Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,221 Year: 5,478/9,624 Month: 503/323 Week: 143/204 Day: 13/4 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Arizona: Showing America how to avoid thinking since 1912
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 358 of 397 (721473)
03-07-2014 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 354 by saab93f
03-07-2014 2:33 PM


Re: J G Machen "Christianity and Liberalism"
I guess I always need to say *European* settlers to satisfy the nitpickers here.
Many Indian tribes and individuals did become Christian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 354 by saab93f, posted 03-07-2014 2:33 PM saab93f has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 359 by Theodoric, posted 03-07-2014 3:08 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 361 by saab93f, posted 03-07-2014 3:17 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 362 of 397 (721477)
03-07-2014 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 350 by DevilsAdvocate
03-07-2014 6:10 AM


Re: J G Machen "Christianity and Liberalism"
How does Christ save us from physical death when all of us, everyone dies a physical death. Or do you believe you will miraculously avoid dying physically. Christ saved us from spiritual death. Even he died physically. Never does Christ say he will save us from physical death.
Sorry, I guess I have to literally spell everything out. We are saved from death by RESURRECTION, DA, not from actually having to die. We don't stay dead, we don't even stay in spirit form, we are resurrected with our BODIES, that's a PHYSICAL resurrection, which was impossible before Jesus died and rose again. When you say that "even" Jesus died you seem not to grasp that because Jesus was sinless He didn't have to die at all, because death is the result of sin. (But of course someone who believes in evolution wouldn't grasp this since death is just a part of life for you) But Jesus died FOR us, in our place, so that HIS resurrection could be OUR resurrection. BODILY resurrection.
This IS based on the Bible but like a good liberal revisionist you change the meaning of the words that have been understood by orthodox theologians down the centuries in the sense I am using them. You really should read Machen who focuses on this liberal corruption of the Bible. Liberals don't seem to know how to read in context.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 350 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-07-2014 6:10 AM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 365 by AZPaul3, posted 03-07-2014 3:45 PM Faith has replied
 Message 368 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-07-2014 3:54 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 363 of 397 (721478)
03-07-2014 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 361 by saab93f
03-07-2014 3:17 PM


Re: J G Machen "Christianity and Liberalism"
A good follower of revisionist history. No, there were genuine Christian converts among the Indians, converted by love and persuasion and not by sword.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 361 by saab93f, posted 03-07-2014 3:17 PM saab93f has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 364 by saab93f, posted 03-07-2014 3:33 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 366 of 397 (721481)
03-07-2014 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 364 by saab93f
03-07-2014 3:33 PM


Re: J G Machen "Christianity and Liberalism"
I was merely trying to correct a typical revisionist history, not to "vindicate Christianity."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 364 by saab93f, posted 03-07-2014 3:33 PM saab93f has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 367 of 397 (721482)
03-07-2014 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 365 by AZPaul3
03-07-2014 3:45 PM


Re: What Body?
If you aren't saved I'm not sure what sort of body you might expect, but those who are saved get glorified perfected bodies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 365 by AZPaul3, posted 03-07-2014 3:45 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 369 by AZPaul3, posted 03-07-2014 4:34 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 370 of 397 (721487)
03-07-2014 6:21 PM
Reply to: Message 368 by DevilsAdvocate
03-07-2014 3:54 PM


Re: J G Machen "Christianity and Liberalism"
When you say that "even" Jesus died you seem not to grasp that because Jesus was sinless He didn't have to die at all, because death is the result of sin
I grasp that. You are throwing around baseless accusations and assumptions of what I do or do not grasp.
Again, I'm taking it from what you've written, but if I'm wrong I'm happy to be wrong. But since you believe in evolution it seems you must deny what the Bible says about how death entered with sin -- ABE meaning not only spiritual but physical death /ABE --, and if you deny that, instead thinking that death is just a part of life and not something that entered that corrupted the life God gave, I'd think it would make Jesus' death for us hard to explain.
But of course someone who believes in evolution wouldn't grasp this since death is just a part of life for you)
Death is part of life. For everyone.
But the question is whether death was ALWAYS a "part of life" according to your theology or a corruption of life that entered because of sin, as my theology says. You appear to think that Adam would have died anyway and not on account of sin, the Fall, so that the only death he died was a "spiritual" death. Do I have that wrong? So that although you can go on to describe our resurrected bodies I have to wonder where that fits into your theology since it seems to be all about spiritual life and death and not bodily life and death to you.
Those in Christ will be raised with a spiritual body which are conversions of our physical bodies to a perfected spiritual body.
As long as "spiritual" doesn't mean something ethereal to you, something that can't eat fish for instance, as Jesus demonstrated He could in His glorified body, but really IS a body, though changed and glorified, we are in agreement on this point.
But again, your language in general about spiritual death as opposed to bodily death suggests you don't believe Jesus died for our bodies and that "spiritual body" suggests something nonphysical.
We are even said in scripture to be WAITING FOR the redemption of our BODY, not just our spirit. [abe: which confirms the interpretation that the body died at the Fall, or why would it need to be redeemed? /abe] In fact according to my theology our spirits are already regenerated through being born again in Christ.
Romans 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.
Philippians 3:21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.
Our body is vile now because corrupted by the sin nature, so it needs to be raised an uncorrupted body.
The reason to read Machen is that he demonstrates how liberals change the meaning of the Biblical text. You can quote the part about the spiritual body correctly for instance, but in the context of other things you've said about how it's all about spiritual death rather than bodily death, it seems likely you mean something different by all these things than traditional theology taught for all the centuries up to the development of modernism or liberalism.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 368 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-07-2014 3:54 PM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 373 by herebedragons, posted 03-07-2014 8:53 PM Faith has replied
 Message 374 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-07-2014 9:09 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 372 of 397 (721490)
03-07-2014 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 371 by ramoss
03-07-2014 6:43 PM


Re: Most Christians disagree with Faith
Funny, I've treated no one as a "piece of dirt" but you have. What's your excuse?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 371 by ramoss, posted 03-07-2014 6:43 PM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 376 by ramoss, posted 03-08-2014 12:21 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 377 of 397 (721496)
03-08-2014 12:40 AM
Reply to: Message 373 by herebedragons
03-07-2014 8:53 PM


The Meaning of Jesus' Death
You appear to think that Adam would have died anyway and not on account of sin, the Fall, so that the only death he died was a "spiritual" death.
Well, why did God say to Adam regarding the tree of knowledge of good and evil "for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die." I have looked up the Hebrew word used for die in that verse in my concordance and no where else is it used in the context of spiritual death. There is no indication that die means to start the process of dying. It means exactly what it says - Adam would physically die. And yet Adam and Eve ate of it and they did not die, not for hundreds of years later.
It's Devils Advocate who thinks Adam only died spiritually [ABE: AS A RESULT OF THE FALL/ABE], not I. I think Adam died both spiritually and physically [abe: AS A RESULT OF THE FALL /ABE]. He did die physically, right? He isn't still living, right? Why assume that God meant he would physically die immediately? But that is also true if you think in terms of the corruption of the body, disease etc., as a process of death, because that would have started in his body immediately. If you believe that God does not lie then you try to understand what He meant. Seems obvious that He meant the whole being became subject to death, and that has to include every kind of corruption of the soul and body. It DID occur immediately, it also had prolonged consequences and in the end complete physical death.
In fact, when God finds out what happened he says "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever." He even had to assign cherubim with a flaming sword to guard the way to the tree of life to keep man from it. Why was he worried that man might live forever when he had sworn that eating the fruit would result in death.
I've always understood this to be because he would have lived forever in a condition of sin and corruption, or paradoxically you could say, in a condition of death. Which is how Satan and his demons "live forever." Perpetually and increasingly full of hatred and pain and fear and disease, malevolent to "perfection" but never dying. This is not life as God wants us to have it. Jesus had to die to remove sin from us so that we could have eternal life free from sin and all the evils we are subject to from sin.
Also, why did God make all the plants for food? Why would an eternal being that could not die need to eat? You do realize why we eat right? We need to take in energy from the environment to maintain our body systems. Without that intake of energy, we would die. And yet if before the fall there was no death, why would Adam need to eat? Did Adam need to eat or did God make food available just for fun?
I don't know but Jesus also demonstrated that even in His glorified body He ate. Eating may have a different meaning or function to an immortal being. I look forward to finally understanding such things.
Oh, and you do realize that plants die when you eat them, right? So there WAS death. But you probably want to restrict the meaning of death to only things that breath air; oh wait ... plants breath air too. So was there ANY organisms that died before the fall? How about bacteria? Nematodes?
Yes, plants don't count. Not the same kind of life, not the same kind of breathing, not the same kind of death. Best I can do. I'm not God. I'm sure we'll all understand these things some day.
instead thinking that death is just a part of life and not something that entered that corrupted the life God gave, I'd think it would make Jesus' death for us hard to explain.
I don't see that. Why does it make Jesus' death hard to explain? His death would still pay the price that could reconcile us to God. Why does death being a part of the physical world change that?
Maybe I should have said it makes His death too easy to explain; it makes it trivial. It loses its importance and its meaning in connection with the Fall from which His death is to redeem us. It becomes a mere token rather than the world-shattering re-creation of life in the abolition of sin and death that we understand it to be. "The wages of sin is death" is meaningless in the context of death as a natural part of the physical world, but as an explanation of the reality we actually live it becomes the reason the sinless man-God who could not die in Himself took on death in our place for our sake.
The whole "no death before the fall" bit just doesn't make sense and it doesn't even fit with the Biblical evidence.
I'd say you're missing a lot.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : To add "AS A RESULT OF THE FALL in two places due to bizarre accusation that I'm lying rather than that I simply didn't feel it necessary to say the whole thing over and over again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 373 by herebedragons, posted 03-07-2014 8:53 PM herebedragons has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 378 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-08-2014 1:29 AM Faith has replied
 Message 380 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-08-2014 2:18 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 379 of 397 (721499)
03-08-2014 1:56 AM
Reply to: Message 378 by DevilsAdvocate
03-08-2014 1:29 AM


Re: The Meaning of Jesus' Death
You don't need to accuse me of lying, I simply have some trouble grasping your point of view. You've been arguing with me that sin and redemption are all about spiritual death, not physical death, so please try again to make your meaning clearer to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 378 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-08-2014 1:29 AM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 381 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-08-2014 2:28 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 382 of 397 (721502)
03-08-2014 5:14 AM
Reply to: Message 378 by DevilsAdvocate
03-08-2014 1:29 AM


Re: The Meaning of Jesus' Death
It's Devils Advocate who thinks Adam only died spiritually, not I.
No I don't. Lying again about me, eh Faith. Show me my quote where I said Adam didn't die a physical death. You know it is un-Christlike to lie.
No lie, I merely didn't get the whole phrase said.
In Message 315 you said:
Spiritual death entered through one man, Adam.
Surely at least from the context of this discussion, as well as the fact that it would be absurd to suggest otherwise, you should know I didn't mean you denied that Adam physically died but that he died physically BECAUSE OF THE FALL [and I just added those words to my Message 377 where you apparently took me as lying], and that physical death for all of us is the result of the Fall.
As I've understood your argument, you've been insisting that it's only spiritual death that was the result of the Fall, and the implication of that is that physical death is natural, which would also support your belief in evolution.
Now you seem to be saying that it's only animals and plants you are talking about, as if you hadn't been denying that human death is the result of the Fall, as in Message 381 I see you are saying
Faith writes:
You've been arguing with me that sin and redemption are all about spiritual death, not physical death,
DA writes:
My main point is that the Bible does not say that physical death of animals and plants began at Adams fall.
That's your *main* point? No, at least the point I've been arguing with is your saying that ADAM's physical death was not the result of the Fall. Are you saying something different than that or not?
As for the death of animals being a result of the Fall I think it is inferred from the statement in Genesis that God put the whole Creation under the curse for the sake of humanity; also Paul's statement that "through one man death entered into the world" which is taken to mean Creation as a whole; also the statement that "all Creation groans for the revealing of the Sons of God" suggesting that the whole Creation, which certainly includes the animals, suffers on account of human sin too, and eagerly awaits the final redemption just as we do.
Plants, again, do not seem to be treated in scripture as living in the sense that animals and human beings are.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : to add URL
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 378 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-08-2014 1:29 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 383 of 397 (721503)
03-08-2014 5:56 AM
Reply to: Message 380 by DevilsAdvocate
03-08-2014 2:18 AM


Re: The Meaning of Jesus' Death
But death is a natural part of the physical world. Physical death is a process of the physical world, is it not? Is physical death not under the laws of nature.
Only because of the Fall, but it was not a part of the original Creation.
Romans 6:23 writes:
"For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord,"
The wages of sin is spiritual death. The gift is eternal life in our new glorified bodies.
You are adding the "spiritual" to limit it to "spiritual death" but the normal reading is physical death. It includes spiritual death just as eternal life also includes the resurrected body.
Now contrast that with Romans 8:13
Romans 8:13 writes:
for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.
This is clearly talking about spiritual life and death. Not physical. We will all die physically, will we not die spiritually if we are redeemed by Christ.
OK, here he is talking about eternal life versus death as a result of living according to the flesh.
"Putting to death the deeds of the body" is talking about being redeemed by God through salvation.
This is also a very odd reading in my experience. This is about our own obligation to mortify the sins of the body, though through the Spirit of course. In context it is WE who are putting to death our deeds through the Spirit, not Christ.
"you will live" is clearly talking about living spiritually (not being separated from God).
But you are making an unnecessary distinction between physical life and spiritual life. It refers to both. Life is obedience to God, mortification of sin fosters that life; that life is both spiritual and physical.
We lose our physical bodies and are raised a new with spiritual bodies.
We will be CHANGED, scripture says, not that we will "lose" our bodies but that they will be glorified and perfected.
But as you go on I see that we are in agreement about all the scripture you quote about how our resurrected bodies will be different than our physical bodies now.
The only point is that they WILL be bodies, we will not be disembodied spirits, like angels or demons and ghosts. Jesus made a point of emphasizing that.
So we agree on that much. What we disagree about is that Christ's death redeemed our physical bodies from death which came upon us because of sin at the Fall, just as He redeems our spirit, which I believe is done or at least begun when we are born again and receive the Holy Spirit.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 380 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-08-2014 2:18 AM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 384 by frako, posted 03-08-2014 6:06 AM Faith has replied
 Message 396 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-08-2014 8:40 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 385 of 397 (721505)
03-08-2014 6:17 AM
Reply to: Message 384 by frako
03-08-2014 6:06 AM


Re: The Meaning of Jesus' Death
No idea. But the entire universe would have been different so perhaps all the planets were habitable. Who knows, I don't.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 384 by frako, posted 03-08-2014 6:06 AM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 386 by frako, posted 03-08-2014 6:45 AM Faith has replied
 Message 388 by saab93f, posted 03-08-2014 8:02 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 387 of 397 (721507)
03-08-2014 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 386 by frako
03-08-2014 6:45 AM


Re: The Meaning of Jesus' Death
We don't need to assume there was no Fall to assume such high numbers you know. They lived even after the Fall to be hundreds of years old so they *could* have had many more than you are accounting for, but what scant evidence there is suggests nobody was procreating at the rate you have in mind, although I agree it certainly seems possible. In Genesis 5, the list of patriarchs, the first son is said to have been conceived when the father is around a hundred years old or older and then other sons and daughters are mentioned but not specified. If Genesis 10 gives the whole picture, Noah only had three sons although he lived to be 950. His descendants, listed by sons only, don't add up to huge numbers, maybe half a dozen to a father, sometimes only two. It's possible of course that many were not reported, only the major heirs in a line, and certainly daughters must have been born but weren't named. But specific names of the men are given, whose genealogies are followed down the centuries, which suggests that the numbers weren't anywhere near what you are guessing, for whatever reason, even for those generations that lived hundreds of years.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by frako, posted 03-08-2014 6:45 AM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 390 by ringo, posted 03-08-2014 11:47 AM Faith has replied
 Message 393 by frako, posted 03-08-2014 2:02 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 389 of 397 (721509)
03-08-2014 8:14 AM
Reply to: Message 388 by saab93f
03-08-2014 8:02 AM


Re: The Meaning of Jesus' Death
We're fallen, they weren't. That was frako's context.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 388 by saab93f, posted 03-08-2014 8:02 AM saab93f has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 394 of 397 (721524)
03-08-2014 6:27 PM
Reply to: Message 393 by frako
03-08-2014 2:02 PM


exponential population growth
Of course I get that but it didn't happen when the people were living hundreds of years so why should it happen at all? In fact if you simply calculate all the children Adam and Eve could have had on a normal life span plus those of all their children and children's children the planet would be overrun very fast anyway. Same with Noah's sons, and their less long-lived descendants. Population CAN grow very fast with normal life spans but there is no reason to assume that it will. BUT IF IT DID AND THE FALL HAD NOT HAPPENED, there would have been all kinds of options we can't even guess at.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 393 by frako, posted 03-08-2014 2:02 PM frako 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