John wrote: > ... there is not a dual reality when it comes to man. > He is mind, body/soul, and spirit. That is what he is. > The three cannot be separated and survive.
Even if this were true, this does not mean that we cannot talk about what each part contributes. When talking about the physical body, I can talk about different organs and tissues, whether they be the heart, the lungs, the stomach, the brain, the muscles, the skin, etc. Being reductionistic is not a sin and it is not improper even if the body cannot exist without all parts connected and functioning together. John wrote: > THAT is why the physical body will be raised ----------- > because there is no life for man apart from the three and > no eternal life apart from God. "That which is flesh" and \ > that "which is spirit" IS A STATE OF MIND (Rom 8:5), The state of mind is described as either carnal or spiritual, but this does not mean that there is not a real flesh and a real spirit that is being talked about. You cannot use the context of Romans 8 to deny the reality of the physical body or to deny the reality of the spirit. John wrote: > You are using a non-bliblical word (which is fine, in > and of itself) to express an dualism that is not taught > in scripture at all, which is not fine. Sorry, but the dualism is taught in the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation. I don't have time to write a book for you right now showing it everywhere. If you are interested, ask, and I will post passages as I have time. You can start with the formation of Adam from the dust of the ground, and what it took to make him alive. John wrote: > Many argue that man is given choices in life that > are "spiritual" and "non-spiritual." Right. This is the state of mind that you referenced in Romans 8. Men can mind things that are spiritual or mind things that are not spiritual (carnal). John wrote: > ALL choices are "spiritual" because man cannot > be separated from such. Wrong, John. Read Romans 8:5 again. "They that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh, but they that are after the spirit the things of the spirit." Some choices are spiritual (motivated by the spirit) and some choices are carnal (motivated by the flesh). John wrote: > As far as I am concerned (and Bill might not agree with > this - input please), your use of "spiritual" is fine as long > as you do not mean to imply a dualism that embraces an > autonomy in each of its two ontological states -- body and > soul living together until judgment day. We are one being, > ontologically speaking, and nothing in scripture denies this > or teaches other wise. Scripture certainly does teach dualism. Please do not be so ignorant. Have you not read in Revelation 6, how the souls of those who were slain were under the altar of God, asking how long they would wait for the judgment? These were conscious souls under the altar of God in heaven? Where were their bodies? In the ground on earth. And have you not read Luke 16, how when Lazarus died, the angels carried him to Abraham's bosom, but the rich man found himself in hell? Where was the rich man's body? Jesus says his body was buried. If you are going to rebuke anyone for teaching dualism, you had better start with rebuking Jesus. Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
