Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Drew
Member
Hi:stranger said:
The issue of Gen 2:17 has been addressed already in this thread:
If guibox's information is correct, the meaning of the Gen 2:17 is not at all "on the day you sin you will die", but rather "when you die, you really die".guibox said:
Also, please bear in mind the content of this from 1 Timothy 6:
God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see
I think this text argues strongly against the belief that humans are presently immortal (in hell, heaven or otherwise). Immortality is granted to the redeemed at the return of Christ.
stranger said:
Stanger, no matte rwhich way you look at it, the suppositions still do not warrant immortality in eternal torment.
Let's look at this from a traditional point of view. If man spiritually died, but was still physically living, then any essence that man had that would live outside the body DIED when he sinned. Man was merely a shell 'living' but didn't know that he was already dead.
this would mean that when man physically died, there would be nothing left to move on with for he already suffered the 'spiritual death'
How is this reversed?
When Christ imparts His righteousness onto us and the Holy Spirit convicts us of sin and comes in. Man then is 'spiritually' alive again.
Now does this happen to the wicked?
Nope.
Hence, Romans 6:23 still applies in that the whole of wicked man experiences DEATH.
Drew
Member
Consider Jude 7 and 2 Peter 2:6
In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire
if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly
The very real problem the "eternal torment" proponent faces is the following. He cannot believe that the objects that are burned in Jude 7 are the physical towns. Why? Because in order for "eternal fire" to refer to the neverending punishment that the lost will experience, the fire has to be burning people, not buildings. Obviously, S&G are not burning today. So far so good.
Now we introduce 2 Peter 2:6. This time it is stated that the fire burned something to ashes. So this time the "eternal torment" supporter has to believe the the objects that are burned are the buildings and the structures and not the people, since by the dictates of the "eternal torment" belief, the unredeemed are not burned to ashes, they are maintained in a state of burning forever.
If this inconsistency were not enough of a problem, the "eternal torment" supporter has to explain how the reduction of S&G to ashes can be an "example of what is going to happen to the ungodly".
So I will ask, how does the reduction of the physical towns of S&G to ashes serve as an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly, if the ungodly are in fact never reduced to ashes, but instead preserved in a perpetual state of burning?
In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire
if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly
The very real problem the "eternal torment" proponent faces is the following. He cannot believe that the objects that are burned in Jude 7 are the physical towns. Why? Because in order for "eternal fire" to refer to the neverending punishment that the lost will experience, the fire has to be burning people, not buildings. Obviously, S&G are not burning today. So far so good.
Now we introduce 2 Peter 2:6. This time it is stated that the fire burned something to ashes. So this time the "eternal torment" supporter has to believe the the objects that are burned are the buildings and the structures and not the people, since by the dictates of the "eternal torment" belief, the unredeemed are not burned to ashes, they are maintained in a state of burning forever.
If this inconsistency were not enough of a problem, the "eternal torment" supporter has to explain how the reduction of S&G to ashes can be an "example of what is going to happen to the ungodly".
So I will ask, how does the reduction of the physical towns of S&G to ashes serve as an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly, if the ungodly are in fact never reduced to ashes, but instead preserved in a perpetual state of burning?
Drew, check out the following translations against guibox's paraphase.
NASB: but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die." (NASB ©1995)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GWT: But you must never eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because when you eat from it, you will certainly die." (GOD'S WORD®)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KJV: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASV: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BBE: But of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you may not take; for on the day when you take of it, death will certainly come to you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DBY: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou eatest of it thou shalt certainly die.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JPS: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WBS: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest of it thou shalt surely die.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WEB: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat of it; for in the day that you eat of it you will surely die."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YLT: and of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou dost not eat of it, for in the day of thine eating of it -- dying thou dost die.'
from: http://bible.cc/genesis/2-17.htm
Gen 2:17 stands as an objection . . .
This is easy, first comes the physical then the spiritual to harp on a theme. These towns and everything in them were destroyed as a physical example. Note the word 'example' in bold. The very plain and straightforward text - 'as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire should alert you to something yet to come, namely 'eternal fire'. These are the words of scripture - I did not fish up the words 'eternal fire'.
Yes I can, though I don't know if the words 'eternal torment' found in scripture without checking.
Buildings, rocks, timber, are not unholy in themselves but 'unclean' by association with unholy people, in this instance, S&G. The depiction of 'Babylon' is an example - it wasn't the city that murdered the prophets but the inhabitants thereof. To me it seems you continually miss the point of the physical coming first and then the spitiual - of which we know less about than the physical universe. Now what we do know has been revealed and for this reason is to be closely adhered to. My thoughts are that the 'spiritual realm' is the most deceptive realm in reality itself.
In an intense fire objects and people can be turned to ashes. The cities were ruined . . . whether or not every person therein was turned to ashes I don't know. Technically speaking it says the cities were destroyed - and it is safe to assume no inhabitants except Lot and co. survived.
? "eternal torment" supporter ? has to believe. . . that the buildings and the structures and not the people?? Why not the people? THEN you say:
since by the dictates of the "eternal torment" belief, the unredeemed are not burned to ashes, they are maintained in a state of burning forever
Are you confusing the 'already' with the 'not yet', the world that was and is with the new age still to come. But to settle this point let us read on and see how Peter presents the case:
He tells us the destruction of S&G is an example of judgement (warning if you like).
v9 the Lord knows how to rescue the righteous, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgement.
(this implies the inhabitants of S&G are yet to face another judgement)
God tells us through the apostle Peter that it is an example. Jude 7 speaks in like manner. It is a warning to those who live in gay abandon.
My answer is: example, warning, threat. The judgments of God are revealed against all unrighteousness and wickedness. This is a prime revealed instance - we are given the background details so it is not just a fire that broke out and destroyed a few cities.The words 'keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgement (2Peter v9) and Jude's reference to 'eternal fire' in the same context all serve as examples.
What you see in this world are the physical things. At one point in life usually in later years - you may find that a small window opens up for the briefest interval of time - and you can see just a fleeting glimpse of the spiritual - its another world and is not bound by the physical laws that we are accustomed to. In fact I think that this is part of your debate - you are arguing against spiritual realities on the basis of physical laws.
jgredline said:
I believe we were all 'spiritually dead' before Christ saved us.
That means we were given the means to immortality...broke it...lost that immortality and experienced 'death' spiritually and then physically and consciously
Christ came to give life. Christ came to make us spiritually alive again. Christ came to give us immortality again.
But only to the those who choose Him
"He who hath the Son hath life, but he that hath not the Son hath not life"
Neither life in the body, neither life in the spirit.
Neither abundant life here on earth, neither life in the afterlife.
Either by traditional standards or wholistic standards, jg. Wicked man does not have spiritual life. Wicked man does not have eternal life.
Going back to man being spiritually dead due to Adam's sin, but spiritually alive in Christ...when is this manifested and culminated to eternal life?
"As in Adam die, so in Christ shall all be made alive, but each man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afteward they that are Christ's at His coming"
Notice that it says 'As in Adam all die' but you yourself stated that man did NOT 'die' as you so take Genesis 2:7 so literally. Yet Corinthians says we do.
Hence, this could be talking about a 'spiritual death'. Notice that Christ makes us alive and this only occurs at His second coming.
One way or the other, you can't escape the simple fact that the wicked do not have spiritual life or eternal life. No immortal spirit, no everlasting life.
If wicked man did indeed have an immortal spirit, he lost it in sin. He can never get it back unless He believes in Christ.
jgredline
Member
I believe we are all spiritually dead until we are born again...Is that what you mean..I think thats what your saying.guibox said:
hmmm, I am not sure I follow what your saying here...
Ok, but here is where your view falls apart...When we are born again we ''receive'' the Holy Spirit and become spiritually alive...Now if we were monistic, how can this be?
This could only happen if we are a dichotomy and then become a trichotomy...
I agree that the wicked man does not have spiritual life and remains a dichotomy...but indeed does have eternal life, but in the fires of Hell...
Guibox..Of course the flesh / corpse will die..What does not die is the Soul..
or soul/spirit...When Adam died, he died spiritually...Now this where the monistic view makes NO sense..When God breathed into Adam the breath of life, The corpse came alive...Why, because he was no longer monistic, he was a dichotomy...Again I know and am very familiar with Hebrew words for soul and spirit and again I tell you they were often times used interchangeably through out the scriptures....
Well, this is something you will need to take up with Jesus because God himself said....41 "Then He will also say to those on the left hand, Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels:...and further down the scripture...46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
Gentlemen,
We could go around like this for hours but we seem to be speaking a different language. Until you guys can wrap your minds around how the Hebrews believed in anthropology and used the appropriate words to convey that, we are going to keep going round and round.
jg. You talk about 'monism' but I believe in wholism. The breath of life made man a living, breathing, cogitating functioning being. A nephesh.
He was not made or given an immortal soul. There is no support either in nephesh or ruach to convey such an image.
Until you realize that you cannot get off first base unless you prove this, you will always read dualism into everything.
Even many staunch supporters of "my soul going to heaven at my physical death" have said that man was not created immortal but given immortality thanks to Christ.
You have a huge hurdle that you cannot jump over to prove that man was created as an immortal being. Either man was created immortal and never lost it, even when He sinned (and from a traditional perspective even this can be shown from the scriptures this didn't happen), or only the righteous are made immortal and can now go to heaven at death after the resurrection of Christ. jg, by making man inherently immortal and remaining immortal even after sin is to remove the concept of 'death by sin' in any fashion. It is to remove the importance of Christ taking the sins of the world, dying with those sins and resurrecting to life as an example for us. It is to deny the fact that only Christ is the Lifegiver, and only through Christ can we be saved.
What do we mean by 'being saved'? It means to be given eternal life.
You cannot have it both ways. Either man was 'dead' in every fashion and is made alive, or, as the Greeks believed', man is inherently immortal and nothing can destroy the soul.
Most importantly, the Bible contradicts the inherent immortality
Only God hath immortality
Immortality is something we seek
No amount of dancing or ignoring it can explain away these two verses alone, jg.
This is what I believe in a nutshell and nothing you have said has convinced me otherwise. I am convicted by the Word of God and it is crystal clear without contradictions:
-man was created a wholistic being, a living soul, a living nephesh composed of breath and body and given thought, felling and emotion due to this breath,this spirit
- When man sinned, he began the process of death due to separation. Man would eternally perish in non-existence due to removing themselves from the Lifesource
- When man dies, when the spirit, the breath, the life spark, leaven him, he ceases to be a functioning nephesh. 'In that very day, his thoughts perish' (Ecclesiastes 9)and he rests in the grave 'until his change comes' (Job 14) at the resurrection where he is raised to eternal life (Daniel 12:1,2, 1 Corinthians 15:51-55, John 5:28,29)
- Christ came to take the death penalty away for us. Once we accept this offer, we have 'passed from death to life'
- Man still has a sinful nature and until this is removed 'flesh and blood cannot enter the kingdom of heaven' (1 Corinthians 15). Only glorification can make us fit for heaven. Until this happens, man is not an immortal being. We are made alive, immortal and undying at the resurrection 'as in Adam all die, so in Chrits shall all be made alive, but each man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward they that are Christ's at His coming' (1 Corinthians 15)
- Because the wicked have not believed on Christ and accepted His merits (John 3:16) they remain under the death penalty. They are doomed to die eternally. However, they must be judged and punished first. This occurs at the second resurrection where they are resurrected from their graves to face judgment by fire. (Revelation 20)
- Because God wants to create a new heaven and a new earth, sin must be gone. The last enemy that is to be destroyed in death (1 Corinthians 15). All enemies of God MUST be destroyed.
- God creates a new heaven and a new earth for 'the former things have passed away'. They are gone from existence. Kaput. Never more to reign or show their face again in God's perfect universe.
- And the righteous lived happily ever after :fadein:
That's it boys. I believe the scriptures are crystal clear on this and if you can't accept that, then we are wasting our time in further dialogue on this subject. I have answered all your seeming 'contrdictions' by the word of God itself. Everything you have thrown at me is contradicted or explained by the heavier weight of evidence to the contrary. The Bible cannot be contradicted. Hence, the ambiguous and metaphorical texts must be interpreted by the clearer ones. THe Bible must be looked at as a whole and the grand scope of salvation history and the lingustics of the Bible must determine the meaning. You can proof text Luke 16 and Revelation 14:10,11 all you want but it is all explained easily by the Word.
The question is, are you willing to put your preconceived notions of Greek dualism on the shelf long enough to allow the scriptures to speak the truth on the matter?
God bless
We could go around like this for hours but we seem to be speaking a different language. Until you guys can wrap your minds around how the Hebrews believed in anthropology and used the appropriate words to convey that, we are going to keep going round and round.
jg. You talk about 'monism' but I believe in wholism. The breath of life made man a living, breathing, cogitating functioning being. A nephesh.
He was not made or given an immortal soul. There is no support either in nephesh or ruach to convey such an image.
Until you realize that you cannot get off first base unless you prove this, you will always read dualism into everything.
Even many staunch supporters of "my soul going to heaven at my physical death" have said that man was not created immortal but given immortality thanks to Christ.
You have a huge hurdle that you cannot jump over to prove that man was created as an immortal being. Either man was created immortal and never lost it, even when He sinned (and from a traditional perspective even this can be shown from the scriptures this didn't happen), or only the righteous are made immortal and can now go to heaven at death after the resurrection of Christ. jg, by making man inherently immortal and remaining immortal even after sin is to remove the concept of 'death by sin' in any fashion. It is to remove the importance of Christ taking the sins of the world, dying with those sins and resurrecting to life as an example for us. It is to deny the fact that only Christ is the Lifegiver, and only through Christ can we be saved.
What do we mean by 'being saved'? It means to be given eternal life.
You cannot have it both ways. Either man was 'dead' in every fashion and is made alive, or, as the Greeks believed', man is inherently immortal and nothing can destroy the soul.
Most importantly, the Bible contradicts the inherent immortality
Only God hath immortality
Immortality is something we seek
No amount of dancing or ignoring it can explain away these two verses alone, jg.
This is what I believe in a nutshell and nothing you have said has convinced me otherwise. I am convicted by the Word of God and it is crystal clear without contradictions:
-man was created a wholistic being, a living soul, a living nephesh composed of breath and body and given thought, felling and emotion due to this breath,this spirit
- When man sinned, he began the process of death due to separation. Man would eternally perish in non-existence due to removing themselves from the Lifesource
- When man dies, when the spirit, the breath, the life spark, leaven him, he ceases to be a functioning nephesh. 'In that very day, his thoughts perish' (Ecclesiastes 9)and he rests in the grave 'until his change comes' (Job 14) at the resurrection where he is raised to eternal life (Daniel 12:1,2, 1 Corinthians 15:51-55, John 5:28,29)
- Christ came to take the death penalty away for us. Once we accept this offer, we have 'passed from death to life'
- Man still has a sinful nature and until this is removed 'flesh and blood cannot enter the kingdom of heaven' (1 Corinthians 15). Only glorification can make us fit for heaven. Until this happens, man is not an immortal being. We are made alive, immortal and undying at the resurrection 'as in Adam all die, so in Chrits shall all be made alive, but each man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward they that are Christ's at His coming' (1 Corinthians 15)
- Because the wicked have not believed on Christ and accepted His merits (John 3:16) they remain under the death penalty. They are doomed to die eternally. However, they must be judged and punished first. This occurs at the second resurrection where they are resurrected from their graves to face judgment by fire. (Revelation 20)
- Because God wants to create a new heaven and a new earth, sin must be gone. The last enemy that is to be destroyed in death (1 Corinthians 15). All enemies of God MUST be destroyed.
- God creates a new heaven and a new earth for 'the former things have passed away'. They are gone from existence. Kaput. Never more to reign or show their face again in God's perfect universe.
- And the righteous lived happily ever after :fadein:
That's it boys. I believe the scriptures are crystal clear on this and if you can't accept that, then we are wasting our time in further dialogue on this subject. I have answered all your seeming 'contrdictions' by the word of God itself. Everything you have thrown at me is contradicted or explained by the heavier weight of evidence to the contrary. The Bible cannot be contradicted. Hence, the ambiguous and metaphorical texts must be interpreted by the clearer ones. THe Bible must be looked at as a whole and the grand scope of salvation history and the lingustics of the Bible must determine the meaning. You can proof text Luke 16 and Revelation 14:10,11 all you want but it is all explained easily by the Word.
The question is, are you willing to put your preconceived notions of Greek dualism on the shelf long enough to allow the scriptures to speak the truth on the matter?
God bless
Drew
Member
I know that I owe some posters some responses, but I wanted to quickly comment on the above.guibox said:
I strongly suspect that some (maybe most) of the "eternal torment" supporters consider dualism to an unassailable truth, something they might never even consider stepping back from and examining in the light of alternatives.
And alternatives there indeed are - the "wholism" that guibox refers to is an example.
If people think that "wholism" is conceptually incoherent - that it is somehow simply impossible to be true, then we can talk about that. Please identify yourselves.
I even have had discussions where people have made statements like "the Christian definition of the human person is that of a physical body and an immaterial immortal soul". And yet, when challenged to defend that position, a first year undergrad in philosophy could see the obvious circularity. Now the annihilationist can fall into the same trap of circularity, although I honestly don't think that has happened in this thread at least.
I don't know about you, but my Bible does not contain an annex of definitions of the nature of the human person. I think if we take what the Bible gives us, rather than look at it through dualist glasses, the truth of wholism is pretty clear.
Its not a matter of choosing to look through dualist glasses or wholist glasses - one can, if one wants to, step back and examine both ways of seeing things.
My question about the 'nature' of man is more fundamental than you have supposed. While the scriptures do not contain an annex, you will recognise that the two ntures, namely, the flesh and the Spirit are described in many places in great detail. When we speak of 'in Adam' that is the same as 'in the flesh' and when we speak of 'in Christ' that is the same as 'in the Spirit'.
Specifically, partaking OF ONE OR THE OTHER leaves no other alternatives. I have yet to see a work that is both good and evil in God's sight.
So my question has great relevance for this debate. While you argue about 'mortality, or immortality' you have enterred a secondary arena. I invite you back to the primary one.
Perhpas the worse presuppositions that the annihilationist carries is the anti dualism approach. The fact is that the two natures that I am referring to are opposites of one another. Love finds its nemesis in hate, lying finds its nemesis in telling the truth, being selfish finds its nemesis in being selfless. In short the Kingdom of Light and the Kingdom of darkness fit the biblical scenario perfectly.
If you call this a Greek dualism - that in itself is a shift into the philosophical arena, you ought not to be surprised that philosphers often borrow from what is revealed while God does not need to borrow from them for obvious reasons.
Man was created in God's image after His likeness. This off course applies to all men. At creation, so to speak, man was on one side reflecting the image on the other side. The corruption of that image with the advent of sin and death - and here we move to more tentative ground, does not eradicate that image. After all God made man in His own image.
The question presents itself - upon what 'anthropology' do we proceed in this debate. Guibox and Drew I am happy to proceed so long as we draw the line between what is revealed and what is interpretation.
stranger said:
We are not God, nor made like God. God alone hath immortality. We never did. To say that we are immortal beings because we are made in God's image means we should also have the attributes of omniscience and omnipresence too.
You bring up some ethical dilemmas here which are tied in to one's idea of what 'death' means and the implications for God's character.
If God intentionally created man immortal KNOWING that billions would be condemned to hell that they had no choice but to be born into heading too, it puts God in a horrible light.
Whereas we see that sin brings death and decay when separation from God occurs, we see that God is bridging the gap so immortality can be ours.
God is the Lifegiver, stranger. If we are separated from Him, we cannot live in any form or fashion.
This is the foolishness of the traditional interpretation. It has created an argument that leaves one with no other choice but to rewrite the terminiology of the Bible. It wants to make man an immortal being which cannot experience 'death'. Therefore, when the Bible makes it quite clear that 'the soul that sins shall die' and 'the wages of sin is death', then these terms must be reinterpreted to accomodate an immortal soul.
'Well, the soul cannot die, so...death must mean separation of the soul from the body to experience eternal torment.". One then is put on a crash course of interpretation that moves further and further from the bible truth that man's sin brought separation. Man's separation didn't bring on 'eternal torment' and the 'lake of fire'. Man's separation from the LifeForce brought death.
It is only in accepting Christ and the merits of grace that man can live eternally again. This is the good news of the gospel! The good news of the gospel wasn't 'Christ died so He could save us from the hell He created'. The good news is that Christ paid the penalty of death for our sins so we could live forever.
This free gift of love and mercy doesn't accomodate the wicked.
G
Guest
Guest
guibox said:
Question - had Adam and Eve not sinned, would they have died? ie: would they have grown old, aged, and died?