Cremation forbidden or encouraged within our Chrisitan cirlce?

[Obadiah]

...The real issue is that Adam was not told that he was ash and would return to ash...

Clearly you have chosen to ignore the fact that you are wrong about this verse (claiming it says Adam was not told this, when he indeed was in the original language), and you are insisting on continuing to teach people here this falsity. At first I assumed you were simply making a mistake. Now I have to assume you are doing it on purpose.

Every word in Scripture is significant, and for Christians it is the example of Christ which counts in all things.

If you actually believe this you also must follow all of Jesus' examples. For instance you only wear sandles and a robe in the Biblical style, etc. Do you do this? Or do you not really believe or practice what you said here. Obviously Jesus was buried. That was done to fulfill scripture. But scripture never says this was supposed to be an example of the only way to dispose of a body any more than the fact that Jesus dressed in a robe and sandals (as well as the apostles and early Christians) was intended to tell us this is the only acceptable way to dress.

 

[Runner]

Jews and Christians have always buried their dead, and throughout the Bible believers as well all Israelites and Jews held to this practice. It is only after the New Agers (promoting Eastern religions) came on the scene that Christians have been diverted from this.

This discussion reminds me of the discussion in 1 Corinthians 8 about eating meat offered to idols. If a Christian could not tell his loved ones to cremate him without having troubling visions of Hindus and New Agers dancing in his head, then I would say eschew cremation and go for the embalming, casket. burial and headstone. If a Christian thinks that making a distinction between dust and ashes is Biblical hyper-literalism and that the Creator of the universe could not care less whether a body is reduced to "dust" or "ashes," then I would say save your family the $10,000 to $25,000 and go for the cheapest cremation you can find with a clear conscience.

You do realize what happens during embalming, right? The blood typically goes down the local sewer system. If there has been an autopsy, the internal organs often are incinerated. Indeed, it is the completely disgusting nature of embalming that has always tilted me strongly in favor of cremation. To my mind, cremation shows far greater respect for the body - and for the planet. As for what the ancient Jews and early Christians did, who cares? Do we lead any other aspect of our lives as though we were required to mimic the practices of 432 B.C. or 47 A.D.?

By coincidence, I just happen to have finished The Lost World of Adam and Eve: Genesis 2-3 and the Human Origins Debate by Genesis scholar John H. Walton. He makes the point that Genesis must be read in light of what it would have meant to the ancient Israelites - and that it would not have been understood by them as an account of material origins at all. The statement that Adam was created from the dust would not have been understood by the Israelites as meaning that the first human was literally created from the dirt at all. All of which is somewhat off-topic, but it does show that the "dust" argument against cremation rests on shaky ground.

 

[AirDancer]

To claim that cremation is a big no-no for Christians would be tantamount to claiming that of all the 0-11 victims of 9-11 who were never found, none were Christians.

Our Lord God knows what is in our hearts.

 

[Malachi]

Clearly you have chosen to ignore the fact that you are wrong about this verse (claiming it says Adam was not told this, when he indeed was in the original language), and you are insisting on continuing to teach people here this falsity. At first I assumed you were simply making a mistake. Now I have to assume you are doing it on purpose.

There is no mention of ASH in Genesis. I will quote that verse from Gen 3:19 (KJV): In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. The word "dust" is translated from the Hebrew aphar, which means clay, earth, mud, ground. This corresponds to the same word used in Gen 2:7:And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul, and in fact refers back to this verse. So where is the "falsity"?

Obviously Jesus was buried. That was done to fulfill scripture.

And Christians are symbolically buried with Christ when they are baptized by immersion according to Scripture (Rom 6:1-5). That should be an indication in itself that Christian are to be buried, and not cremated.
1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

 

[Malachi]

To claim that cremation is a big no-no for Christians would be tantamount to claiming that of all the 0-11 victims of 9-11 who were never found, none were Christians.

That's a big stretch. Taking a disaster and comparing it to cremation is apples and oranges. And then to take it to the next step. Who knows who were Christians in that disaster and who were not? It would be the same as referring to the Titanic disaster and saying well that was not really Christian burial. A disaster, by definition, is an exception to what is normal.

 

[AirDancer]

That's a big stretch. Taking a disaster and comparing it to cremation is apples and oranges. And then to take it to the next step. Who knows who were Christians in that disaster and who were not? It would be the same as referring to the Titanic disaster and saying well that was not really Christian burial. A disaster, by definition, is an exception to what is normal.

The Bible doesn't say anything about exceptions being made for disasters.

 

[Malachi]

The Bible doesn't say anything about exceptions being made for disasters.

The Bible does not have to since that is understood. People in disasters don't choose to be burned up or buried twenty thousand leagues under the sea.

 

[Deborah13]

The Bible does not have to since that is understood. People in disasters don't choose to be burned up or buried twenty thousand leagues under the sea.

Tell you what, if you really want to prove you are right, then you need a scripture that says 'you must bury your people in the ground or caves' or a scripture that says 'you must not burn your dead'.
Now Law of Moses', covered everything that was of importance in an Israelite person's life. Certainly if it is considered to be a law, a command, or of such importance as you imply, it must be somewhere in Moses Law.
So when you find it. Please post it. Thanks.

 

[Obadiah]

There is no mention of ASH in Genesis. I will quote that verse from Gen 3:19 (KJV): In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. The word "dust" is translated from the Hebrew aphar, which means clay, earth, mud, ground. This corresponds to the same word used in Gen 2:7:And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul, and in fact refers back to this verse. So where is the "falsity"?...

The falsity now is in your failure to show the entire meaning of the word by picking only the part you want to use to fit your idea. Obviously you now took the time to do some research, but you left out the part that doesn't fit your idea. I have to believe you did that on purpose since you obviously have read the entire definition now and even partially quoted it above. To show that I'm not saying this in error, this is an exact copy and paste from Strongs via E-Sword (emphasis mine):

‛âphâr
aw-fawr'
From H6080; dust (as powdered or gray); hence clay, earth, mud: - ashes, dust, earth, ground, morter, powder, rubbish.

Now, if you want to show some kind of reason to believe "dust" could be the only possible meaning in this particular scripture, that's fine. But the reason of just because you say so doesn't hold any weight with the rest of us when you are using this scripture to condemn those of us who have a different idea about disposal of bodies than you do.

 

[Runner]

And Christians are symbolically buried with Christ when they are baptized by immersion according to Scripture (Rom 6:1-5). That should be an indication in itself that Christian are to be buried, and not cremated.

Water baptism - including Jesus' own baptism by John the Baptist - was practiced long before Jesus' burial. The Jewish practice (admittedly not immersion) dates back to Leviticus. Physically, immersion in water would be a poor representation of a burial. Water had well-established "purification" symbolism long before Paul wrote Romans, and immersion would certainly be a better representation of cleansing from sin or a new birth. Romans 6:1-5 says what it says and can certainly be read as suggesting that immersion represents participation in Jesus' death and burial. But obviously, Paul was not talking about actual burial practices. It seems to me as though you are reading the passage as though it said, "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death and must also be physically buried like he was." It is obvious that adding this to the passage is ridiculous - it is completely out of place because it isn't what Paul was talking about at all. I have fulfilled my "Christian burial" requirement (if that's how you want to understand Romans 6:1-5) by being baptized. Ditto for Genesis 3:19 - it obviously isn't talking about burial practices at all. To argue that someone who is embalmed, placed in a coffin and buried "returns to the ground" and "returns to dust," but someone who is cremated doesn't, is trying to make Genesis 3:19 do way more work than the passage was ever intended to do.

This is typical, alas, of hyper-literalism: passages are read woodenly, with little regard for what the author of the passage was actually talking about, and then applied completely out of context to support someone's pet position on a topic like cremation. The error is compounded by the propensity of the hyper-literalist to claim that his understanding of the passage is the only one approved by God and that anyone who thinks otherwise is not only wrong but on thin ice with God. This is often true even when huge branches of Christendom and hordes of esteemed Biblical scholars don't share the hyper-literalist's view. It becomes quite tiresome and is one reason that forums like this have difficulty keeping participants. I always feel as though hyper-literalists need to "get out more" - i.e., to do some reading and study outside of their usual sources to see what a really wide range of views are held by highly informed believers on key doctrines. On issues a lot more important than "burial vs. cremation," the Bible and God's kingdom can accommodate believers with staggeringly different views.

 

[jasonc]

The Bible does not have to since that is understood. People in disasters don't choose to be burned up or buried twenty thousand leagues under the sea.

The navy has for some times in major battles bury their dead at sea.

 

[Deborah13]

The navy has for some times in major battles bury their dead at sea.

Since man has been sailing the seas the dead have been buried at sea. There has to have been thousands.....

 

[Edward]

I think the girls have it right on this one. The Lord looks at the heart and if there's no intent towards a pagan god there then you're good. I don't think God would be a stickler about how ones body is disposed of. Many Christians have been cremated, some, probably even unplanned for sanitary reasons (they had the plague or something).

God is super wise, merciful, and longsuffering. He's not going to let a little thing like this be a monkey wrench in His plan. I think 2 Peter 3:9 covers it.

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance./

He's not going to let you get away because of type of body disposal. If it was that important then more would be said about it in scripture. It doesn't matter to God when the time comes whether you're super preserved like the Egyptians did it, or total ash that has been scattered to the wind...that body will animate again!

on a side note...

Malachi; ...There is a big difference between "the dust of the earth" and ashes...

Reminds me of a good brother and Pastor's sermon once where he shared that, it had been revealed to him that, man was made from the dust of the ground as scripture says but that since the earth was new, conditions were not like you would think. It wasn't dirt is what was said. That man was formed of gold dust taken from the shore of the Pison river. I like that idea.

 

[Mike S]

Well, yes it's legal or I wouldn't do it.
Bodies are buried in Jewish cemeteries that are not embalmed. It is less harmful to the environment, too. The human body isn't any different than an animal's in decomposition. Can you bury a dog on your property? In some places in CO you can't.

The law in CO has always allowed for private land burials. There have always been family cemeteries on private land. The idea has become more popular over the last few years, so some new laws have been written in individual counties giving guidelines for that county. Here's a fairly recent article....
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_23841718/natural-burials-an-option-that-is-cheaper-and

Deb, the entire modern burial system with concrete vaults and expensive coffins and such strikes me as nuts. I far prefer cremation with a plaque somewhere relevant to my life in lieu of a gravestone for future generations to visit for genealogy.