Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,901 Year: 4,158/9,624 Month: 1,029/974 Week: 356/286 Day: 12/65 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   According to the Bible, mankind doesn't have an immortal soul.
Phat
Member
Posts: 18348
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 17 of 30 (186939)
02-20-2005 11:21 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by wmscott
02-20-2005 9:58 AM


Re: the soul dies
wmscott writes:
Now when you disagree and say that I am wrong, you need to support your counter argument, if you fail to do so, your argument fails. So if you wish to argue that I am wrong about the soul being mortal, that it is actually immortal, you will need to scripturally prove that the soul is immortal. So far you haven't offered any scriptural support for your argument, without any biblical backing you might as well concede that the Bible does indeed teach that the soul is mortal.
All that I can see is that you teach this doctorine using the Bible. What do you make of Luke 16:22-28?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by wmscott, posted 02-20-2005 9:58 AM wmscott has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by wmscott, posted 02-21-2005 6:44 PM Phat has not replied

  
PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6901 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 18 of 30 (187021)
02-20-2005 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by purpledawn
02-19-2005 8:56 PM


Re: the soul dies
quote:
I want to know if he truly means the word "immortal."
Immortal describes God only. It never describes humans.
The soul is a combination of breath and body.
An intimate moment at creation when God made man from the dust of the ground and then leaned over and breathed the breath of life into the nostrils of his creation.
And man became a living soul, meaning body plus breath = soul.
When breath departs, dead soul. Breath does not take on a life of its own, that's silly. The teaching of such has its roots in paganism, which made its way into many isms.
Hope that helps.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
Hey, Albert, I agree!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by purpledawn, posted 02-19-2005 8:56 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by purpledawn, posted 02-20-2005 4:19 PM PecosGeorge has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3486 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 19 of 30 (187036)
02-20-2005 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by PecosGeorge
02-20-2005 3:28 PM


Re: the soul dies
Pecos,
I understand the meaning of immortal and soul as you explained them, but this board if full of people with various religious catch phrases, traditions, ideas, etc.
It is hard to have a discussion when two people are working with a different idea of what a word, phrase, or tradition means.
I wanted wmscott to clarify HIS definition of immortal and soul. I wanted to make sure that we were on the same page concerning the definitions.
quote:
Immortal describes God only. It never describes humans.
Paul's writings seem to be the main source of the various uses and forms of the word "aphthartos" or immortal. Imagine that!

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by PecosGeorge, posted 02-20-2005 3:28 PM PecosGeorge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by PecosGeorge, posted 02-21-2005 8:35 AM purpledawn has not replied
 Message 21 by PecosGeorge, posted 02-21-2005 9:08 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6901 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 20 of 30 (187158)
02-21-2005 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by purpledawn
02-20-2005 4:19 PM


Re: the soul dies
quote:
Paul's writings seem to be the main source of the various uses and forms of the word "aphthartos" or immortal. Imagine that!
I more than understand your struggle, I feel it.
The immortal soul doctrine is heresy. This doctrine gives the soul something only God has. This doctrine is, however, profitable.
Traditions, Purpledawn, are worthless, according to scripture. No light is in those who do not speak according to the word. (Isaiah 8:20)
Walk away, shake the dust off your feet and leave behind that which would be determined to vex your spirit.
Pecos, a very long-time student and teacher of the word.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
Hey, Albert, I agree!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by purpledawn, posted 02-20-2005 4:19 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6901 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 21 of 30 (187162)
02-21-2005 9:08 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by purpledawn
02-20-2005 4:19 PM


Re: the soul dies
Hi, Purpledawn
This might also help from Immortality and Incorruption google aphthartos
It says it well.
1 Cor. 15:53,54 would read thus:--"The [special] dead [i.e., the saints] will be raised incorruptible [i.e., immortal, not liable to corrupt, decay, or perish] and we [of the same special class] shall be changed." "For of necessity this corruptible [diseased, perishable condition] must be invested with incorruptibility [imperishable quality] and this mortal [dying condition] must be invested with immortality" [unchangeability]. "And when this corruptible [perishable condition] shall be invested with incorruptibility [imperishable quality] and this mortal [dying condition] shall be clothed with unchangeability [immortality], then will that prophetic promise be fulfilled [which says] Death will be swallowed up in victory." That is to say: when this special class, the dead and we, the overcomers, the saints, are changed to undying, changeless conditions, then will that prophecy of Isaiah 25:8begin to be fulfilled
Blessings to you.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
Hey, Albert, I agree!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by purpledawn, posted 02-20-2005 4:19 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6901 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 22 of 30 (187171)
02-21-2005 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by purpledawn
02-20-2005 11:09 AM


Re: The Soul
How'ya doing, Purpledawn?
This may also help with the soul issue and helps it all come together. Sleep = a metaphor for death and comforting.
DEATH LIKENED TO SLEEP
Death is likened unto sleep in the scriptures.
"Lazarus sleepeth ... Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead" (John 11:11, 14).
"...Lest I sleep the sleep of death" (Psalm 13:3).
"...For now shall I sleep in the dust; and thou shalt seek me in the morning, but I shall not be" (Job 7:21).
"Why died I not ... for now should I have lain still and been quiet, I should have slept..." (Job 3:11-13).
"...Them that sleep in the dust of the earth..."(Daniel 12:2).
"And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep" (Acts 7:60).
"For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption" (Acts 13:36).
"...Them also which sleep in Jesus..." (I Thessalonians 4:14).
Maranatha!

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
Hey, Albert, I agree!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by purpledawn, posted 02-20-2005 11:09 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
wmscott
Member (Idle past 6276 days)
Posts: 580
From: Sussex, WI USA
Joined: 12-19-2001


Message 23 of 30 (187294)
02-21-2005 6:40 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by purpledawn
02-20-2005 11:09 AM


just conducting a friendly fire exercise?
Dear Purpledawn;
On this point we disagree. IMO, the writers of the Bible are limited by human perception. So if this hinders or ends our discussion, so be it.
But if you believe this, there would be nothing in the Bible on what happens after death at all, you couldn't prove anything one way or the other. There would be no mention of a resurrection or of any hope for the future, which is not what we find in the Bible. We do find the hope of the resurrection and references as to what death is like. In short, your viewpoint is just simply wrong.
So the OT writers make no claim that the human body does not die completely and you haven't provided any verses where God stated otherwise. So the concensus is that as far as the OT is concerned no part us continues after death and especially after decay. Agreed or Not?
I agree, the NT teaches the same as well for that matter.
[OT references to resurrection; yes there are a number, here are a few. (Hosea 13:14)] -Unfortunately this is dealing with a death of a nation and not redemption from a literal grave.
Paul quoted it and applied it to the resurrection. (1 Corinthians 15:54-55) But when [this which is corruptible puts on incorruption and] this which is mortal puts on immortality, then the saying will take place that is written: "Death is swallowed up forever." "Death, where is your victory? Death, where is your sting?" In the Bible, many things have more than one application.
Psalms are songs and not really good doctrine supporters.
Jesus Christ disagrees with you. (Luke 24:44) "He now said to them: "These are my words which I spoke to YOU while I was yet with YOU, that all the things written in the law of Moses and in the Prophets and Psalms about me must be fulfilled."
Do you understand that I agree with you, that the authors of the Bible do not say that humans have an immortal soul?
Do you understand that my arguments are showing you the weakness in your presentation?
Until your last post, I thought you were arguing for immortality of the soul. Now that you have stated your position, I can see that you are not. I don't understand why we are arguing. Are you just conducting a friendly fire exercise? I hadn't picked up on the idea that you were merely trying to show the weak points in my argument. To do so, you need to focus on the scriptures I use and show why they don't fit or fit well with my argument and perhaps suggest better ones. That would be more effective. I am looking to hone the edges on my arguments and correct any weak spots. But I haven't seen you really point out such, could you go back and point them out to me more plainly. I am not picking up on that you have been showing me a better argument on the soul being mortal, maybe I am just missing it. I would also suggest that just as I do not always have the best argument and have room for improvement, you may wish to consider that the same could be true for you as well, maybe I have got some things right that you could learn from.
Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by purpledawn, posted 02-20-2005 11:09 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by purpledawn, posted 02-22-2005 4:01 PM wmscott has replied

  
wmscott
Member (Idle past 6276 days)
Posts: 580
From: Sussex, WI USA
Joined: 12-19-2001


Message 24 of 30 (187296)
02-21-2005 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Phat
02-20-2005 11:21 AM


an illustration
Dear Phatboy;
What do you make of Luke 16:22-28?
(Luke 16:22-28) "Now in course of time the beggar died and he was carried off by the angels to the bosom [position] of Abraham. "Also, the rich man died and was buried. And in Hades he lifted up his eyes, he existing in torments, and he saw Abraham afar off and Lazarus in the bosom [position] with him. So he called and said, 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in anguish in this blazing fire.' But Abraham said, 'Child, remember that you received in full your good things in your lifetime, but Lazarus correspondingly the injurious things. Now, however, he is having comfort here but you are in anguish. And besides all these things, a great chasm has been fixed between us and YOU people, so that those wanting to go over from here to YOU people cannot, neither may people cross over from there to us.' Then he said, 'In that event I ask you, father, to send him to the house of my father, for I have five brothers, in order that he may give them a thorough witness, that they also should not get into this place of torment.'"
First off, this account is not an account of an actual event, but is rather an illustration, a moral story. (Luke 14:7) "He then went on to tell the invited men an illustration," The illustration of the Rich man and the Beggar Lazarus is about two groups that existed in Jesus' day when he told the illustration. One of the groups the Rich man, pictured the Pharisees who were the ones that Jesus told the illustration to. (Luke 16:14-15) "Now the Pharisees, who were money lovers, were listening to all these things, and they began to sneer at him. Consequently he said to them:" Jesus then in verse 19, tells them the illustration. The Pharisees are well pictured by the Rich man in the illustration, they are materially wealthy and through their studies of God's law, are well versed in the scriptures so are blessed with good spiritual food. But they view the common people (who are the group pictured by the beggar) as mere dirt, calling them 'am ha'arets, or people of the earth and so far beneath them that they don't associate with them. The common people hunger for spiritual food, and eagerly eat whatever table droppings they can get from the Pharisees. God doesn't share the Pharisees' view of the common people, and when Jesus begins preaching, there is a change in how the two groups find themselves being treated. The rich Pharisees find themselves receiving fiery condemnation from God's son, while the common people find themselves in a favored position with God, with Jesus' ministry being mainly directed towards them.
So in the account, the fiery torment, refers to the effect Jesus' ministry had on the religious leaders in his day, his denunciations and openly exposing them for their hypocrisy which tormented them so much that they had Jesus killed. The bosom position of Abraham who pictures God, is referring to having a favored position with God. Now the old teaching in Christendom on this was that since Jesus was the first to go to heaven, the beggar was carried to a paradise or limbo in the 'nice' part of hell and that the Rich man ended up in the bad hot part. Both parts were supposedly located in the center of the earth. How much of this old doctrine do you wish to refer to in you argument? Most of Christendom no longer believes in this doctrine any more, it seems to have been quietly dropped. So what do you want to say is the 'bosom [position] of Abraham'? I say it pictured a favored position with God. What do you want to say it was?
Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Phat, posted 02-20-2005 11:21 AM Phat has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3486 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 25 of 30 (187540)
02-22-2005 4:01 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by wmscott
02-21-2005 6:40 PM


State of Nonexistence
IMO, the Bible is written by inspired people as most written works are. They write creatively about their culture and religion. The only part that could truly be considered the word of God, IMO, is what was supposedly imparted by God to the prophets and they were told to tell the people. Telling people what to say and inspiring them to write are two different things.
In the OT the authors are very clear when God has given humans special information beyond what they already knew.
Exodus 36:1
"Now Bezalel and Oholiab, and every skillful person in whom the LORD has put skill and understanding to know how to perform all the work in the construction of the sanctuary, shall perform in accordance with all that the LORD has commanded."
quote:
But if you believe this, there would be nothing in the Bible on what happens after death at all, you couldn't prove anything one way or the other.
There isn’t truly anything in the Bible that describes what happens after death other than what the living could observe. The scriptures you provided, concerning death, do not reflect any special information received from God. The descriptions of death, creative or otherwise, are from a living human viewpoint of the time. What they learned through observation. From their living viewpoint there is nothing immortal about man.
I haven’t looked, but I would think that science has monitored brain activity after death. That type of study would help to support mortality of the soul.
As you showed with Solomon’s words.
Ecclesiastes 8:5-6
For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no further reward, and even the memory of them is forgotten.never again will they have a part in anything that happens under the sun.
The dead are no longer a part of the living equation, which is what I thought you are trying to show. Right now from the human viewpoint, the OT culture agrees with you. If you don’t find anything spoken by God to counter that, then that is all you have concerning the soul and death.
quote:
According to the Bible righteous people who die, enter a state of nonexistence until they are later resurrected. Since they are not aware of anything while in this state, they are sometimes referred to as being asleep.
This is not supported by your scripture or any that I know. Referring to a dead person as asleep is an idiom. Once they have decayed, they cease to exist. There is nothing to resurrect.
In the OT no word is translated resurrection. So I’m guessing that any individual supposedly brought back from the dead is what you consider a resurrection.
People brought back to life in the OT:
1 Kings 17:7-24, 2 Kings 4:32-35, 2 Kings 13:21
Now in ALL these cases the people weren’t dead very long and their bodies were still intact. IMO, the authors used these stories to show the holiness of the healer. No mention of future resurrection is mentioned.
The people brought back to life in the NT, including Jesus, also still had bodies intact to reanimate. I think Lazarus was the longest timeframe. If you consider all of these to be examples of how the resurrection will be, then you leave out a very large group of people.
All people who are dead and buried, who were buried or died at sea, returned to dust, eaten by animals, etc. They have no body. You have shown no example of those without bodies being resurrected. These are the people who truly don’t exist anymore.
Your examples of resurrection are limited to those who still have bodies. No scripture shows otherwise that I’ve seen.
quote:
Paul quoted it and applied it to the resurrection
Concerning Hosea 13:14. Just because Paul pulled three lines from Hosea, doesn’t change the meaning of those lines when read within Hosea. It doesn’t mean that Hosea supports Paul’s purpose.
quote:
I am looking to hone the edges on my arguments and correct any weak spots. But I haven't seen you really point out such, could you go back and point them out to me more plainly.
1. The only point that your scriptures support is that the people of the Bible did not view the soul to be immortal.
2. Scripture does not support the statement that: righteous people who die enter a state of nonexistence until they are later resurrected.
3. Scripture does not support resurrection from nonexistence.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by wmscott, posted 02-21-2005 6:40 PM wmscott has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by wmscott, posted 02-23-2005 9:01 PM purpledawn has replied
 Message 27 by PecosGeorge, posted 02-23-2005 9:46 PM purpledawn has replied

  
wmscott
Member (Idle past 6276 days)
Posts: 580
From: Sussex, WI USA
Joined: 12-19-2001


Message 26 of 30 (187922)
02-23-2005 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by purpledawn
02-22-2005 4:01 PM


Are you saying Sadducees were right and Jesus was wrong?
Dear Purpledawn;
IMO, the Bible is written by inspired people as most written works are. They write creatively about their culture and religion. The only part that could truly be considered the word of God, IMO, is what was supposedly imparted by God to the prophets and they were told to tell the people. Telling people what to say and inspiring them to write are two different things.
You are of course in conflict with Paul. (2 Timothy 3:16) " All Scripture is inspired of God." and according to Peter, what Paul wrote was inspired scripture. (2 Peter 3:15-16) "Paul according to the wisdom given him also wrote YOU, speaking about these things as he does also in all [his] letters. In them, however, are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unsteady are twisting, as [they do] also the rest of the Scriptures,"
So you are in conflict with both Paul and Peter on this point. I have talked to people who only accept the 'red' parts in the Bible were Jesus is being quoted, which of course is ridiculous as we both know since the person who recorded what Jesus said, also recorded what he taught and did, that make up the non 'red' part of the book. I think you want to be careful about slipping into the same sort of extreme position of only accepting parts of the Bible, since the same authors that wrote down the prophecies, wrote the books in which they are contained. Paul wrote under the influence of the holy spirit, which means what he said was God's opinion on the matter, that the whole books are inspired by God, not just parts.
All people who are dead and buried, who were buried or died at sea, returned to dust, eaten by animals, etc. They have no body. You have shown no example of those without bodies being resurrected. These are the people who truly don't exist anymore.
I am not sure what you are saying here, do you mean that they don't come back at all, or they come back in another way? If you are saying that a body is needed for a resurrection, you would be saying that no one in the OT would be coming back. By your reasoning, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, would have no hope of a resurrection, which would put you in conflict with Jesus.
(Matthew 22:31-32) " As regards the resurrection of the dead, did YOU not read what was spoken to YOU by God, saying, 'I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob'? He is the God, not of the dead, but of the living."
Are you saying Sadducees were right and Jesus was wrong? I think you need to clarity your position. Do you think that God and Jesus are limited in their ability to resurrect, and are only able to resurrect the recently dead who still have a fairly intact body? God had no problem creating Adam out of dust, why would he need anything more for a resurrection.
The people brought back to life in the NT, including Jesus, also still had bodies intact to reanimate.
Jesus' body was not brought back to life, but was disposed of just as Moses' body was. Jesus was not resurrected as a human with a fleshly body, but was resurrected as a spirit with a spiritual body. (1 Peter 3:18) "he being put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit."
Just as Jesus died as a man and was three days later raised up in a spirit body, so will those of his followers who receive the first resurrection. (1 Corinthians 15:42-45) "the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption, it is raised up in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised up in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised up in power. It is sown a physical body, it is raised up a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual one. It is even so written: "The first man Adam became a living soul." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit."
Referring to a dead person as asleep is an idiom. Once they have decayed, they cease to exist. There is nothing to resurrect.
No not an idiom, it is a simile or figure of speech. Comparing sleep to death is a figure of speech, for death is like a deep dreamless sleep, but the two are of course different things. someone who is in a state of non existence, is not merely sleeping nor will they 'wake up' on their own. (another simile) The reason for the using the simile of sleeping, is as an illustration, that the person is unconscious and can be awakened by someone with the ability to resurrect the dead.
As for there being nothing to resurrect, a body isn't needed. For that matter, the matter in your body is completely replaced on an average of every seven years they tell us. Which electrons or molecules make up your body is unimportant, you are not changed in who you are by the continuous replacement of the matter in your body. When angels come to earth and appear, they materialize a human body out of thin air, and then dematerialize it when they leave. So for God or Jesus to create a new body to resurrect someone is easy. What makes making a copy of a dead person's body a resurrection, is the putting of that person's mind or consciousness into the mind of that body. Somehow God can do this, so that the resurrected person is not merely a perfect copy, but the original person brought back to life, that is a resurrection. From the viewpoint of the person involved, they will one moment be closing their eyes in death and the next moment they will be opening them in the resurrection. to them it will seem as if no time has pasted since they were not in existence to experience the passing of time or anything else.
The fact that those who have died in the past, will be raised in the coming future is shown in the Bible.
(1 Thessalonians 4:15-17) "For this is what we tell YOU by Jehovah's word, that we the living who survive to the presence of the Lord shall in no way precede those who have fallen asleep [in death]; because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel's voice and with God's trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. Afterward we the living who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we shall always be with [the] Lord."
This verse is frequently misunderstood, on the part where Paul is talking about the living being caught away in the clouds, he means when they die they will go straight to heaven, whereas those who have died before the presence of the Lord will have to wait in the sleep of death until they are resurrected in spirit bodies to heaven at that time. His point here is that even though those who have died earlier are not resurrected until the start of Christ's presence, they are still raised before those who die and are resurrected durning Christ's presence. That is how Paul means the living do not precede the dead.
Now for why I cited this verse, the dead here that are raised (the first resurrection), are not raised until the presence of the Lord, (called the 'second coming' by many) which is a great span of time from when they died, so by then their dead human bodies are long gone. Yet they are still raised. At the time when the earth is made into a paradise, there will the general resurrection (the second resurrection) of the dead to life on earth. They will be raised in physical human bodies, materialized, looking as they did in their prime. There is no need for the same matter that made up their old body, matter is matter.
Concerning Hosea 13:14. Just because Paul pulled three lines from Hosea, doesn't change the meaning of those lines when read within Hosea. It doesn't mean that Hosea supports Paul's purpose.
If Hosea doesn't support what Paul used it for, then Paul would be guilty of mis quoting and twisting the meaning of scripture. Considering the fact that he wrote under inspiration, and his words are included as part of the word of God, and are attested to by Peter as being inspired scripture, it would be impossible for him to have twisted the meaning of Hosea. Hosea had to have a application to the resurrection, (Hosea 13:14) "From the hand of Sheol I shall redeem them; from death I shall recover them. Where are your stings, O Death? Where is your destructiveness, O Sheol?" as the wording clearly indicates that it does.
Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by purpledawn, posted 02-22-2005 4:01 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by purpledawn, posted 02-24-2005 6:10 AM wmscott has not replied

  
PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6901 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 27 of 30 (187929)
02-23-2005 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by purpledawn
02-22-2005 4:01 PM


Re: State of Nonexistence
Hi,PurpleDawn
quote:
3. Scripture does not support resurrection from nonexistence
Scripture does support creation by an omnipotent God and also recreation by the same God.
Recreation - resurrection - same thing.
He either is or is not - able.
And, ALL scripture is given.....again, by that same God who is either able or not able to accomplish the task.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
Hey, Albert, I agree!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by purpledawn, posted 02-22-2005 4:01 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by purpledawn, posted 02-25-2005 6:05 AM PecosGeorge has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3486 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 28 of 30 (188041)
02-24-2005 6:10 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by wmscott
02-23-2005 9:01 PM


Farewell
Quite obviously we have a difference of opinion when it comes to inspiration and the authors of the Bible. Since this is the Faith and Belief Forum, this difference severely limits our discussion and has brought it to an end.
I was trying to stay focused on what you were saying and if the scripture you provided supported what you said they did. I still don't feel that they do.
Your thoughts will probably appeal to those who feel the same way as you do, but I don't see that your conclusions are any less pagan oriented than the Christian beliefs you were trying to disprove. Just different ways of interpreting the words of Paul. To each his own.
So good luck with your book and have a great week.
Good Day.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by wmscott, posted 02-23-2005 9:01 PM wmscott has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3486 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 29 of 30 (188397)
02-25-2005 6:05 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by PecosGeorge
02-23-2005 9:46 PM


Resurrection or Re-creation
quote:
Scripture does support creation by an omnipotent God and also recreation by the same God.
Recreation - resurrection - same thing.
He either is or is not - able.
Where does the scripture support re-creation of humans by God?
Where does God promise to re-create the dead?
Resurrection and re-creation are not the same.
Resurrection is raising a dead body to life or reanimation. Those examples are in the scripture.
I've seen no example of God bringing someone back from nonexistence.
This is not about whether God is capable of re-creation, but whether he said he would or showed examples of doing so.
Just because he supposedly can, doesn't mean he will.
This message has been edited by purpledawn, 02-25-2005 06:39 AM

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by PecosGeorge, posted 02-23-2005 9:46 PM PecosGeorge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by PecosGeorge, posted 02-25-2005 8:26 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6901 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 30 of 30 (188424)
02-25-2005 8:26 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by purpledawn
02-25-2005 6:05 AM


Re: Resurrection or Re-creation
quote:
Where does the scripture support re-creation of humans by God?
Where does God promise to re-create the dead?
Resurrection and re-creation are not the same.
Resurrection is raising a dead body to life or reanimation. Those examples are in the scripture.
I've seen no example of God bringing someone back from nonexistence.
This is not about whether God is capable of re-creation, but whether he said he would or showed examples of doing so.
Just because he supposedly can, doesn't mean he will.
As you wish!
Maranatha!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by purpledawn, posted 02-25-2005 6:05 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024