[TruthTalk] Fw: JOHN: An extended discussion on Person/Persons/Personhood including you, BT and, DM

[Lance Muir]

FYI: Izzy, Judy, Kevin & Dean.   THANKS TO THE BISHOP FOR THIS FINE WORK!     ----- Original Message ----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lance Muir Sent: March 10, 2006 11:52 Subject: Re: JOHN: An extended discussion on Person/Persons/Personhood including you, BT and, DM Well,  just a few weeks ago -  Jan or the first of Feb.   And a rather good discussion  (Bill was in on this one) back in July  of last year.    This is Bill sometime around the end of July of 05   Okay, I will address your question and then try to summarize my position. I chose not to answer your question for the following reason: implicit in your wording is the assumption that we can separate the spirit aspect of personhood from the other aspects, the whole of which integrates to form what we call "persons," and that we can then address that aspect in abstention of the others. I do not accept that premise as it relates to our discussion, and therefore could not answer your question in the form it was structured.  In other words, I stumped you, huh? J   When the biblical authors speak to living subjects of their present or prior state of death, they are speaking metaphorically of their entire person; e.g., when Paul writes that his readers had been dead in trespasses and sin, he is speaking of their entire state of being and not just about their spiritual condition. The spirit aspect of their personhood was no more dead and no more alive than the rest of their being. So you think a person cannot be spiritually dead until they are physically dead? If a person is physically alive, he is also spiritually alive??? He is speaking metaphorically about the hopelessness and helplessness of their entire former existence in the depravity of their fallen state. I mplicit in his use of the term "dead" is the conveyance that they could do nothing of themselves to remedy the fact that they were doomed in that former state.  Agreed, of course.    I hope this will satisfy your request and trust that we have pretty much exhausted the need to continue this discussion.  No, not really, but I think you must be tuckered out, Bill.  I think if I keep pointing out the holes in your theory, so to speak, you might get either really angry or have to give up and agree with me once in a while.  J   Thank you for your patience and the charity with which you conducted yourself. It is a pleasure to converse with you when we are not nipping at each others heels. God bless you,  Absolutely likewise, Bill, and thanks, as it was enjoyable.  izzy   Bill