|
Nice thoughtful reply, Debbie. I look
forward to DM’s response. I must add a comment regarding Bill’s
statement that often complicated just means something new or different. I
agree at times. But most of the time “complicated” theology takes
many paragraphs or pages to explain (or in my opinion explain-away scripture).
It seems to me that true theology can be stated fairly briefly and succinctly.
Even a little child should be able to grasp the truths that are essential to
salvation. If it requires a PhD, chances are it’s a construct of From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Debbie Sawczak David: here is a
response--and maybe a bulkier one than you would've liked, sorry!--to your
three questions to me about spirit. For anyone not into the topic: feel free to
ignore. 1) Yes, I agree without hesitation that there is such a
thing as spirit. There are beings who are not material. But my answer would be
less ready if you are asking whether I believe in a "part" of a human
being which is the spirit, distinct from other "parts", separated at
death. My thinking on this is in flux, but I am currently considering a No.
I take no support for its existence from the passage in
Revelation 6, given that this is a vision containing plenty of symbolic
imagery. As for God breathing into Adam at creation, this doesn't prove
anything about the separate existence of a spirit. Nor do I think parables such
as the one about Lazarus and the rich man are good foundation for this sort of
thing, as it is likely that Jesus drew on familiar
conventional ideas in which to couch his main point, whether those
ideas were accurate or not. And I think it is possible to read other biblical
references to a person's spirit without having to posit a distinct entity.
"The spirit returns to God who gave it" could easily be understood as
just referring to life, the power of being alive, rather than as a substantive
thing. (If you interpret it as the latter, note that the generality of the
statement obliges you to reckon with all human spirits going to be
with God at death.) I believe humans are unique among all earthly creatures in
various important ways, including their capacity for personal and
intimate relationship with God who is transcendent and nonmaterial, but I
don't think that necessarily entails an extra "part" called a spirit.
Spirit could also just be the name for that capacity or for that aspect of our
existence. And of course such a relationship integrally involves our whole
being anyway, including the physical. When a person dies, in this view, she is
thoroughly dead until the resurrection. I remember long ago when my
brother died, his Christian Reformed pastor said at the graveside, "The
next thing David will hear is the sound of the archangel's trumpet!"
This was a surprise at the time, from an evangelical preacher, but not
objectionable. It doesn't conflict with "absent from the body--present
with the Lord" (always accompanied by a snap of the fingers by Sunday
School teachers), because that is how it would be experienced by the
person. (There is always the problem, see, of the interface between time
and eternity, which I can't really get my head around, and that's OK.) When
Lazarus was raised, I envision it more as a whole person being
re-animated, rather than his spirit being plucked from Sheol (or
heaven or wherever) and re-inserted into his body. I imagine him then sort
of picking up where he left off (as opposed to experiencing
the "culture shock" of returning to earthly life!). I am not certain, though. I do wonder about the activity of
Christ between his death and his resurrection, about which a little is said in
Scripture, and Moses and Elijah visible at the transifguration (though I can
think of different ways to understand this; the time/eternity thing enters into
it again), and some other things. The idea that there IS a distinct thing
called the spirit is not altogether implausible to me, but if that is
true, I don't think the spirit is "extricable" from the rest of a
living person in any meaningful way; i.e., it is impossible to isolate things
done by the spirit. There are no "spiritual" vs
"physical" acts; we can never somehow leave spirit or body out
of any behaviour. The body would not be a container for the spirit, and
their relationship wouldn't consist in merely "affecting" one
another, but of some more fundamental interdependence. The bodiless state
between death and the resurrection would then be some kind of aberration,
de-struction--with the spirit no longer intact either. (It's even possible that
there are body and spirit, inseparable, dying together--a sort of combination
of the two views.) I guess I have a hard time thinking of a human being as an
assemblage of different kinds of things, each having its own "life".
A human is one kind of thing, one life. (But then, you are familiar with my
revulsion for dualism generally.) 2) Your second question is part of the problem I
have with the "distinct spirit" view. As soon as you regard
the body and spirit as separate, you have the body being the direct
product of sexual reproduction, its features determined genetically, while
the spirit has to be snuck into the body at fertilization by God,
who creates it specially and directly. That means you have a sinless,
uncorrupted, spirit thwarted by a sinful, corrupt, diseased body, with
each person's spirit undergoing its own individual Fall (or maybe resisting it
in some cases?); I don't believe that reflects reality. If I take the view
outlined in the first two paragraphs of (1) above, however, it obviates question
(2). 3) Similarly with this question. If I don't think in terms
of two distinct entities of body and spirit, I can say that we genetically
inherit from our parents all kinds of traits manifesting themselves in the way
we relate to God. (And that's not to say that all traits are unalterable, or
that we have no choice or responsibility when it comes to what to cultivate, or
that God can't heal all manner of conditions.) If you regard body and
spirit as distinct entities, I don't see how you can have spirit-traits
(whatever those are) inherited via physical genes. So in your case, your
answer couldn't be other than No. Of course, we also acquire all kinds of
attitudes and behaviours from our parents (and others) by learning, and there
continues to be debate about what is inherited and what is learned.
We are formed as well, cumulatively, by our tiniest experiences and
choices. I don't think it's necessary to posit a spirit in order to explain the
differences between twins. I am keeping this file (along with others!) wide open. Both
views leave certain things without satisfactory explanation--at least so far. I
grew up with the spirit+body view and it affects the way I understand a lot of
things; departing from that understanding entails a fair bit of reintegrating,
and that takes some study and prayer and "percolation
time". But that shouldn't and doesn't put me off. I would like to
repeat here what someone else said not long ago on TT (Bill, I think), that
quite often when we contrast simple with complicated, we are really only
contrasting familiar with unfamiliar--like the grammar of our mother
tongue with that of another language. I should add that "spiritual" is used in
opposition to both "physical" and "carnal" (or
"natural", "unspiritual", or various other terms). These
oppositions shouldn't be mixed up. Some TTers who shall remain
nameless mix them up fairly often. It doesn't help that some
Englishes use "flesh" for the counterpart of
"spirit" in both oppositions. Debbie P.S.: Note that, in any case, I don't believe in three
distinct entities per person! (I hope there would be a good "binding
agent" for the soul and spirit after death!) Occam would turn over in his
grave. Not that anybody here cares about that. ----- Original Message ----- From: " To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 12:53 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death > Debbie wrote: |
- RE: [TruthTalk] Spirit ShieldsFamily
- Re: [TruthTalk] Spirit Debbie Sawczak
- RE: [TruthTalk] Spirit ShieldsFamily
- RE: [TruthTalk] Spirit Kevin Deegan
- RE: [TruthTalk] Spirit ShieldsFamily
- Re: [TruthTalk] Spirit Debbie Sawczak
- Re: [TruthTalk] Spirit David Miller
- Re: [TruthTalk] Spirit Debbie Sawczak
- Re: [TruthTalk] Spirit knpraise
- Re: [TruthTalk] Spirit Debbie Sawczak
- Re: [TruthTalk] Spirit David Miller
