Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death

[knpraise]

 

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 12:21:48 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Since this "spiritual condition" you speak of includes the physical body  -  the correct word would be "dead"  or "death.'   

 

jt: Why not allow scripture to interpret scripture JD? Death scripturally can be either the absence of spiritual

life or the end of days absence of breath because of sickness and disease or old age. Both are valid.

 

LOL, Judy.  You admonish me to "let scripture interpret scripture" and they you off me NO scripture.  

 

Look, what Bill is trying to get across is that aside from the metaphorical language used to teach biblical concepts,

the reality is this:  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.  

 

jt: Why not see what the scriptures say about this and if they don't agree with Bill then you can decide whose

report you will believe.  1 Thess 5:23,24 speaks of the God of Peace sanctifying us completely and identifies the

complete man as spirit, soul, and body.  All three are to be preserved blameless.  Now if they are not to be

thought of separately then why are these verses in the Bible

 

You have used my words if you believe that "total man" and "complet man" speak ofthe same unity.   I do.   My body is made up of physical components.  The components of a man are body, soul and spirit.  Man is not complete without all three. 

 

 

and why does Heb 4:12 speak of the separation

of spirit and soul.  This word of God can distinguish between, spirit and soul, between joints and marrow and between the thoughts of the heart and the intentions of the heart  (often, two very different things.)   This verse has nothing to do with the subject at hand. 

 

I would think these issues are important since the Word of God addresses them.

 

I agree, so lets use scripture that speaks to the subject at hand and stay on point, shall we? 

 

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), 

 

jt: I believe you are wrong about this JD. 

 

I was quoting scripture, Judy.  Those who are of the flesh are those who HAVE THEIR MINDS SET ON THINGS OF THE FLESH. Those who are of the Spirit have their minds set on things of the Spirit  ........................m  Romans 8:5.   You can believe I am wrong all you want -- but I am hanging with Paul on this one. 

 

 

 The rich man in Hades who wanted Lazarus to come and help him -

did he have his body down there with him? 

 

No Judy  --  he just had a tongue !!!   I will be back.   I have to go into the other room and laugh for a while. 

 

 

 When Jesus went and preached to the spirits in prison - where are

their bodies?  This is important - If you can't identify flesh then how are you going to keep from walking in it?

You will never get out of captivity that way and the body you are in right now is not going to heaven the way

it is.    Of course it isn't.   What in this world are you talking about.   Our bodies will be raised and then transformed into some form of which we know nothing. 

 

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. 

 

jt: And you and your friend use a non-biblical word to express a tritheism that is not taught in scripture. Godhead

is the scriptural term

 

"Godhead" is an English interpretation of a biblical (read:Greek) word.  In other words, "Godhead" is not a biblical word  --  it is an interpretation.   A better word may be "essence."   "Trinity" is a non-bliblical word that gives us the FAther, the Son and the Spirit  (that's three ) .  When we say "the trinity" we are saying "the three."  

 

 

and mankind is also a triune being.  How is it that you can accept all of these non-biblical

concepts concerning the Godhead (where does anyone get the idea that there is dancing going on?) and yet

refuse to accept the concept that our bodies contain a soul and spirit which harmonize and work together the

same way the Godhead does ie none is complete without the others and they submit one to the other.

 

I am sorry, Judy, but there is nothing in the above with which I disagree.   How does your point argue against mine/   I missed  it.

 

Many argue that man is given choices in life that are "spiritual" and "non-spiritual."  ALL  choices are "spiritual" 

because man cannot be separated from such.  

 

jt: I wouldn't argue with your point above, but I would add that there are two spiritual kingdoms vying for the

allegiance of manking and we need to know which one we are communing with and walking in lock-step with.

 

Apparently the flat tire has been fixed and the auto is running down the road in good shape.   Amen to the above. 

 

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.  

 

jt: Now you are verging off into philosophy JD.  How are we ever going to try the spirits and prove what is of God

if you are constantly going off into mixture?  Ontology is a metaphysical term.  Can we use the same plainness of

speech Paul spoke of in 1 Cor to discuss spiritual realities - Please JD?

 

"Ontology" has to do with our "state of being;  all that goes into making us what we are."

Plug that definition into the above and it will make some sense to you.   I am not going to speak fourth grade to you.  

 

Since man is a spirit filled being  (John 3:21;  Phil 2:12-13) he destroys himself when he tries to live his life apart

from God - such is impossible and death is its only result. 

 

jt: Ppl can be demonized for a long time before God's mercy runs it's course and physical death ensues. Look at

how long he gave the Amorite nations - 400 years wasn't it?  Before He said - That's it.  Today we have all kinds

of weird spiritualities calling themself godly who will also inherit the wind unless they repent and turn.  I miss the connection between your point and mine. 

 

This is not some liberal teaching that takes us away from God  !!!   Such a conclusion is thoughtless bordering. 

 

jt: Any teaching that ignores or negates God's holiness and his justice and focuses upon his love to the exclusion

of all else is a liberal teaching and will take people away from God.

 

Amen to that sister!!  Seriously.   Amen !!!

 

Rather, it puts God in man and offers man a choice  -  to accept this gifted presence and live,   or reject what cannot be rejected and die. 

 

jt: Only one problem JD. God does not go where He is not invited - just because the worlds (and we) are held together

by the Word of His Power does not mean that He is inside every person.  Repentance must precede baptism.

 

Since the reconciliation  (and even before, perhaps), His presence within is a part of our ontology  -  our being.   And I have given scripture on this several times.  You offer none in the above statement, by the way  (and as usual). 

 

This teaching insists upon repentance  (a change of mind), preaching to the lost that they must stop thinking they are autonomous AND ACTING OUT THAT THOUGHTLESSNESS, and accept what is given to them and live as if LIFE were an integral part of who they are because that is the way it is.     JD

 

jt: Not necessarily; calling the unrighteous righteous is not something I would want to be part of.    Yet, God did this very thing when he accepted faith in the place of our (failing ) righteousness..........................as Denver's Resident Prof puts it,   "perpetually."   

 

 

It is as bad as

partaking of another man's sin.  Ppl who are right with God know it - they don't have to be told.

 

Huh???

 

If they don't know

it and are interested then they need ministry.  This all encompassing "positional truth" theory is error en masse. 

 

I love you guys!   You just wrote these words:  Can we use the same plainness of

speech Paul spoke of in 1 Cor to discuss spiritual realities - Please    jt   And then you adopt a philosophical stance in characterizing my comments while making no sense at all in that criticism.   Can you spell "hypocrite"  Judy?   Now, do not mistake me, here.   I am not calling you a hypocrite  .............   but do you understand why this comes up in view of the above?  

 

 Someone has taken a sliver of truth and run with it rather than waiting on the Lord.   jt

 

Yes they have!!   Amen and amen. 

 

From: Judy Taylor <jandgtaylor1@juno.com>

And since it is the spiritual condition under discussion, this would be "spiritually dead" right JD?

 

And why not go with the "biblical" word  "dead,"  Judy?