Bill wrote > Jesus knows that his hearers will realize
that dead people cannot bury dead people. Hence he knows that they will not
be able to take his statement literally; they will have to conclude that the
first death is representative of something other than yet similar
to the second death: in other words, they will know it is a
metaphor.
Bill writes: I actually don't think we've got that
much left to argue about. Both you and Judy have said that you do not
think of "spiritual death" as literally being dead in the spirit.
Hence you are both treating your concept as a metaphor, whether you
realize it or not, and so I don't really have an issue with either of your
positions.
jt: Why can't we just call
life what God calls it and death what God calls it? Why do we have
to qualify with all of these advanced linguistics?
In response to David's expressed concerns, Judy wrote:
This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are
physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will
inherit both at the last day.
And in response to her, you (Izzy) wrote: A "spiritually
dead" person is going to hell when he physically dies. He already
doesn't "get it" about things of the Spirit. And you also wrote to
me, If folks in that condition die to today they are
hell-bound. ... It simply defines for us that they are not
actually physically dead
yet. These statements treat "spiritual death" in a metaphorical sense
and not a literal one.
jt: Sounds to me as though
you are evading the point Bill - what difference does the word make life
is life and death is death so far as God is concerned - now what does He
mean by this concept?
You ask in a separate post what the difference is
between us? The difference is this: I let the word
"death" or "dead" supply the metaphor without adding "spiritual" to
it. You add a word and then treat the two --
spiritual + death -- as a metaphor for something else, as you both
explain above.
jt: I have a question. What kind of death
is God talking about then? In the garden Adam died the day he ate
from the wrong tree, yet he lived another
960yrs physically and the whole time he had a working body, a conscious
soul, and a spirit (albeit one that had lost communion with God).
Since a metaphor is defined as a similitude reduced to a single word
- your definition is in error. God is not using similitude or
metaphor here - When He says "death" he
means "death" and since the death Adam experienced that day was not
physical, nor was it alzheimers (brain or
soul death). What do you suppose it was?
Why do I have a problem with this? Because of that
centuries-old doctrine of "spiritual death," which literally does refer to
one's spirit as being dead until it is regenerated.
jt: You are not dealing with the truth of
scripture then. You are dealing with some "centuries old
doctrine of man"
Neither of you seem to "get it" that "spiritual
death" is not biblical language; it is a doctrine which speaks to biblical
concepts; it is a synthesis, a conclusion. You have picked up on the
language of this doctrine, but the concepts that it represents are treated
differently by you than by those who adhere to the classic doctrine.
jt: No Bill - You are the one hamstrung by this
doctrine. I am not dealing with any such thing and neither is Izzy;
the dead burying their dead is not speaking of physical or soulish death
since they were able to dig a hole and had presence of mind enough not to
let a dead body just lay around.
Yet, how am I to know that this is what you are doing
when I see you using the language of that old doctrine? I can't know
that you are using it differently, until after I have been through a
very long process with you. Why not drop the language and then, when it is
necessary, explain your concept by using "death" as the metaphor which
speaks to your perceived conclusions? At least this way people will not be
so likely to misunderstand you going in.
jt: Why would Izzy and I
assume that everyone we speak to has a load of "centuries old" doctrines
of men to wade through?
I had none until I began
reading extra biblical stuff and as soon as I saw the conflict with the
written word I layed it down fast. My daughter-in-law has a newly
energized hunger for God and she is asking me about commentaries because
we live in a fast food era where we want everything yesterday.
However, I hesitate because I don't want to fill that God-given hunger
with error that will slow her down. Better for her to see it in
God's Word.
And yes, there is a spiritual element included in
this metaphor, but it is actually quite more than spiritual: those who
reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul,
and spirit. I would like to quote a verse and then ask you a couple
questions. "Then Jesus said to them, 'A little while longer the light
is with you. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you; he
who walks in darkness does not know where he is going'"
(John 12.35). Do you agree with me that the "darkness" in which the
rebellious man walks is not literal darkness; in other words he may be
walking in daylight, yet still be walking in darkness in accordance with
this passage? If you agree with me, it is because you are able to
recognize a metaphor in Jesus' statement. "Darkness" here refers to a
state other than literal darkness. Do you agree with me?
jt: This is not a metaphor either Bill - it is
spiritual reality. Satan and his demons are darkness. God is
light and in Him is no darkness at all. When we will not come to the light, or walk in the
light - darkness is there to pursue us. Nothing
metaphoric
about
that.
Allow me to quote a portion from the following
verse: "While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may
become sons of light." Do you recognize the metaphorical thrust
in these words? Jesus is not asking these people to worship light as
an abstract energy, nor does he want them to be fire worshipers or
children of the sun; he expects them to worship instead that which is
represented by the word "light." In other words, he expected them to draw
a correct inference from the metaphorical language he employed. He
expected them to pick up on the metaphor and understand by it that he
wants them to believe in him, that they might become his followers. Do you
agree with me?
jt: Jesus Words are not metaphor Bill. They
are Spirit and they are Life. A biblical metphor is in Psalm 91:4
where it speaks of God's feathers and his wings - We know he is not a
bird.
This is the same thing which is happening with the verse
you are asking me about: "Follow Me, and let the dead bury their own
dead." Jesus knows quite well that he has employed a
metaphor in this statement. He knows that his hearers will realize
that dead people cannot bury dead people. Hence he knows that they will
not be able to take his statement literally; they will have to conclude
that the first death is representative of
something other than yet similar to the
second death: in other words, they will know it is a metaphor. And
so, what will they conclude that this metaphor is representative of? They
will conclude that it is representative of their
condition in refusal of him. Yes, this condition includes a
spiritual aspect, but not only that. They were
entirely helpless and hopeless without him; and it was very
important for them to draw that conclusion; hence they needed to realize
that he was telling them that in a state of
denial, they were as good as dead, as hopeless and helpless as
the guy who was about to be buried.
jt: You sure make
something terribly complicated out of one sentence Bill. How would
you expect thest ppl to have such a
wide ranging
overview which includes first and second deaths? Jesus was sent to
the lost sheep of the house of Israel
remember?
God's back-slidden covenant ppl born under the law and his ministry
consisted of travelling around teaching and healing all who were
oppressed
of the devil. How would these ppl have refused something that had
not yet been offered?
John's baptism was
one of repentance and Jesus taught Israel about the Kingdom of God which
became available post
resurrection. judyt
