Matt 10:28 does God really "destroy BOTH" Body AND soul in fiery hell??

[BobRyan]

Easy (softball lob) question being left as an exercise for the reader -

In the text below is Abraham being referenced as "the DEAD" or "The Living" in CHRIST's words below "Regarding the Resurrection of THE DEAD"


Matt 22
31 ""But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God:
32 " I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB'?He is not the God of the dead but of the living.''



2nd "easy" question left as an exercise for the reader.

How does Christ's logic PROVE that there MUST be a resurrection for ABRAHAM in order for the two statements of fact to still be "true"?



3rd (but hard) question left to the reader -- "How could you have missed this in reading Matt 22 so many times in the past?"

 

[Andre]

We have been over this one many times already. Again this is speaking about the thoughts of men in the presence of men, not in the presence of God. When man dies he surely will have thoughts in the presence of God—thoughts of regret, of sorrow, and then for others thoughts of rejoicing. But for all, after death there will be thoughts. They will not perish in eternity. Only in relation to others still living on the earth will they perish. But you don’t like to leave things in their context. You will pull any verse out of its context just to support a damnable heresy (what the Bible itself calls it).

This is, of course, a strategy that the opponent of "soul sleep" must employ in order to preserve his position. There is absolutely no justification for adding the "only in respect to other men" qualification to the "his thoughts perish" statement. This approach of inserting qualifications like this can allow one to get away with anything - why not add any unstated qualification one wants? How about giraffes - I choose to interpret "a man's thoughts perish" as "a man's thoughts perish in relation to giraffes only". Boy, this is easy.

DHK argues "context". Does context actually support his view. It clearly does not do this. Psalm 146 is about the trustworthiness, faithfulness, power, and compassion of God. If the context were clearly about a life in heaven that began immediately after physical death, then perhaps one could argue that "his thoughts perish" has to mean "his thoughts perish only as expressible to other men". But the context is not this at all. In order for the "context" argument to work, the context would need to give us a reason to reject the "plain reading" - that man's thoughts entirely perish at death.

However, the context is a series of praises about the attributes of God, and has nothing to do with the nature of human mental activity in a post-death heaven.

And all of this does not even address the very serious conceptual problem that, despite patently incorrect claims to the contrary, thoughts are not relational quantities - they simply cannot be said to cease to exist in respect to "other men" and continue to exist in relation to God. This is like saying the following:

"My experience of a sore knee exists in relation to the French but not the Germans"; or

"My reveries about a summer vacation at the lake exist in relation to women but not men."

Of course, while we are in the business of adding unjustified qualifying statements, why not go whole hog and claim that "thoughts" means "external acts of communication". Under such an approach, the Scriptures can be used to construct any old system one wants.

 

[DHK]

This is, of course, a strategy that the opponent of "soul sleep" must employ in order to preserve his position. There is absolutely no justification for adding the "only in respect to other men" qualification to the "his thoughts perish" statement. This approach of inserting qualifications like this can allow one to get away with anything - why not add any unstated qualification one wants? How about giraffes - I choose to interpret "a man's thoughts perish" as "a man's thoughts perish in relation to giraffes only". Boy, this is easy.

The qualification is put there according to the context that the verse is in, which you have addressed below.

DHK argues "context". Does context actually support his view. It clearly does not do this. Psalm 146 is about the trustworthiness, faithfulness, power, and compassion of God. If the context were clearly about a life in heaven that began immediately after physical death, then perhaps one could argue that "his thoughts perish" has to mean "his thoughts perish only as expressible to other men". But the context is not this at all. In order for the "context" argument to work, the context would need to give us a reason to reject the "plain reading" - that man's thoughts entirely perish at death.

Here you are wrong. The context clearly contrasts a warning: a warning not to put your trust in princres who will die and their advice and thoughts with them, but rather put your trust in the everlasting God who abides forever. That is the message of the Psalm in a nutshell summarized in verses 4 and 5. However, you are reading into the psalm doctrines that are not there because you fail to take into consideration that overall context of the psalm. The thoughts of a man perish at death; thus men on earth are incapable of going to the princes and leaders of the nation for advice. But God is everlasting and always present. Trust in him. His thoughts toward you never perish, and his advice is always present. It has no relevance whatsoever to a man's "thoughts" in eternity. You are simply reading that into Scripture.

Of course you can make the Bible say anything you want to the way you aviod the context.
How do you know that Christ died for the sins of the world if you ignore context. Maybe he died for the sins of some alien world? Do you ignore context?

Do you know that the Bible says "There is no God" in Psalm 14:1. It does. Do you just pull it out of context like you are doing here in Psalm 146. But the context is more evident in Psalm 14:1, isn't it? The full verse says "The fool hath said in his heart there is no God." I hope that you at least can understand that context, if you can't understand the context of psalm 146.

 

[BobRyan]

Matt 22
31 ""But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God:
32 " I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB'?He is not the God of the dead but of the living.''



And for GOOD reason too - since scripture rejects the ghostly spirits concept!

ALL readers can see this point "clearly" when we LOOk at the texts in Isaiah, and Psalms and MATT

Furthermore - look at the stream of texts both in Psalms AND in Isaiah AND the views consistent with that in Matt 22 ALL pointing to this "dormant" state -- there is no way to spin this AROUND as "Psalms is not factually accurate" as if that would solve the problem for the eternal-torture group.

Matt 22:23-34 Christ insists that God is not the God of the dead.

Praise to God - ceases at death
Ps 115:17 the dead do not praise the Lord, nor do any who go down into silence;
18 [b]but as for us, we will bless[/b] the lord from this time forth and forever. Praise the lord!
Ps30:9 yet clearly when the living worship we "worship in spirit" John 4:24 -

No thanks or praise to God given by those that are dead.
Is 38:18 “for sheol cannot thank you, death cannot praise you; those who go down to the pit cannot hopefor your faithfulness.
19 “it is the living who give thanks to you, as I do today;

No memory of God
Ps 6:5for there is no mention of you in death; in sheol who will give you thanks?

No thought activity
Ps 146:2 I will sing praises to my God while I have my being.
3 do not trust in princes, in mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4 his spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.
5 how blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob,
Ecclesiasties 9:5-6 they have no activity


Ps 143
3Do not trust in princes,
In mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4His spirit departs, he returns to the earth;
In that very day his thoughts perish.


Isaiah 38
18"For Sheol cannot thank You,
Death cannot praise You;
Those who go down to the pit cannot hope for Your faithfulness.
19"It is the living who give thanks to You, as I do today;
A father tells his sons about Your faithfulness.

As usual - when DHK makes a comment on texts such as the ones above - it is merely to contradict them.

DHK said
When man dies he surely will have thoughts in the presence of God—thoughts of regret, of sorrow, and then for others thoughts of rejoicing. But for all, after death there will be thoughts. They will not perish

But I HAVE found a bible text that DOES agree with DHK's view -

Gen 3 "you shall NOT surely die".

In Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

As usual - when DHK makes a comment on texts such as the ones above - it is merely to contradict them.

"Contradicting" isn't the right word Bob.

2 Peter 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

I feel sorry for you Bob, that in all of the above Scriptures you do nothing more than to take them out of context and, as Peter says, wrest them to your own destruction.
There was no contradiction on my part; only an exposition on the verses given. Your refusal to believe the Word of God is astounding.

 

[BobRyan]

I feel sorry for you Bob, that in all of the above Scriptures you do nothing more than to take them out of context

Making an unproven accuasation is so easy to do - it takes no effort at all and I am sure thousands of them could be posted.

PROVING your point with substance - going text by text and SHOWING that your accusation has merrit - would be quite another story altogether.

Seeing the glaring truth of this statement is left as an exercise for the reader.

In the list of texts above - I am simply providing the list -- DHK's comment is to the effect that merely posting those texts is to "misquote them".

And in making that charge DHK - you have unwittingly admitted that these texts "by themselves" merely "quoted" are sufficient to debunk the arguments you are making about "not being dead" when someone dies.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Making an unproven accuasation is so easy to do - it takes no effort at all and I am sure thousands of them could be posted.

PROVING your point with substance - going text by text and SHOWING that your accusation has merrit - would be quite another story altogether.

Seeing the glaring truth of this statement is left as an exercise for the reader.

In the list of texts above - I am simply providing the list -- DHK's comment is to the effect that merely posting those texts is to "misquote them".

And in making that charge DHK - you have unwittingly admitted that these texts "by themselves" merely "quoted" are sufficient to debunk the arguments you are making about "not being dead" when someone dies.

In Christ,

Bob

Bob I answered all of your texts in Post #218. In spite of what you have posted since then you have never adequately refuted that post. Your inflammatory posts are pointless and needless. If you want to answer the post then do so--one verse at a time. If you cannot, then bow gracefully out of the debate and admit your defeat.
But do not, and I repeat do not!
Make false accusations, use demeaning language, or resort to personal attacks.

 

[BobRyan]

DHK - I genuinely believe that you are satisfied with your answers. If I posted anything to suggest that I did not think you were happy with what you posted I certainly did not mean to do it.

However as it turns out - I am still going to have to stick with the Bible even if the mere quote of it appears to debunk your suggestions


No thought activity
Ps 146:2 I will sing praises to my God while I have my being.
3 do not trust in princes, in mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4 his spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.
5 how blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob,
Ecclesiasties 9:5-6 they have no activity


Ps 143
3Do not trust in princes,
In mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4His spirit departs, he returns to the earth;
In that very day his thoughts perish.


Isaiah 38
18"For Sheol cannot thank You,
Death cannot praise You;
Those who go down to the pit cannot hope for Your faithfulness.
19"It is the living who give thanks to You, as I do today;
A father tells his sons about Your faithfulness.

DHK


Quote:
DHK said
When man dies he surely will have thoughts in the presence of God—thoughts of regret, of sorrow, and then for others thoughts of rejoicing. But for all, after death there will be thoughts. They will not perish

By contrast --

No thought activity
Ps 146:2 I will sing praises to my God while I have my being.
3 do not trust in princes, in mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4 his spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.


The obvious point is that when we are praising God it is ONE person not TWO praising God - so when that when WE stop praising God is that ONE person that stops - not one of two people.

 

[DHK]

DHK - I genuinely believe that you are satisfied with your answers. If I posted anything to suggest that I did not think you were happy with what you posted I certainly did not mean to do it.

However as it turns out - I am still going to have to stick with the Bible even if the mere quote of it appears to debunk your suggestions

You ignore the apparent context of the variuos psalms and other passages of Scriptures that you use, and then string them together to conjure up an unbiblical doctrine in much the same way the RCC comes up with the doctrine of Purgatory. Like Purgatory "soul sleep" is a purely man-made doctrine. I have gone through these Scriptures before, it is evidednt that:

"A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."

No matter how much evidence I present to you; no matter how Biblical the proof may be; your mind is made up. I cannot change it. Only God can. Nevertheless for your sake I will once again go through these Scriptures with you.

No thought activity
Ps 146:2

I will sing praises to my God while I have my being.

3 do not trust in princes, in mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4 his spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.
5 how blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob,
Ecclesiasties 9:5-6 they have no activity

Context is everything. That is what I have been stressing all along. The author is expressing what he does while he is on this earth, not in the afterlife. "I will sing." He praises God now. He is speaking of the here and now. He is speaking of this life on this earth while he is alive, as most people do. His outlook is purely practical. It is not philosophical or metaphysical as you are eisigeting it to be. It is a very simple psalm of both intent and praise. These last five psalms in the Bible are all psalms of victorious praise to God.
From the human standpoint one doesn't praise God from the grave. That is obvious. It is not a statement of theology on soul sleep. It is simple statement that as long as he lives he will praise God. With every breathe he will praise God. With every thought that he has as long as he has thoughts (as long as he is alive) he will praise God. Thus the phrase--"in that day his thoughts perish." It means nothing more than he will praise God until the day of his death; until his mouth and tongue can no more utter the words. He is speaking of this life. Not a word is spoken of the after life. You are reading into Scripture that which is not there just as the RCC reads into such passages Purgatory. There is no difference here.

Ps 143

3Do not trust in princes,
In mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4His spirit departs, he returns to the earth;
In that very day his thoughts perish.

See above comments. As long as I am alive I will praise the Lord. As long I live I will trust in God. I will not trust in princes, but rather trust in the Lord. Why? Man dies and his advice will go with him. God never dies, he is ever present with us. Again you try and make this psalm metaphysical and like the RCC teaching purgatory you try to make it teach soul sleep, but it says no such thing about no such doctrine. Why not teach the Assumption of Mary instead? The two doctrines have just as much in common when it comes to this passage of Scripture. There is a comparison here. Don't trust in princes; trust in God. That is the teaching--not the assumption of Mary; not Purgatory, and not soul sleep.

Isaiah 38

18"For Sheol cannot thank You,
Death cannot praise You;
Those who go down to the pit cannot hope for Your faithfulness.
19"It is the living who give thanks to You, as I do today;
A father tells his sons about Your faithfulness.

By contrast --

No thought activity
Ps 146:2 I will sing praises to my God while I have my being.
3 do not trust in princes, in mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4 his spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.

The obvious point is that when we are praising God it is ONE person not TWO praising God - so when that when WE stop praising God is that ONE person that stops - not one of two people.

You are not making sense here. What do you mean it is one person praising God. Learn the application of Scripture. As David praised the Lord so should we all. "I will sing praises to my God. Each and every one of us need to do that. I expained this passage to you already. It seems that this is the third time you have quoted it. Is there a reason for this repetition?

Again, in Isaiah 38, you completely ignore the context. The context is that Hezekiah was sick. God told Isaiah to go to him and tell him to get his house in order for tomorrow he would die. But Hezekiah wept and prayed and pled with God that he would not die, and God added fifteen more years on to his life. Chapter 38 is Hezekiah's prayer of thanks and praise to God for His graciousness to Him in answering prayer and in healing him of his sickness. So now what do we see?

Isaiah 38:18-19 For the grave cannot praise thee, death can not celebrate thee: they that go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth.
19 The living, the living, he shall praise thee, as I do this day: the father to the children shall make known thy truth.

These are Hezekiah's words. He would not have been able to praise God from the grave, or after he was dead. It is the living that are a testimony to others about God. Hezekiah makes this point clear with the parent/child illustration.
"I do this day: the father to the children shall make known the truth."

The father instructs the child while he is alive, not while he is dead--an obvious truth.

The entire passage is very practical, very obvious teaching. It is not the philosophical, metaphysical teaching that you are looking for that teaches soul sleep; like the Catholics teach purgatory and the Assumption of Mary. Your odds are just the same. They are all false doctrines and none of them are found in the Scripture.

You do err not knowing the Scriptures neither the power of God.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: No matter how much evidence I present to you; no matter how Biblical the proof may be; your mind is made up. I cannot change it. Only God can. Nevertheless for your sake I will once again go through these Scriptures with you.

HP: An excellent post by the way.

One of the beautiful things this list offers is the opportunity to address ideas that exist within the Church and to facilitate a basis for honest truth searching. There is a need within the Church to have perpetual debate in every generation on the issues that are being discussed. This should help us from the dangers posed by the mere regurgitation of past errors, and cause us to think and fairly examine the issues afresh for ourselves.

Even though it is obvious that some have indeed made up their minds on the issues, posts such as the one you made make an impact upon those that might not be fixed in their positions, or are in the process of examination of their beliefs.

Duty is ours and the results the Lord’s. Be not weary in expressing the truth. There will be a time when these lips will no longer express the truth to others. Our abilities, ‘IN A SENSE,’ ‘AS WE NOW KNOW AND UTILIZE THEM,’ will cease to function. We must work while there is still time to pass on truth to the next generation. That is NOT to say that we will, in the next world, be found sitting around mindless on a cloud playing a 'player harp,' unable to sing praises or testify with new lips the truth to the glory and honor of our Redeemer!

Oh how the Church needs to realize that words are often used in differing senses. Often we need to inject into our thinking the words, ‘as if though’ or ‘in a sense’ when reading specific passages, so as not to just find ourselves, as BR has so aptly demonstrated to the list on this particular issue, causing a verse to walk on our four legs to prove a particular presupposition that in fact is not taught in Scripture at all.

By the way. Thanks for all the time you spend making this list possible!! Keep up the good work!

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobRyan
DHK - I genuinely believe that you are satisfied with your answers. If I posted anything to suggest that I did not think you were happy with what you posted I certainly did not mean to do it.

However as it turns out - I am still going to have to stick with the Bible even if the mere quote of it appears to debunk your suggestions

DHK
You ignore the apparent context of the variuos psalms and other passages of Scriptures that you use,

You keep "claiming" that a mere quote of the text is to abuse it since it so obviously debunks your views - but you have never actually shown that to be true. It is therefore a hollow claim.

much the same way the RCC comes up with the doctrine of Purgatory. Like Purgatory "soul sleep" is a purely man-made doctrine

And so we get another hollow claim. You see DHK you actually have to show you have a point - simply claiming to have one does not form a kind of "proof" of something.

The truth of this point is left as an exercise for the reader - unless DHK would like to actually prove claim 1 or 2 above.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Let's examine a classic case where DHK fails to sustain his argument...

In response to Psalms 146:2 you elect to post an exact contradiction of it --

Quote:
DHK


Quote:
DHK said
When man dies he surely will have thoughts in the presence of God—thoughts of regret, of sorrow, and then for others thoughts of rejoicing. But for all, after death there will be thoughts. They will not perish

At this point - Bob points out the glaringly obvious

By contrast --

No thought activity
Ps 146:2 I will sing praises to my God while I have my being.
3 do not trust in princes, in mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4 his spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.


The obvious point is that when we are praising God it is ONE person not TWO praising God - so when that when WE stop praising God is that ONE person that stops - not one of two people.

In an effort to extricate yourself from this obvious dilemma - you post this!

DHK said

The author is expressing what he does while he is on this earth, [not in the afterlife.

ALL agree that the author is on earth.

ALL agree that he is speaking of the LIVING - those that are alive on earth and doing things.

ALL agree that he is NOT referring to the resurrection or to events AFTER the resurrection.

The point remains.

"I will sing." He praises God now. He is speaking of the here and now. He is speaking of this life on this earth while he is alive, as most people do.

ALL agree.

The point remains. He is pointing to activity that CEASES at death!

Obviously.

DHK said

His outlook is purely practical. It is not philosophical or metaphysical as you are eisigeting it to be. It is a very simple psalm of both intent and praise. These last five psalms in the Bible are all psalms of victorious praise to God.

I said nothing "metaphysical" I simply point out that thought that DOES happen while the PERSON is alive - does NOT happen while the PERSON is dead.

The point remains.

DHK

From the human standpoint one doesn't praise God from the grave. That is obvious.

Agreed. However this is an eisegetical INSERT on your part that you make INTO the text of scripture arguing that the AUTHOR is (speaking merely from the non-inspired non-informed HUMAN POV) NOT speaking from the standpoint of absolute truth - but rather from the standpoint of an unbelieving pagan that does not know what happens to the PERSON at death.

Your "insert" remains "your own".

My point remains.

DHK
It is not a statement of theology on soul sleep.

Now you have taken your own eisegetical "insert" and framed it into an exact contradiction of 2Tim 3:16 "ALL SCRIPTURE is inspired AND is to be used for doctrine". When you find scripture debunking your views you simply say "it is NOT to be used for doctrine" or as you say "theology" to take it out of the way!!

How sad!

How transparent.

How glaringly obvious to the objective reader sir!

My point remains.

(Reader: Imagine DHK's reaction if I went around claiming that the Bible is NOT to be used for doctrine in cases where DHK wants to claim that my views are in contradiction to it!! That objective experiment is being left as an exercise for the reader)

DHK
It is simple statement that as long as he lives he will praise God. With every breathe he will praise God. With every thought that he has as long as he has thoughts (as long as he is alive) he will praise God.

Finally!! You return to the path of truth if only for an instant.

We can be thankful for that much.

But your argument has been shown to be primarily "imagining" that the Bible is not to be used for doctrine WHEN it contradicts your man-made traditions. The fact that you are so comfortable making that kind of argument in a post shows just how strong a hold your man-made traditions have over your bible study.

Why not simply accept the Bible in this case instead of arguing as you did here that you are successful in making claims about the Bible NOT being used for theology in a case where it contradicts your dearly held traditions?

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

As the post above points out - DHK's argument against these Bible texts is of the form "they do not agree with my doctrine so I don't think God means for us to take them as theological statements on doctrine -- they differ with my own if taken as a doctrinal position on what stops when a person dies".

That is shocking enough.

What is even more surprising is that that argument "seems reasonable" to many readers when it is used to defend beliefs they ALREADY hold!

How very instructive for the objective reader!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

When viewing these texts

However as it turns out - I am still going to have to stick with the Bible even if the mere quote of it appears to debunk your suggestions


No thought activity
Ps 146:2 I will sing praises to my God while I have my being.
3 do not trust in princes, in mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4 his spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.
5 how blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob,
Ecclesiasties 9:5-6 they have no activity


Ps 143
3Do not trust in princes,
In mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4His spirit departs, he returns to the earth;
In that very day his thoughts perish.


Isaiah 38
18"For Sheol cannot thank You,
Death cannot praise You;
Those who go down to the pit cannot hope for Your faithfulness.
19"It is the living who give thanks to You, as I do today;
A father tells his sons about Your faithfulness.

.

DHK argues

See above comments.

In those comments DHK argues that these texts are NOT meant to convey any doctrine on the subject of what ceases at death for the actualy "person" since doing so would contradict his closely held traditions.

And then DHK adds this -

DHK

As long as I am alive I will praise the Lord. As long I live I will trust in God. I will not trust in princes, but rather trust in the Lord.

Why? Man dies and his advice will go with him.

Not ONCE doe these texts reference "at death man's ADVICE to his fellow man ceases but his THOUGHTS continue" -

Yet this is EXACTLY how DHK would eisegete the meaning of the text!

And one has to agree with DHK at least to this extent - to save the man-made tradition of the "immortal soul" and "infinite torture" you really have no choice to but to eisegete these "inserts" about "man giving advice to his fellow man INSTEAD of his thoughts really ceasing". It is just about the only solution you have when clinging to man-made tradition over scripture to that extent.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Suppose for a moment that you come to scripture with the pre-bias that at death "all thoughtful ADVICE given from one person to another ceases. But the very things that do NOT cease for each PERSON that dies is - memory, praise to God, thought etc because the PERSON is immortal not MORTAL at least when it comes to that PART of the person responsible for thought and praise and worshp to God. Suppose you argue that this is the VERY part that CONTINUES after death while admitting that all other things (like building a house or raising kids etc) CEASE".

So then what do you do when you come to a post like this??

However as it turns out - I am still going to have to stick with the Bible even if the mere quote of it appears to debunk your suggestions


No thought activity
Ps 146:2 I will sing praises to my God while I have my being.
3 do not trust in princes, in mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4 his spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.
5 how blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob,
Ecclesiasties 9:5-6 they have no activity


Ps 143
3Do not trust in princes,
In mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
4His spirit departs, he returns to the earth;
In that very day his thoughts perish.


Isaiah 38
18"For Sheol cannot thank You,
Death cannot praise You;
Those who go down to the pit cannot hope for Your faithfulness.
19"It is the living who give thanks to You, as I do today;
A father tells his sons about Your faithfulness.

.


The obvious point is that when we are praising God it is ONE person not TWO praising God - so that when "the PERSON" stops praising God is that ONE person that stops - not one of two people.

Why not simply turn a blind eye to these texts and say 'they are not meant for doctrine"??

Answering that question is left as an exercise for the reader!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

One may easily respond that BobRyan is not such a person as in the case above that came to these texts listed with a prior-bias against what they teach. So you could easily challenge the idea that I would be so objective so Bible-based as to reject man-made tradition against these scriptures and accept the Bible's clear teaching that the thoughts of a PERSON in fact CEASE at death.

But in my discussion here it appears that Andre is just such a person and he is an example of at least one who did choose the Bible over tradition.

 

[BobRyan]

Page 1 response to Hope of Glory -

When Christ speaks of it in Matt 10 it is that same fiery judgment mentioned in Matt 25:41 "prepared for the devil and his angels".

You then SEE exactly when and where the Devil and his angels are subjected to that fiery judgment - in Rev 20. We see that it is not until the end of the 1000 years that they are tossed alive into that "2nd death". It is then also that the wicked dead are bodily raised and they too are tossed alive into that fire and brimstone second death - lake of fire.

So in Matt 10:28 when we find God destroying "BOTH" body AND soul in that fiery hell that Matt 25 says is "prepared for the devil and his angels" then we can understand that the same destroying fire that destroys both body and soul for humans - is doing the same thing to the "devil and his angels".

No infinite torture - even though there is "fire and brimstone" and "torment" and "no rest day or night" for those in the Rev 20 condition of suffiring the "second DEATH" that apparently is also burning "the devil and his angels" according to Matt 25:41.

 

[BobRyan]

Matt 22
31 ""But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God:
32 " I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB'?He is not the God of the dead but of the living.''

In Matt 22 Christ obviously connects two WELL accepted facts for the Sadducees. And by connecting BOTH of them - forces the Sadducees into a tight spot for which the ONLY SOLUTION is the "resurrection".

#1. The God is NOT the God of the Dead (for reasons seen in the OT texts already given on this page).

#2. That God said to Moses at the burning bush - "I AM the God of Abraham" long after Abraham was dead -


So here is the question for the objective reader - WHY would the Sadducees agree to the statement "God is not the God of the dead"??

Think about your answer without injecting man-made tradition.

Next Why would they accept as fact that God really did say to Moses in Exodus "I AM the God of Abraham"?

Think carefully about your answer - do not use man-made tradition to solve the problem.

#3. HOW does the connection of those two statements force the conclusion "Well then in that case there must be a resurrection for that is the only way for both statements to be true".

The SAME logic that was irrefutable for the Sadducees is also irrefutable by those who cling to the man-made tradition of an immortal soul.

The Sadducees where "put to silence" as the grasped the full meaning of the argument FROM SCRIPTURE - "sola scriptura" and had no answer even though they stubbornly refused to yield. Even the Pharisees observed that this argument "put them to silence"!

Will Christians today be more stubborn than the Sadducees???

In Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

[/b][/i]
You keep "claiming" that a mere quote of the text is to abuse it since it so obviously debunks your views - but you have never actually shown that to be true. It is therefore a hollow claim.

And so we get another hollow claim. You see DHK you actually have to show you have a point - simply claiming to have one does not form a kind of "proof" of something.

The truth of this point is left as an exercise for the reader - unless DHK would like to actually prove claim 1 or 2 above.

Bob

Bob I have consistently shown you how you have taken each text that you have used out of its context and twisted it to mean something other than its actual meaning. If your only answer is the meaninless rhetoric that you give above with its veiled name-calling the I ask you to bow out of the discussion. For it is obvious that you have nothing more to say on the matter.

 

[DHK]

Finally!! You return to the path of truth if only for an instant.

We can be thankful for that much.

But your argument has been shown to be primarily "imagining" that the Bible is not to be used for doctrine WHEN it contradicts your man-made traditions. The fact that you are so comfortable making that kind of argument in a post shows just how strong a hold your man-made traditions have over your bible study.

Why not simply accept the Bible in this case instead of arguing as you did here that you are successful in making claims about the Bible NOT being used for theology in a case where it contradicts your dearly held traditions?

In Christ,

Bob

It is your man-made tradition, Bob, yea, rather heresy that you are trying to defend. Admit: the psalm says nothing about the resurrection, nothinng about heaven or hell, and nothing about soul sleep. So why are you inserting soul sleep into this text when it says nothing about it. Why not teach Purgatory from the text instead. It would be just as fruitful wouldn't it. Why are you reading into this psalm doctrines that are not there? That is what cults do.