Jump to content

OpenMind

Non-Conformist Theology
  • Content Count

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About OpenMind

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Philippians 3:21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself. This is a clear reference to the last day resurrection, which Paul also describes in 1 Corinthians 15. It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
  2. It kind of sounds like we're on the same wave length, but I'm not sure. Are we in agreement then that neither Isaiah 11 nor Job 32 are referring to a spiritual entity inside our body that lives on after death?
  3. You said not knowing the first thing about the trinity is risky business. I'm just wondering why you think that's risky.
  4. Job 32:8 Surely a spirit is in man, And the breath of the Mighty One Doth cause them to understand. The word translated as spirit in Job 32:8 is ruach, which means breath, wind, spirit. The word "breath" in that same verse is from the word neshamah. Neshamah is primarily "breath" but can also be translated as "breath of life", which is the breath of God, and in this case obviously he is speaking of the breath of God. I believe "spirit" is the most logical translation of the word ruach in Job 32:8 but not in the sense of an entity, rather the attributes of character, in this case "the spirit of understanding". If you read the entire passage you'll see that Elihu the son of Barachel was speaking and explaining that he had stayed quiet because he was the youngest and believed he should let the elders speak because age brings understanding, but here he's explaining that he realized that age does not bring wisdom, rather the breath of God brings wisdom, which he has. But it is a spirit in man, And the breath of the Almighty gives them understanding. In other words he's speaking of the "spirit of understanding" that is received from God. This is the only context in which the use of the word spirit here makes sense. Coincidentally, this is the same "spirit of understanding" that Isaiah spoke of. Isaiah 11:2 And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord;
  5. Betha, I think the scripture blast was exactly the point of his post. It's a common strategy in a debate that can't be won to post an overwhelming amount of random references, hoping that nobody will actually make the effort to verify whether they say what you claim they say so that all those meaningless references appear as overwhelming evidence. Thankfully, it's easy enough to copy and paste all those references into biblegateway.com and see them all on one page which quickly reveals the farce.
  6. I appreciate the effort, but you must admit that claiming we need to join together two spirits to make one is simple nonsense. Instead of trying to force this doctrine to fit into the scriptures, try letting scripture tell you what you are. That would be a good starting point. Are you a body, or are you a spirit? Establish that and go from there.
  7. This is a question that nobody can answer, because it brilliantly exposes the lie of immediate life after death. Once a person admits that this simple logic does not reconcile with main stream teaching, the flood gates of truth can open.
  8. This is nice, but a bit of a stretch don't you think?
  9. I'm not sure how you link confusion about trinitarian doctrine with false doctrines, yet you seem to do just that when you say "that's risky business". Do you think being unclear about trinitarian doctrine leads to false doctrines?
  10. Do any of those scripture verses you cite actually say what you claim they say? I don't believe they do. In fact, most of your references there are completely random and unrelated, so why don't you, for each of your two statements above, post the actual words of the verse that you think most closely resembles your own statement and then we can go from there.
  11. My question still stands. If you are already an immortal spirit, why would the body need to be transformed into an immortal spirit? And why would you need to be joined with it? You say "the body without the spirit is dead", which is of course true (though not using the definition of "spirit" as you see it), but when the body is resurrected it is not raised a natural body, but a spiritual. So again I ask, if you are already an immortal spirit, why would you need a spiritual body to go along with that immortal spirit? What's the point? My point being, not that the body will not be resurrected as a spiritual body, because it certainly will, but that in it being so, we do not need also another spirit as our body becomes the immortal spirit we crave. In other words, when our bodies are resurrected and transformed, that's all we need. This extra spirit that you guys believe in, is completely unnecessary and in fact impossible to reconcile with the resurrection since with it we are already immortal and spiritual, the entire point of the resurrection. It's an obvious conundrum. Not sure why you can't see it.
  12. Why would you not want to share your evidence? Do you think you're doing me a favour that I have to pay you for it? I'll be happy to answer your question, whether you share your evidence or not because it's not a competition or adversarial discussion to me, but I'm not sure what you're referring to. Please restate the question.
  13. The KJV is not translated word for word, but neither is the NIV. Can you please post the source for your Greek. Thank you.
  14. Here's something else to consider for all those who believe the dead are living in heaven. Considering the story of the death and resurrection of Lazarus in John 11, why when Martha said "I know he will rise again on the last day" did Jesus not comfort her by saying "He's living right now in heaven"? And why, if the people knew he was living in heaven would they want him to come back? Wouldn't they be happy for him and want him to stay in a place so much more wonderful than earth where he would surely suffer again? And why when John recounted the resurrection of Lazarus made he no mention of "his spirit" returning to his body? In fact, there was no reference to what happened to Lazarus' spirit at all. And wouldn't Lazarus have said upon his resurrection, "why did you bring me back? I was happy in heaven."? Nobody spoke about where Lazarus was and wondered if he went to heaven or hell. Nobody spoke about Lazarus as though he was "living" as a spiritual entity. Nobody comforted the other by saying he's in heaven. Nobody mentioned heaven at all. Why is that? I mean, if your concept of immediate life after death is true, then wouldn't such a critical part of our universe be talked about in scripture at the very least in such a detailed recounting of the events surrounding Lazarus' death and resurrection? Wouldn't the whereabouts of his "spirit" be the most integral part of the story? And what, if death is not death, would a resurrection really mean? It wouldn't be bringing somebody back from the dead if he was really still alive. It would be about bringing somebody's spirit back to their old body for the selfish reasons of those left behind, and would Jesus really facilitate such a transaction, knowing that Lazarus is in a better place in heaven? Think about that.
  15. None of your examples prove your point. It seems to me you didn't fully read my OP because I addressed some of these examples there, and my explanation in the OP covers the rest of your examples as well, but for the sake of simplicity I'll recap here. Into thine hand I commit my spirit. The word "spirit" refers to the breath of God, which is our very life as per Genesis 2:7. When we die, we give up our last breath and we lose our life. This is what it's saying, the same as when Jesus gave up his spirit in your example of Luke 23:46. Jesus gave into the hands of the Father his breath of life. In other words, he gave his life for the purposes of the Father. Genesis 2:7 also refutes your statement that you "have a soul", as it explains that any living creature is a soul. We don't have souls. We are souls. The Hebrew word used in that verse is Nephesh and you can read about it here: https://biblehub.com/hebrew/5315.htm The "spirit of bondage" refers not to an entity but to the characteristics of bondage itself. Similar to how we use phrases like "school spirit", "Christmas spirit" or "the spirit of giving". These "spirits" are not entities, but refer to the qualities that form character. The same applies to "spirit of adoption". You rightly pointed out that the word "spirit" is translated from the Greek word pneuma. So if you looked this up you must know that it can mean "spirit, breath or wind". The context determines which of those applies. When "spirit" applies, it is a reference to character. When breath applies, it is a reference to the life that God gave us in Genesis 2:7. Romans 8:16 - The spirit itself bears witness with our spirit. This one also refers to the qualities of our character, as that is it which, when in sync with the Holy Spirit, confirms we are children of God. None of your examples claim or validate your claim that we are an immortal spiritual entity living inside of a temporary shell. In fact, that concept is found nowhere in scripture, only in the inferences of people and the imagination of Hollywood. It seems that people are very attached to this concept of going to heaven upon death and it's a nice thought, so I understand the appeal, but if you truly open your mind and care not what you want, but care only what the scriptures say, then you should be able to see it. Personally I find comfort in knowing that upon death I'll know nothing. I will feel nothing and my consciousness will cease. It will be like going into surgery and being put to sleep knowing that you'll miss all the bad stuff and when you wake up things will be better. That's a comfort to me. One last thing. You don't even need to find my explanations of your scriptures convincing enough to override your own beliefs. You need only to find them plausible in light of the other scriptures I pointed out which say that we are dust and that the dead know nothing. In other words, start with those very clear scriptures and then compare the irrefutability of those with the clarity of your examples and see how you can make them mesh exactly as they are and without inserting extra words. If you can't make them mesh then your Bible contradicts itself. Perhaps start with John 6:39 and admit that the resurrection happens on the last day as Jesus plainly said. That alone contradicts the notion of immediate entry into heaven. And putting aside all of my explanations here, this is all really quite simply settled by common sense, knowing that we are to be transformed into immortal spirits on resurrection day, how then can it be that we are already immortal spirits today, as you claim? What then would be the point of resurrection day?
×
×
  • Create New...