>>Does the soul contiunue and intereact between physical death and the resurrection? >>
Only if you refuse to put those texts in context. Now.
Daniel 12:1,
John 5:28,29
Acts 2:29,34
The story of His friend, Lazarus, who was ASLEEP. in Matthew 11
tell you what. put the words 'sleep', slept, asleep' into your search and see what you get. Just try it.
As I said, I don't have my own computer, here, and none of my Bible software, so you are going to have to look up these by yourself.
Harold
Sleep is a polite way to say dead, it is a methaphore or word picture. Even then it does not mean 'cease to exist' as when you sleep tonight you do not cease to exist, or even be aware in some ways, but simply change the level of your awareness and do not interact using the senses.
In the bible the primary image of death has to do with communion, death is seperation, so being dead in sins means not being in right community with God because of sin. The diea of its meaning being 'non-being' is a hellenistic and modernist one based on a non-creational view of human nature. The Hebrews did not think in abstract Greek catagories like 'being'; but in concreate actualities like 'Lordship", "fellowship' and 'justice'
Daniel 12:1 says nothing on this topic, it merely says there will be a future delierence and that God watches over His people to assure this will be the case. Ecc. 12:1-7 does speak of this, but says the soul returns to God who gave it in creation, and so it must retain being to return.
John 5:28-29. This contradicts your view as it says all in the grave [theri bodies] hear His voice and are after that raised with new bodies. I should have added this one to the texts that say specificly the soul exists between physical death and the resurrection. Asp add 1 Thessalonians 4:14 wheree Jesus brings with Him from heaven those Christians who have died.
Acts 2: 29 & 34. v. 34 says David did not ascend to heaven, true, to ascend here means not go there but take the place of rule there. This only Jesus does. ['ascend to the throne' is even common enough today]. His body remains are in the tomb, and all will be until that day, from that it does not follow he has no form of existance, only his body is not living now. [2:34-36 shows us this is what Peter is speaking of here].
I almost forgot I wanted to ad Matthew 22:23, Mark 17:27, Luke 20:28, where Jesus said that Abraham, Isac and Jacob are 'the living', using a presnet tense verb of ongoing existance. [that is, not those who had lived, but are now living]. It is in fact precisely because all are alive that all can recieve resurrection bodies on the day, to create them again would mean THEY had not been raised at all.
You: "Think a minute here, do you REALLY want to say any idea found first in Roman Catholic teaching is anti-biblical?"
Harry: "Yes."
Does that tell you something about what you are dealing with?
Sound's like the JWs, right?
It should. They are sister cults. They both came out of the same failed New Advent prophetic movement.
Sounds like the KKK doesn't it?
Same spirit. It hates the RCC.
1CO 15:33 Do not be misled: "Bad company corrupts good character."
Just look and see who they are like and you will see who their spiritual sisters and brothers are.
So do you think logic, fact and reason are going to overcome that spiritual darkness?
Good luck.
jim
>>I almost forgot I wanted to ad Matthew 22:23, Mark 17:27, Luke 20:28, where Jesus said that Abraham, Isac and Jacob are 'the living', using a presnet tense verb of ongoing existance. [that is, not those who had lived, but are now living]. It is in fact precisely because all are alive that all can recieve resurrection bodies on the day, to create them again would mean THEY had not been raised at all.<<
>>Matthew 22:23, Mark 17:27, Luke 20:28, where Jesus said that Abraham, Isac and Jacob are 'the living',<<
What Bible is he using?
Matthew 22:23 "The same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him and ask Him,"
Mark 17:27 doesn't even exist.
Luke 20:28 " Saying, "Teacher, Moses wrote to us that f a man's brother dies, haveing a wife, and he dies without children, his brotgher should take his wife and reaise up offspring for his brother."
I can't find a word about Abraham, Isiaac or Jacob are living.
Harold.
> Mark 17:27 doesn't even exist.<
That may have been a typo for Mark 12:27: "He [God] is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!"
> I can't find a word about Abraham, Isiaac or Jacob are living.<
How about Matt 22:31-32: "But about the resurrection of the dead -- have you not read what God said to you, 'I am the God Abraham, the God of Isacc, and the God of Jacob'? He [God] is not the God of the dead but of the living."?
These passages were used to argue against those who denied the resurrection, which I know you are not doing. But, these passages can also be used to argue that those who died IN CHRIST (or those who believed in God before Jesus was born) are still alive in some way though they died bodily. If they are not alive in some way after the die bodily, they are DEAD -- so how can God say He is the God of the living, esp. after Jesus was referring to those who had believed in God but who had since died bodily?
peace,
Cheryl
<I can't find a word about Abraham, Isiaac or Jacob are living.>
Christ spoke against the SadDuceAn doctrine of no resurrection. Mat 22 and Mark 12 are saying the same thing.Luke 20:38 So he is the God of the living, not the dead. They are all alive to him."
>>how can God say He is the God of the living, esp. after Jesus was referring to those who had believed in God but who had since died bodily? <<I look at that as saying that the dead know nothing, they don't praise God, simply because they are dead. If, IF they have accepted Jesus as their Lord, then they will live. But not until He comes for us at the first resurrection. I have ask others, what do you say to. according to Acts 2, where is king David? Luke 11, where was Lazarus?
I think it odd that here was such a good place to show that if a person was good that he had been to Heaven. Where did Lazarus say that he had been? Did he thank Jesus for bringing him up from hell, or did he have something else to say for bringing him down from paradise? I noticed that he didn't say anything. Neither did Dariius' daughter or that widow's son. Why? Because they were simply dead. Asleep, as it were. We call it ''sleeping in Jesus".
>>They are all alive to him.">>
Like He said. All that believe in HIm shall have everlasting life. I have never said anything different. Only the in between times we see differently. I think it would be a shame for psople to blame God for burning anyone for thousands of years for a mistake made in this one short lifetime. Does it sound like a just God that would do that? MY God is a just God. He is not a sadist. He says so. It pains Him that so many will disobey Him and suffer. "Why will ye die"?
I think it odd that here was such a good place to show that if a person was good that he had been to Heaven. Where did Lazarus say that he had been? Did he thank Jesus for bringing him up from hell, or did he have something else to say for bringing him down from paradise? I noticed that he didn't say anything. Neither did Dariius' daughter or that widow's son. Why? Because they were simply dead. Asleep, as it were. We call it ''sleeping in Jesus". <
Harold, you make a good point -- why didn't these people who were "dead" and then resurrected into their mortal bodies again not have an experience about where they went after they died? I can only speculate (which I know is dangerous <s>) but that in those cases, it could be that our mortal minds cannot retain the glory of God from an experience like this and that while their spirits were "living" with God, they did not have the consciousness necessary to be aware of what was going on and then report back what had gone on. Although, there are passages in Rev. that allude to the circumstance that martyrs (who by definition, have died) are conscious while they wait for Christ to finish His work. There is also the possibility that the point of the story wasn't what happens between when someone dies and Christ returns but that Jesus was Christ and had the power of God to literally bring the dead back to life -- which pointed them to the power of God to bring the spiritually dead to life.
I do wonder what happened to Enoch and Elijah, though -- they were taken up as mortals -- were they transformed so that they could exist on the heavenly plane of existence?
I don't know if my understanding of what happens to those who die is that different from yours -- we simply have to trust that God will keep us safe after we die so that we are resurrected when Jesus comes. We have no control over what happens after we die -- we can only be witnesses to what we know: the Gospel that Jesus Christ came to save us from our sins, the Resurrection is real, our Redeemer lives and those who live in Christ will live in Him forever!
<Does it sound like a just God that would do that? MY God is a just God.>
Not if He lets you sleep in the grave for who knows how long until your everlasting life starts. (s)If you have comfort in not knowing how long you're dead while dead you would have as much comfort in no resurrection ever.
I do NOT think logic fact and reason can overcome darkness, but I do think the Holy Spirit most often uses logic fact and reason in accord with His own word to overcome darkness.
It is true we can historically traqce some common roots between the SDA and JWs, and varied other 'restortionist' groups. We can also trace some borrowing by White from the 'spiritualists' in terms of having a pure deiit and so on, and between them and materialistic views in defining some words, and so forth.
On the otehr hand, unlike those groups they do continue to [with qualifications in SOME] hold the doctrine fo the Trinity, the centrality of the cross, the future judgment of the Risen Reighning Christ, and so on. [not with perfect biblical fidelity in some cases, but still their stand is orthodox here[.
So while they share history and attitude with very wrong fringe groups they also share in many ways in the Christian heritage, in spite of the bias against how that is expressed by Rome [which they have never really bothered to study to see what Rome actually says, which on salvation, for example, is so close to theri own view except for which works one must do as they can be criticised using the exact same arguments, except Rome is more cross centered than they are in many ways].
So yes, I repeat the sue of fact, reason, and logic with biblical exegesis not because of any trust in them as such, but because I believe God can and does use them even in hard cases of hide bound unbelief to move hearts and open them to the grace and mercy of God in Jesus Christ. Isaiah 55:10-11.
Remember that when I give a reference it is always to the whole sentence or paragraph, not just a bit of word data. [Mark 12:27 is the correct reference here, hit the '7' ending both of the pair].
The point is made here, as Spencer noted,based on the verb tense, that is, Abraham is said to be at that time one who is living. While the bible I had in hand was an English translation [NKJV] I was working from having read the passage several times this year working though Matthew, including a study of some key passages in the Greek text. [My skills here are poor, compared to any expert, but I can do this if I go slow and use the proper references and so forth].
The text simply does not say they 'will live' but that they 'are living'.
While it is true in another sense they will come to bodily life at the resurrection this text specificly says they ARE ALIVE in another sense NOW, God IS the God of the ones now living. That is what the text SAID and MEANT as written, no 'future' meaning is grammaticly possible here.
Whatever may be true about the future resurrection condition THIS VERSE is not speaking about it.
Is God just to punish sinners forever for sin? YES.
The reason is simple, God is infinite, and so any sin is a sin against an infinite Person, and so of an infinite nature. It deserves an infinite punishment. Strict impartial justice demands this be the case.
If God does not punish sinners in hell forever then He would be unjust, and so not good. Hell is a necessary componant to the moral goodness of the divine nature. This is what God has told us of Himself in His word, and God defines Himself, we do not get to do this, our ideas of what is loving or good or whatever in regard to God SIMPLY DO NOT MATTER. GOD IS GOD AND WE ARE NOT.
A God constructed to fit your own understanding is what the bible calls an "idol", a nothing, a figment of a sinner's immagination.
If God does not punish all sinners infinitly as far as the being of creatures can take this in then God does not deserve our respect, much less worship, because He is a totally amoral and unjust judge. Sinners are all guilty sinners before His Holy face.
Givnign sinners what they want, to have no real felt consequence for their vile sin, would be to let sinners get away free with their having sinned.
Yes Giod uis love, and also His name is Jeleous, the Holy one, altogether righteous, the consuming fire of absoliute moral and judicial purity before whom all vile sinners must be judged.
I am sure glad I have a better impression of God. The God I love loves me and all the other sinners. You sound sick. It is a shame that people like you go around telling people that God burns His children forever. Shame on you.
>>While it is true in another sense they will come to bodily life at the resurrection this text specificly says they ARE ALIVE in another sense NOW,<<"
That is so stupid that I am not even going to go on with this ignorance.
YOU: While it is true in another sense they will come to bodily life at the resurrection this text specifically says they ARE ALIVE in another sense NOW,"
Harold: That is so stupid that I am not even going to go on with this ignorance.
You (and Tommy yeah but?) have apparently presented Harold with a challenge for which there is no standard SDA answer. Being unable to respond, because that programming has not been entered, he has fled the field.
Very interesting. Perhaps there’s hope. I got absolutely nowhere by quoting Mark’s gospel saying “…Jesus declared all foods clean.” He responded that Mark’s comment was “spurious.” I wonder who told him to say that as he had never used that word before and, I’m sure, has no more understanding of it’s meaning than he does of the word “context” which I’m sure he was also fed by one of his SDA handlers, er – “elders.”
Keep up the fire. The fortress may be cracking. Hopefully the result will be that he is delivered from his delusional state into clear thinking reality rather than going catatonic after having his imaginary world fall apart.
<<Please try one more time to convince me that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were NOT LIVING at the time of Jesus!!!<<
I don't see why I must. I am disappointed that you won't even take the words of Jesus, Himself. I have posted this scripture so many times... John 5:28 "Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will "hear His voice 29 and come forth - those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of cfondemnation."
I think it is a shame that your church has taught you so well that you just can't see what is actually writen in your Bible. Your eyes are just blinded to the facts. Tell me, what did Jesus say about His friend Lazarus? He said that Lazarus was sleeping and that He would go waken him. Also, you never told me where king David is. Look in Acts 2.
As far as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, aren't they asssured of eternal life? I think that if you look, every person who has claimed the promises of the Lord have that. But, does that mean that they don't die?
When do you think we should get our reward? Now or when He comes for us? According to Revelation 22:14 , we get that reward when He comes. He is bringing it with Him. That is when we get our immortality according to 1 Cor.15.Harold.
