoking, not all Christians will agree that 1 and 2 automatically leads to 3.

My father smoked from the time he was a teen until the day before he died in his 70's. Once he came back to the Lord, he as a man of strong faith and worked hard both within the Church and out in the world as an ambassador for Christ. At no time did his smoking interfere with his ability to do what Christ called him to do. His last days on this planet were a testimony to the hospice workers and to the non-Christian neighbors and friends that he had. His funeral was a powerful gospel message. In no way did his smoking interfere with this

After all the times doctors told him to quite smoking or it would kill him...what actually killed him was esophageal cancer brought about by acid reflux...the same thing that killed my friend's father, a devout Assembly of God member who never smoked, drank or ate a lot of red meat in his life. My friend's father didn't even live as long as dad did.

My point is that we can make judgments for our own selves regarding smoking. I'll certainly never smoke, but others do. It is between them and the Lord. If the Lord is convicting them to quit and they don't, then it is sin. But, I don't know what the Lord might be telling someone else about their smoking...nor is it any of my business.

Back to the principle, again, we cannot and should not make progressions from 1 to 2 to 3, especially for others. All who are in Christ has the Holy Spirit...the Holy Spirit is more than capable of convicting the person whose body is His temple, how He desires that person to live, to die and what to do with their body after death.

 

[handy]

You are, instead, leveraging special knowledge, known only to you, to gain an advantage.

Hence the dealing falsely. In order not to deal falsely, you need to disclose the knowledge to the others, so that they can make their decisions based upon truth.

"In a country where driving while blindfolded is legal, would it be sin for the Christian to drive drunk?"

My answer: yes, its still sin, even if its not explicitly prohibited in the Bible.

What is your answer, handy? Would it be sin? Or just a matter of personal conviction?

Drew, brother, I think you're beginning to stretch here a bit.

My answer is, of course it would be sin to drive drunk because the Bible explicitly tells us to not be drunk.

Perhaps you didn't mean to add the "drunk" to the end of your sentence...I'm a bit perplexed about that. So, just in case that was a typo...in a country in which it is legal to drive blindfolded, it is a sin to do so...no, it's just incredibly stupid.

I think with this, I'm going to walk away. I believe we've both made our own views clear enough...and this is beginning to get sort of silly.

 

[Drew]

OK, Drew...I'll go ahead, even though this isn't the "smoking" thread, I'll answer but let's keep to the principle being discussed.

1. The body is the temple of the Holy Spirit;
Yes
2. Smoking does nothing but damage the body.
Yes

I suggest that if you were to actually answer these questions, you would be forced to concede that smoking must indeed be sin, precisely because it is clearly sin to knowingly and needlessly damage the residence of the Holy Spirit.

No, I do not concede that smoking must indeed be a sin. Again, we are back to going beyond what Jesus said...or the Holy Spirit said. Again, I point to my previous, and I thought quite valid answer...we cannot make progressions from point 1 to point 2 to point 3...to do so very often does take us beyond what the Scriptures (ie the Holy Spirit) calls upon us to do.

So you're saying that its not sin to knowingly, and needlessly damage the temple of the Holy Spirit. This is the necessary implication of your answering yes to the two questions.

I suggest this is an untenable position - once we agree that smoking is avoidable, does only harm, and that the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, we are logically driven to conclude that smoking is sin.

I think you are mistaken about the progression thing. Consider these two statement:

1. Fred is taller than Joe;
2. Joe is taller than Mike.

You are saying we cannot "progress" to point 3 - that Fred is taller than Mike - just by using the tools of logic. I doubt this very much. Even if Jesus said only both 1 and 2, we can, of course, conclude that Fred is taller than Mike.

Even though Jesus never said this (in this hypothetical).