Spiritual Death is Not Biblical

And yet Daniel was the only piece of writing who named king Belshazzar as the king who was ruling when Babylon was defeated. Ancient historians identified Nabonidus as the last of the Babylonian kings so critics claimed that Daniel was completely wrong. Actually in 1850 it was a bible critic named Ferdinand Hitzig who claimed that Belshazzar was a figment of the writers imagination.Do you know what was later found in Iraq on a clay cylinder? Thats right, a reference to an unknown king called 'Belsarussur' who was the grandson of Nebudcanezza and son of Nabonidus.If daniel really was written in 164 bce, there is no way he would have mentioned Belshazzar because even earlier historian did not name belshazzar as ruler. Daniel knew it was Belshazzar who ruled because it was this very Belshazzar who offered Daniel to be the 3rd ruler in the kingdom.But meh, critics will always claim the bible is fake even when such evidence comes to light. Let them doubt. Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic

Hi Peg, The words used in Genesis 2:7 has nothing to do with modern mankind.
They only have to do with the man formed from the dust of the ground.They have absolutuly nothing to do with a spirit of any kind that I can find. This man existed in the beginning not in the last 7,000 or so years. I have no idea when the beginning was but that is when he existed. As I told PD I don't believe you could write a number big enough to tell when the beginning was, if we could somehow measure the time from then until now.The man formed from the dust of the ground in Genesis 2:7 is not the man that was created in Genesis 1:27. That man was created in the image/likeness of God.God from the word 'elohiym strong's #430 meaning 1) (plural) a) rulers, judges b) divine ones.This is where the trinity comes from. God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.God the Father = all knowledge, mind.
God the Son = Flesh body.
God the Holy Spirit = Spirit
This is simply three different manifestations of one God.The man in Genesis 1:27 was created in like manner.The man in Genesis 2:7 was formed from the dust of the ground and God breathed the breath of life into that form and it became a living soul (being),There is nothing in the plain text about the man in Genesis 2:7 having a spirit of any kind. Therefore to teach he suffered a spiritual death is false.If God is eternal then the man created in Genesis 1:27 and all his descendents are eternal beings and will spend eternity somewhere as they can not become none existent.The physical body we have is not designed to last for eternity therefore it must cease to exist and that is the reason there must be a resurrection in which we receive a physical body that can last for eternity. That body will be like the one Jesus had after His resurrection.I repeat again there is no such thing as spiritual death.When most people are talking about spiritual death they are referring to separation from God. Thus a person who has not been born again would be refered to as being spiritually dead as they are separated from God.Everyone who is born and reached the point that the man in the garden did when he ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is separated from God by that man's disobedience.That is the reason John 3:18 says "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." Your Greek is lousy.I gave you the definition of pneuma and strong's # which you quoted in the message I am replying too. pneuma is translated wind in John 3:8 but a literal translation of the Greek does not justify that usage. A literal translation would be: " the Spirit where he willeth doth blow, and his voice thou dost hear, but thou hast not known whence he cometh, and whither he goeth; thus is every one who hath been born of the Spirit.'"The only place a Greek word is translated breath in the NT is found in Acts 17:25. The Greek word pnoē Strong's #4157 meaning 1) breath, breath of life.The Greek word anemos Strong's #417 1) wind, a violent agitation and stream of air, Is translated wind in several places. Between what lines of what I said are you reading that in?4151 pneuma has always been the third person of the triune God, the Holy Spirit, coequal, coeternal with the Father and the Son.
7307 ruwach has always been wind or breath.
5301 naphach has always been to breathe.
5397 nĕshamah has always been breath.
5315 nephesh has always been soul, self, life, creature, person,God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

So Adam was something like a golem? (A soulless construct made from clay for a specific purpose, and having no share in the world to come) All the geneaological material (toledoth) start with Adam though. When if ever did Adam's descendants get souls? Did they get them by interbreeding with the real people or by some other means? Is there some special significance to all the Bible heroes being descended from the golem, did it make them particularly suitable for being drowned and chased back and forth through deserts and massacred in various ways? The one that still had a hole in its side from being speared that was so big you could stick your hand in there? (Or did you mean some other resurrection, that happened in some other verse?)

But IF that is true, does that make the concept of "spiritual death" unbiblical?And a deeper understanding of Adam's death as latter expounded in the Bible does not make the concept of "spiritual death" unbiblical.That is what I would say. Okay. I'm thinking about it. I have no comment right now. I am thinking about it.

This doesn't seem to be a valid question in reference to the plain text. Here, let's look at the story again We aren't told that the tree of life is made for man at all. In fact, we are quickly given the idea that it has another purpose, and is not intended for the gardener in any way. This becomes even clearer once they have eaten the fruit of one of those trees. They have become a sort of partial god, having superior knowledge; and there is a real danger that they will also make themselves unkillable, and enter into full godhood. This can't be stood for, it upsets some sort of hierarchy, the creatures are overturning the order of creation, and drastic steps have to be taken to stop it, involving other members of the heavenly court stepping up and taking a watch. Edited by Iblis, : splelign

quote:

---

When Paul writes "Even when we were DEAD in offenses, made us ALIVE together with Christ ..."(Eph. 2:5) is that an example of the unbiblical "spiritual death" objected to ?

​

The sinner was DEAD and with Christ was made ALIVE. And "spiritual death" is unbiblical ??

---

Paul's writing style is long and involved. He sets the stage and then makes his point. For this verse his point is explained starting with verse 11.It has become very clear in this thread that the phrase "spiritual death" is an ambiguous phrase used by apologetics. It has nothing to do with the human spirit (an animating or vital principle held to give life to physical organisms or life) or with death (a permanent cessation of all vital functions).IMO, the phrase may have started with Augustine of Hippo in his defense of Original Sin against Pelagius. Augustine vs. PelagiusNature in this usage means disposition. Which matches up with this current meaning of spirit. The usage of the phrase has now come to mean separation from God, which is the state one is supposedly in when one sins. Overall it's another name for sinning.Since the phrase has nothing to do with death, the words translated as death in the OT, cannot automatically be said to be speaking of something other than physical death.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

Yes Paul's writing is long and involved. That to many of us is no reason to teach a deadened human spirit or spiritual deadness, spiritual death is not biblical.If you wish to say "Well, because Paul's writing is long and involved there is no biblical spiritual death" you go ahead. I would not be taking that route.And arguing over it with you I think will not be profitable. But let it be known that some unsacred poets and writers would agree that human life is lacking something though they do not know what it is.Jimi Hendix is an example in a song "I Don't Live Today". In the song he said that he did not LIVE today. He said that whatever he had it was not real life because he felt like he was living at the bottom of a grave.Now I am not saying Jimi Hendrix is equal to the New Testament. I am only saying that the sentiment of some people has been that they did not have a full life, a real life. They felt something missing.If you ask me, I say this is the sense in man of what we might call "spiritual death".I would also like to say that "spiritual death" is not restricted to being a "bad" person. Nicodemus "Victor of the People" by name, was told by Jesus that he needed to be born again. He was a model of his community. But Jesus said man, regardless how ethically good, needed to be born again.A dimension, one whole dimension of human life is "dead" to the unregenerated person. For this reason Jesus said that the DEAD would hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear would live.I will not in this post go into your reasoning from verse 11. I do not feel the need to coerce you to see things as I see them. I may consider your complaint latter and write something for the sake of others who are undecided.I would only add one other matter in this particular post. I don't think or claim that the Bible can be theologically systematized to a total degree. You spoke earlier of inconsistency. And I would agree that 100% total systematic consistency is probably not to be found in the Bible.So I do not attempt to totally systematize theologically the Bible. The very phrased "Died to," "have died," "about to die," "death" are used in a number of different ways.And to look for a total theological systemazation I think is unwise. I do not think, however, that because a total systemization of the subject can be derived that that gives me ground to say "Well, spiritual death is unbiblical." You have a number of people here giving opinions and it may take more time to sort things out.Just like it has been clear in other threads that Evolution is an ambiguous concept used by some "free-thinkers" or agnostics.The lengthy expositons of Paul, the shortage of absolute consistency or systemization, or the varied approaches to the phrase "spiritual death" are not sufficient for me to say "Spiritual Death is Unbiblical".What was dead when Jesus said the DEAD shall hear the voice of the Son of God ? Was the body dead? Was the soul dead? I think not. The human spirit is the best explanation. " ... and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6)What is the human spirit before it is born of the Spirit? It can be discribed as "spiritually dead". I'm sorry.Speaking of His resurrection Jesus promises "Because I live, you also shall live." (John 14:19)But wait a minute. The disciples will LIVE regardless if Jesus lives or not. Right? If He resurrects they will live. But if he stays dead they ALSO will live, unless they are murdered with Him.For Jesus to say that because He lives they also will live srongly implies that they are brought into a new realm of spiritual life. To live in Christ is now life to them and what they had before being in Christ was not counted as this spiritual life. There was a deadness that needed to be enlivened. They were regenerated through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead (1 Peter 1:3).They were "made ... alive ... together with Christ" .For them "the mind set on the flesh is DEATH, but the mind set on the spirit is life and peace" (Romans 8:6)What kind of death is this if not spiritual death? What kind of life is he refering to if not spiritual life? I don't have a lot of that history at my finger tips without further research and I have no comment. You have a lot of church history on the matter phaseology. This does not, to me, demonstrate an unbiblical concept of a physically living person having a spiritual death in them.I don't think a terrible lot of church history needs to be mastered to determine the biblical ground for a spiritual deadness and spiritual enlivening in the Bible. This could be your limiting your knowledge by what you have experienced. You select definitions which confirm your experience and claim that they are the most reasonable linquistic principles on which to judge the matter.You have right to limit your understanding to your experience and provide supporting dictionary definitions. But that does not limit the Bible's usage.And saying "Well spirit is just mood or attitude. So the Bible only means mood or attitude or tendency" is not adaquate for many of us. And based on these thoughts we won't be saying "spiritual death" or "spritiual life" is unbiblical.Language is enfluenced by culture. And the experience of God brings man into kind of new culture. At best one can say "Well, I do not WANT to know about any new culture. And the dictionary says spirit means mood and attitude so that is all I intend to understand the Bible to be talking about."You want to prescribe linquistic limits to support a theological position. I don't think these limitations will render a good number of Bible passages to make that much sense. These are dumbing downs of the Bible. They may be comforting to the Humanist. But I think the loss is theirs. You probably could get away with paraphrases like this in English.Go ahead and read it that way if you want to. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

And to look for a total theological systemazation I think is unwise. I do not think, however, that because a total systemization of the subject can be derived that that gives me ground to say "Well, spiritual death is unbiblical."

---

Maybe if you stop using the word dead, when you aren't really talking about physical death we can understand what you're really talking about. I know there are many creative ways to use the words death, die, died, etc. In the OT, the verses shared were actually referring to physical death, IIRC.If one is attempting to show that these words have been used figuratively, then one needs to explain the usage without using the word in the same way. So stop using the word dead figuratively and actually say what you're talking about.

quote:

---

You have a number of people here giving opinions and it may take more time to sort things out.

---

So you really don't have a clear definition.

quote:

---

What was dead when Jesus said the DEAD shall hear the voice of the Son of God ? Was the body dead? Was the soul dead? I think not. The human spirit is the best explanation.

​

" ... and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6)

​

What is the human spirit before it is born of the Spirit? It can be discribed as "spiritually dead". I'm sorry.

---

You're still just referring to those who aren't following God's will. You need to tell me what spirit is referring to in your question. I have no context to know what you mean by spirit.

quote:

---

What kind of death is this if not spiritual death? What kind of life is he referring to if not spiritual life?

---

Paul is still talking about right and wrong behavior. Those hostile to God will not follow his commands and therefore sin and cannot please God. Those not hostile to God will live in accordance with his will and will follow his commands and therefore will please God.This reflects Plato's belief that flesh is bad and spirit is good. The soul determines the moral direction of the person. So a soul that is hostile to God will not follow his commands. A soul that isn't hostile to God and leans toward the spirit, will follow God's commands.

quote:

---

And saying "Well spirit is just mood or attitude. So the Bible only means mood or attitude or tendency" is not adaquate for many of us. And based on these thoughts we won't be saying "spiritual death" or "spritiual life" is unbiblical.

​

Language is enfluenced by culture. And the experience of God brings man into kind of new culture. At best one can say "Well, I do not WANT to know about any new culture. And the dictionary says spirit means mood and attitude so that is all I intend to understand the Bible to be talking about."

​

You want to prescribe linquistic limits to support a theological position. I don't think these limitations will render a good number of Bible passages to make that much sense.

---

I said the word nature in this usage means disposition. It wasn't a blanket definition of the word nature or spirit. I was showing that that is what Augustine was referring to in his statement, which seems to be where the spiritual death phrase came from.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

I don't generally get into these kinds kinds of accuracy questions because often times there are subtle unknowns in the historical record that make things ambiguous but this is something that I have been interested in recently.If you are trying to claim that Daniel had an early date because he was correct about late Babylonian history then you are going to have to hide in some obscurity. First of all, Belshazzar was never king so you have to hide behind the definition of "king" meaning something else like many apologetic interpreters do. His dad Nabonidus was king and was the last Babylonian king to rule before Persian conquest. The Bible calls Belshazzar the son of Nebudcanezzer which he was not. He was also not his grandson. In fact he was not a blood relative of Neb at all. You'll get around this by claiming that "son" means something other than a literal son like many others do who try to square Daniel with history. They claim "son" meant decendant to the throne which is hardly convincing. Any plain reading of Daniel makes it pretty clear that Daniel was meaning "child of" not "successor king to". (which he wasn't a king anyway....one explanation defeating the other)Moreover, Daniel predicted that Babylon would be violently conquered when historical indications are that it surrendered to Cyrus without a battle (at least the city of Babylon did). But you can get fuzzy there too.Last, just because Daniel wrote of Belshazzar does not mean that a 2nd centry BC Daniel could not have known about him. Your drawing upon a fallacy that the only way Daniel would have known about Belshazzar was if he actually lived in the 6th century BC. There is some evidence of lost writings that existed at the time of a 2nd century BC Daniel that could have mentioned the lineage of the Babylonian kings so its not like Daniel would have been in the dark. Either way, just mentioning Belshazzar does not put Daniel in the 6th century especially considering the other mistakes he makes. Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic

---

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson

HI ICANT Jesus indicated that the same man who was made 'from the beginning' was also the same man who was given a wife and whom he called 'Eve' Matt. 19:3-6 Did you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’ If Jesus believed Adam to be the man who was created in the 'beginning' then I am not going to assume that it was some other man. Im sure you wouldnt say that in the case of Rev 13:14, the pneuma is Gods Holy Spirit.Revelation 13:14And it misleads those who dwell on the earth, because of the signs that were granted it to perform in the sight of the wild beast, while it tells those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the wild beast that had the sword-stroke and yet revived. 15And there was granted it to give breath (Greek pneu′ma; Latin., spiritum; hebrew ru′ach.) to the image of the wild beast..."Also in Habbakak it is used in relation to false gods.Habbakak 2:19 "Woe to the one saying to the piece of wood: O do awake! to a dumb stone: O wake up! It itself will give instruction! Look! It is sheathed in gold and silver, and there is no breath (hebrew Ruach, Greek Pneuma, Latin Spiritus) at all in the midst of it"

Hi Peg, What is the transliteration of the Hebrew word that means man or mankind? It is strong's #H120. For any spirit to be an eternal spirit it has to come from God.God created man and gave him an eternal spirit.
God made satan and gave him an eternal spirit.
God allowed satan to give the beast an eternal spirit.Why would I have a problem with the devil giving an eternal spirit to the image of the beast?If the beast did not have an eternal spirit, what good would it do for it to be cast into the lake of fire? The only way the beast could be tormented day and night for ever and ever would require the beast to be a physical living eternal spirit.Here is a literal translation of Rev 13:15
"and there was given to it to give a spirit to the image of the beast, that also the image of the beast may speak, and [that] it may cause as many as shall not bow before the image of the beast, that they may be killed." What is the problem with a piece of wood or a dumb stone not having a spirit of any kind?Edited by ICANT, : No reason given.

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Hi Jazzns, By comparing the texts of the Elephantine Papyri to the texts of Daniel, scholars have concluded that the textual style of Daniel places the book within the era of the 5th century BCE.The Egyptian document known as the Elephantine Papyri was written between 495 BC and 402.I know naturalist like to claim the 165 BC date because they like to disprove Daniel's prophecy.Even if it was written in 165BC it still prophecied the death of the Messiah and the destruction of Jerusalem over 200 years prior to the destruction.God Bless, Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

I don't know what you mean, if I would stop using it. I entered into the discussion and used it.The Bible uses it. Jesus used it. The apostle Paul used it. If Jesus didn't want to say "the DEAD shall hear the voice of the Son of God ..." then He would have said something else.It is very important that people understand that Christ is the life. "I am the resurrection and the life." (John 11:25)"In Him was life ..." (John 1:4)He is the Bread of life and the Word of life which the apostles handled. He is the water of life and the living water in His pneumatic form. He came that we might have life and have it abundantly (John 10:10).In contrast to all these and many more passages that show Christ and God are the uncreated and eternal life the matter of spiritual death is spoken of.The Bible speaks of death in order to help us realize that God Himself is life. The created life of man needs the uncreated life which is God Himself in Christ as the Spirit. The Bible speaks of the dispensing of this Person - the Life, into man.Against this marvelous contrast it must speak of the seriousness of being without God as life. So it mentions death not only in the physical sense but in the spiritual sense. If you are asking me to hide the truth of spiritual death as anywhere revealed in the Bible, I do not intend to do that.And Adam died on the day he ate of the fruit which he was told not to eat. I do not know how much Moses understood about this. If he meant only the stopping of the heart, that is OK.But the mystery which was hidden from generations has now been manifested to the apostles and prophets in spirit. And if the New Testament apostles say death came into the world through Adam, and Jesus says the DEAD should be left to bury the dead, and the DEAD must hear the voice of the Son of God and live, we may understand something more significant about Adam's process of death.Paul writes: "To me, less than the least of all saints, was this grace given to announce to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ as the gospel and to ENLIGHTEN ... all that they may see what the economy of the mystery is WHICH HAS BEEN HIDDEN IN GOD, who created all things." (Eph. 3:9,10)We need to be enlightened to the mystery of the unsearchable riches of Christ by the apostles. Part of that enlightenment is to see Christ is the divine life that man must receive in addition to his created life. While being alive physically he must be reborn, regenerated. And without this regeneration he has inherited spiritual death in Adam.Perhaps what the New Testament calls enlightenment you dismiss simply as "creative" writing.But this wisdom given to the apostles, Paul says was ordained by God before the foundation of the world: I do not see the apostles creatively "shoe horning" some faulty and error prone commentaries to the Old Testament. I see them speaking the oracles of God and the wisdom of God predestinated beforehand for the carrying out of God's will.If you do not understand something in the Bible, you should not fight against it. At most you put it on the back burner until you gain more understanding. That is right that I have not yet labored on a rigorous definition of spiritual death.I do not think it is really that necessary to prove that a concept of death distinct from the stopping of the physical heart, is refered to in the Bible.A rigorous definition of spiritual death, I don't think is needed, to point out that you jump the gun to announce "Spiritual Death is not Biblical".When Paul writes: do you think he is not refering to "spiritual death" ?Do you wish to dismiss this as just some "creative writing". It may depend on how seriously you take the apostles exhortation. He is speaking about unruly Christian sisters in the church life who instead of giving themselves to hope in God are consummed with being given over to pleasures.In principle that same thing refers to the Christian brothers. Now here in this passage is one of the issues of definition. I believe he is talking about people who have been regenerated. Their human spirit has been quickened with the Holy Spirit. Yet their minds are set on the old nature, the fallen flesh. Remember Paul wrote: I sympathize with you somewhat if you find this confusing. But when I see you fight against the teaching, my sympathy turns into caution because you are not humble to receive the Bible's utterances.If you do not see in these passages a "spiritual death" and more importantly a spiritual divine life, it may be that someday you will appreciate it. You are right that you could be given more backround. Did you know that the human soul and the human spirit can be divided from each other? Many places in the Old Testament are not as clear as this. But this is rather definite. The soul of man and the spirit of man are very close, even kind of stuck to each other. Both are components of the human being. Yet the word of God is a living word and operative. This word is like a sharp two-edged sword. And this living word of God can DIVIDE the human soul from the human spirit right within the person.The word of God can pierce even to the dividing asunder of SOUL and SPIRIT.Just reading this much you should be able to see that "there is a spirit in man". Aside from the soul of man, man has something called a human spirit. It is not easy to discern the difference. BUT ... the living word of God can divide the two. And as it does it can illuminate the thoughts and intentions of the heart.Man is made up of three distinct parts - spirit and soul and body: That is three parts to the human being - spirit AND soul AND body.The new birth takes place in the human spirit. Can you find me a single passage saying that the believer in Christ is born again in her soul ? I can see many passages saying the Lord or the grace of the Lord is with the human spirit. Can you find me one that says the Lord is in the soul ?Paul made a contrast between singing with his mind and singing with his spirit. He made a distinction between praying just with his mind and praying with his spirit. So the spirit is something deeper than the mind which is part of the soul. So if it is not fully developed in the Old Testament it is more revealed in the New. Man has a human soul and man has a human spirit. And the fallen man's spirit is deadened and in a comatose state.He senses that there must be something more to life. He often senses that there is something missing about life but he is not sure what it is. This is the sense of the human spirit not functioning.Christ causes the human spirit to be enlivened, regenerated, really resurrected, made alive, born anew, born from above. "That which is born of the Spirit is spirit"When man is justified upon believing in Jesus Christ the human spirit is enlivened because of the righteousness that has just been imputed to him: Okay, let us look at the entire verse: Justification by faith in Christ leads to the enlivening of the deadened and comatose human spirit.I must stop here.

the hebrew word for man is adam...it means 'of the earth' 1.Where does the bible say that Adam recieved an eternal spirit?2.Where does the bible say Satan has an eternal spirit?3.What is the beast are you referring to?

This is an open question to anyone.
The Apostle John writes to the Christians this: What kind of "death" do you think John is writing about ?It seems reasonable that John is not writing to Christians who have been resurrected physically from the tomb yet. So what kind of "death" could he be saying those not loving are abiding in?And what kind of "death" have those who practice the Christian love have possibly passed out of ?Could such "death" reasonably be thought of as "spiritual" ? Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.