The prison is in lock-down today -- some
kind of weapons violation; hence no one goes in and no one comes out. And
so, for those who may be wondering, I am at home for the time being
and not at work.
Bill wrote > The cross stands
as that which gave them life.
jt: The cross always represents
death. judyt
Judy, you are the one who is constantly ridiculing others for referring
to the Christ event (the life, death, resurrection,
and ascension) rather than to "the cross." If I had said instead that the
Christ event stands as that which gave them life, what would your response
have been? You are being ridiculous.
jt: So far as I'm concerned Bill "the Christ event"
is not biblical language at all; it means something to those
of you who have embraced this distinction. To
me the cross means death - covenant death - which can be
applied to us ONLY as we are willing to die to the
old and embrace the new. Walking after the flesh and
being carnally minded is still death - even on this side of the cross.
jt: I try to exact the same scrutiny on myself and I
want to say what the Bible says. the 2nd death is described in Revelation 21:8
and is different from what Jesus speaks of in Luke 9:60.
Judy, I've already clarified this. Why the
obstinance?
Once again, AND PLEASE TRY TO FOLLOW ALONG WITH ME, I am not
distinguishing between the first death and the second death as mentioned in
Revelation. Let go of that fallacious idea.
jt: But you define Luke 9:60 this way Bill. I
am trying to point out to you that this promotes confusion; it is
so
much easier to allow God's Word to define these
things because it is always consistent and there is no such
confusion. I don't believe seeking truth and
examining it against error is obstinance, it should be normal
christian living.
I am distinguishing between the two deaths mentioned in Jesus' statement:
the first time he uses the word "dead" and the second time he uses the word
"dead." The first reference to "dead" has to be understood as speaking to a
different situation than the second reference to "dead." The first
reference is a metaphor; the second reference is literal.
jt: Both are literal. One is spiritual and the other
physical.
You plug in "spiritual" to satisfy the metaphor, as did Augustine and
many since him. BUT unlike Augustine, you then treat "spiritual
death" itself as a metaphor and not as a literal spiritual death. I will
quote you again: "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 in the last day." Hence, by your own definition
you treat "spiritual death" as a metaphor which speaks to something else. Now,
you don't have to admit this, but if you won't, why don't you just drop it?
You are making a fool of yourself.
jt: Then I was not being clear, I should have used
different words. Spiritual death is as literal as physical
death;
it is walking in sin/ transgression which separates
one from God. Why don't we leave Augustine out of
this Bill since he has nothing to do with anything.
Augustine did not pay the price for my sin and
Augustine didn't draw me to the kingdom of God, nor did he
reveal truth to me; he stands or falls before the same Lord as me and
that is it. Also I have to wonder why it doesn't bother you to make the
accusation above. Is there no fear of the Lord with you
Bill?
Please just stop being so obstinate about this -- either that or go
ahead and embrace Augustine's position and treat your doctrine of
spiritual death in the same way as he: that spiritual death means that
"their" spirit is literally dead.
jt: Augustine may have a doctrine - I don't. I
just accept the clear teaching of God's Word about this.
Then at least you will not have to concede that spiritual death is
metaphorical of something else. If you won't do this, then do whatever you
want: just leave my comments completely out of your considerations.
Bill
jt: Bill, I don't see it as ridicule to say what
the Bible says.
The Bible doesn't say anything about spiritual death. That is
something you are adding. Why don't you treat yourself with the scrutiny
you exact on others? Why don't you say what the Bible says?
jt: I try to exact the same scrutiny on myself
and I want to say what the Bible says. the 2nd death is described in
Revelation 21:8 and is different from what Jesus speaks of in Luke
9:60. Only
disciples were being called to follow the son at this point (Matt 8:22,
Luke 9:60) -
Whom was Jesus calling when he said, "Follow
me, and let the dead bury their own dead"? Do you deny that he was calling
this person to follow him?
jt: He said this to one of his
disciples - they are the ones who travelled with him for 3 1/2yrs; he did
send out the 70 to do the work of the ministry but ppl were not called and
invited to His Kingdom until the Promise was sent on the day of Pentecost
because the covenant was not ratified until there was a death.
And were only certain Jews supposed
to love God with all their hearts, souls, minds, and strength,
and the rest were exempt? What do you suppose this Jew was not
doing when he refused to follow God's Son? You don't have to answer
these questions, Judy; they are rhetorical: one of those confusing
linguistic constructs. IN OTHER WORDS, they are so obvious as to not
require answers.
jt: They are only obvious in your mind
Bill. Loving God under the Old Covenant was obeying the law of
Moses. The ministry of the Son was teaching about and introducing a "New
and Living Way" available to them upon his death. I would like to point out that the same _expression_
is used in the parable of the Prodigal Son who was dead in the pigpen and
returned to life after a change of heart (now is alive). It is also
used in Ephesians 2:1 and in 1 Timothy 5:6.
Judy, you are the one who made a big issue out of
distinguishing things before the cross and after the cross.
jt: Things - having to do with covenants
Bill. Before the cross it was through Moses and then it changed. Do
you have a problem with this??
I simply satisfied your criterion and asked questions
pertaining to a time prior to the cross. Yes, "dead" is used of people on
both sides of the cross. However after the cross it is used in a past
tense, i.e, you were dead.
jt: More accurately "after the New
Birth" In Ephesians 2:1 Paul is addressing the church. the
cross in and of itself did not change the hearts of those who would not
receive God's Word. The ones who received the power to become sons
of God (John 1:12) are the ones who "received Him"
The cross stands as that which gave them life. Bill
jt: The cross always represents death.
judyt
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 7:17
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death
I have not one time claimed that Jesus'
statement pertained to physically dead people burying the dead.
This is your confusion, Judy -- not mine. If you are so base as to draw
that conclusion, how are you competent to draw any conclusions?
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 2:57
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Spiritual death
Mar 12.30 'And you shall love the LORD your God with
all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all
your strength.' This is the first commandment.
I told Izzy that I thought there was a spiritual
element included in Jesus' statement: "Follow me, and let the dead
bury their own dead." But I also told her that I thought it was not
just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: "those who reject
Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and
spirit." To which Judy responded with ridicule,
implying instead that Jesus' statement was only in
reference to the spiritual aspect, i.e., it was a reference to
spiritual death and nothing else.*
jt: Bill, I don't see it as
ridicule to say what the Bible says. There is no way a
physically dead person can get out there and dig a hole in order to
bury another physically dead person now is there? In
scripture this concept of death is that of being separated from God because of sin which as I
have been saying is what happened to A&E in the garden. Anything
else is confusion.
Judy, if first
century Jews prior to the cross were called to love God with
all their hearts, souls, minds, and strength, what do you
suppose they were not doing when they refused to follow his
Son?
jt:
Only disciples were being called to follow the son at this point
(Matt 8:22, Luke 9:60) - Also I would like to point out that the same _expression_ is
used in the parable of the Prodigal Son who was dead in the pigpen
and returned to life after a change of heart (now is alive).
It is also used in Ephesians 2:1 and in 1 Timothy 5:6.
judyt
Bill
* 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? ... 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.
