Punishment in the Atonement

[JonC]

But how does this square with what you wrote earlier?

Either you have changed your mind very quickly or you have an urgent need to write more clearly need to write more clearly.

I intended the post following to clarify. I agree with the Bock that the verse is stressing the error of the Jewish understanding - not that he was not "stricken" as this would be obvious to the onlookers, but that he was stricken for their sins and not his.

What I mean is that this is not a proof text for Jesus being punished with our punishments. That isn't the point of the passage.

 

[JonC]

I'm glad you've enjoyed my efforts. The new sermon should be on the website today. I wasn't pleased with my delivery. I seemed to be tripping over my tongue on a few occasions.

I have chronic tongue tripping syndrome, so I know how it feels . I'm sure you did well.

I got half way through an illustration once and forgot what I was illustrating.

 

[JonC]

So do I Jon and for my sins in particular.

HankD

Wow, me too....if we find another we could start a church. You can preach and I'll take up the offering.

Except that I do not believe Jesus experienced the punishments for my individual sinful acts and not the punishments for the sinful acts of those who are not saved. I don't think that atonement works that way.

I find it a bit odd, but I don't think anyone else sees the difference between Jesus dying on the cross for our sin, suffering the consequences of sin and Jesus being punished by God for our sin. At least that explains the hostility to some when PST is questioned (the difference is not discernible to them). That fact alone, considering the people who have participated here, is something I simply find amazing.

Since no one here seems to see a difference between the positions, we can just go on agreeing because I do believe that the atonement deals with both the consequences of sin and Christ bearing our sins. As the distinction of the OP seems elusive here, and it is being productively engaged elsewhere, I believe it time to close this thread.

 

[HankD]

I have no problem saying that Jesus took the punishment for my sins.

The answer lies in the word propitiation.
Not the English word propitiation but the Greek word hilasmos
Several lexicons list Appeasement, expiation, means of forgiveness.

Just what was appeased or satisfied by the death and shedding of the blood of Jesus Christ?

ilasmos is not a common word either in the LXX or the NT.

Kittel's Vol III pgs 301 - 318 has an in depth study of the development of the word.
Under the law (Jesus was under the law)

Galatians 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law.

An appeasing of the demands of the law.

Flogging was an appeasing of the law, a satisfaction by punishment but not death.

Deuteronomy 25:2 And it shall be, if the wicked man be worthy to be beaten, that the judge shall cause him to lie down, and to be beaten before his face, according to his fault, by a certain number.

So it is more than an opinion on my part that the flogging and the beatings that Jesus received speaks of the punishment of the law that He took for me individually. Then the crucifixion - the adamic death sentence.
All of which is explained in Isaiah 53 and obviously(at least to me) is not meant for Israel alone.

1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

HankD

 

[The Biblicist]

I am amazed that we disagree on this passage. I was only mentioning it in passing (I never intended it to be a “sticking point”.

What I am suggesting is the “we” of verse 3 is the same “we” of verse 6. What I stated in post#2 is those who esteemed Jesus as stricken of God did so in error as they view him as afflicted because of his sins when in fact he was being offered as a sacrifice for their sin, bearing their iniquity. You disagreed, and called that view “false”, “grasping at straws”, and “absurd”. I responded in post#12 by offering an explanation by Darrell Bock, that the men believed Jesus smitten by God for his sins, when in fact he was smitten for their redemption.

4 ¶ Surely he has borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was on him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Now, lets go with your interpretation that "we"in verse 4b is making the supposition that God was smiting for his own sins. In either case,the text is not even remotely suggesting that God did not smite him for sin, but the clarification is that it was for "our" sins. Notice in verse five the clarification reaffirms that God did smite him - "wounded...bruised...chastisement....stripes" but it was for our sins. Again verse 7 and verse 10 reaffirm that God is afflicting him for our sins.

 

[JonC]

I have no problem saying that Jesus took the punishment for my sins.

The answer lies in the word propitiation.

Not the English word propitiation but the Greek word hilasmos

Several lexicons list Appeasement, expiation, means of forgiveness.

Just what was appeased or satisfied by the death and shedding of the blood of Jesus Christ?

I have no problem saying that Jesus suffered and died for my sins. Propitiation has punishment in mind in terms of appeasing the wrath of God – not punishing the atoning sacrifice with the punishment due the acts of other people. I affirm that Jesus suffered and died for our sins, that he appeased the wrath that was due me, and that the chastisement for our wellbeing fell upon him. But this does not mean that the Father looked upon his Son as a vile sinner and punished him in our stead.

Where did we go from the image of an atonement – the Father laying our iniquities on him and offering him as a guilt offering for us; Jesus becoming obedient unto death, even the death of a cross; God purchasing us with the precious blood of Christ; Jesus bearing our iniquities; the chastisement for our wellbeing falling on him – to an image of the Father transferring our sins to Jesus, looking on Jesus as a vile sinner, and inflicting the punishment of the elect on his Son to clear the sin debt owed him so that he can forgive us?

Galatians 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law.

An appeasing of the demands of the law.

Flogging was an appeasing of the law, a satisfaction by punishment but not death.

Deuteronomy 25:2 And it shall be, if the wicked man be worthy to be beaten, that the judge shall cause him to lie down, and to be beaten before his face, according to his fault, by a certain number.

So it is more than an opinion on my part that the flogging and the beatings that Jesus received speaks of the punishment of the law that He took for me individually. Then the crucifixion - the adamic death sentence.

All of which is explained in Isaiah 53 and obviously(at least to me) is not meant for Israel alone.

1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

But Jesus was not wicked and punishment under the Law is not transferable. Sin is not transferable.

So my question, the one I’ve been trying to wrap my mind around, is where exactly did Christian doctrine move from God offering His Son as a guilt offering in terms of a sacrifice to an accounting system of sin debts to be collected? Historically we can pinpoint the development of PST from penal and substitution elements in both doctrine and Scripture. We can see how logic was built upon logic and understand why it was put together as it was. But how did we come to accept that God’s justice demands not repentance but a collection of what is owed God regardless of who pays the price? How did we come to accept that justice can include the actual punishment of one man for the crimes of another? When did Christ’s death as an atonement and propitiation become too complicated that we had to move to a simple ledger system of committed sins?

None of those things are inherently found in Scripture. None of those things are common to the historical views of atonement (unless, as some suppose, it was but all records are gone).

 

[JonC]

4 ¶ Surely he has borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was on him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Now, lets go with your interpretation that "we"in verse 4b is making the supposition that God was smiting for his own sins. In either case,the text is not even remotely suggesting that God did not smite him for sin, but the clarification is that it was for "our" sins. Notice in verse five the clarification reaffirms that God did smite him - "wounded...bruised...chastisement....stripes" but it was for our sins. Again verse 7 and verse 10 reaffirm that God is afflicting him for our sins.

Yes, the Father offered the Son as a guilt offering, an atonement, a propitiation, for our sins. He borne our griefs and carried our sorrows. He was seen as stricken and smitten of God (i.e., stricken for his transgressions against God) when instead he was stricken and smitten for our transgressions. He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities, and the chastisement of our wellbeing was on him, and with his stripes we are healed (parallels stating the same thing - it was God's will to sacrifice His Son as an atonement for us, as a propitiation for our sins....when we think of him setting aside his glory and becoming man, being born as a baby in Bethlehem, growing and learning, teaching and discipling, being mocked, being betrayed and arrested, suffering, being beaten, carrying his own cross, hanging and dying...all of this....we need to remember that it is for our transgressions that he became obedient even unto the death of a cross, and our our iniquities that he suffered and died. And for our redemption that he arose from the grave as the firstborn.

I am not sure of your point here. But yes, by his stripes we are healed. I did not know that this was even in question.

 

[HankD]

Where did we go from the image of an atonement – the Father laying our iniquities on him and offering him as a guilt offering for us; Jesus becoming obedient unto death, even the death of a cross; God purchasing us with the precious blood of Christ; Jesus bearing our iniquities; the chastisement for our wellbeing falling on him – to an image of the Father transferring our sins to Jesus, looking on Jesus as a vile sinner, and inflicting the punishment of the elect on his Son to clear the sin debt owed him so that he can forgive us?

But Jesus was not wicked and punishment under the Law is not transferable. Sin is not transferable.

No He was not wicked, He was sinless, nevertheless that transfer was made:

2 Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

HankD

 

[JonC]

No He was not wicked, He was sinless, nevertheless that transfer was made:

2 Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

HankD

Yes, God made him a sin offering He was offered, our sins laid on him. The transfer was Jesus becoming man and accepting the consequences of human sinfulness.

You do realize when we sin we still are in need of repentance and forgiveness, and Christ mediates as our High Priest...And although Christ died as our representative we will still die....Right?

More to the point, if Jesus was punished with your punishment of death then you would not die. Jesus tasted death for every man. And all are resurrected through him, some to life and some to death. But the "second death" is when hades and death are cast into Hell. The ultimate criteria? Christ and the cross. This is why Paul says our hope is in Christ, and focused on a physical resurrection. Christ redeemed us from sin and death, he did not take that punishment - or consequence - from us. But the sting of death is the Law, which Christ has fulfilled.

 

[HankD]

Yes, God made him a sin offering He was offered, our sins laid on him. The transfer was Jesus becoming man and accepting the consequences of human sinfulness.

You do realize when we sin we still are in need of repentance and forgiveness, and Christ mediates as our High Priest...And although Christ died as our representative we will still die....Right?

More to the point, if Jesus was punished with your punishment of death then you would not die. Jesus tasted death for every man. And all are resurrected through him, some to life and some to death. But the "second death" is when hades and death are cast into Hell. The ultimate criteria? Christ and the cross. This is why Paul says our hope is in Christ, and focused on a physical resurrection. Christ redeemed us from sin and death, he did not take that punishment - or consequence - from us. But the sting of death is the Law, which Christ has fulfilled.

I am not going to die.

John 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

2 Corinthians 5:8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

HankD

 

[The Biblicist]

But here is the difference (in the bold part of your comment). You are not emphasizing God offering his Son (as fore-typed by Abraham and Isaac), or Jesus laying down his life, or our iniquities being laid upon Christ as the Propitiation for our sins. You emphasize pain as the punishment due the sins of others, inflicted as punishment on Christ as the Atoning Sacrifice. And you pretend that this is what the Levitical priests were doing – punishing animals in their stead. And on another thread you even went so far as to say the fire at the altar symbolized those punished animals being punished in Hell.

Death is the penalty of sin. Gehenena is simply the filling out of death. Death was the penalty for eating of the tree in the garden (Gen.2:17). Death entered the world by one man's sin (5:12,17,18,19). We entered into this world "condemned already" and death is the condemnation of the Law for sin (Jn.3:17). We are already under the wrath of God (Jn. 3:36) and death is the evidence. Death is the wages of sin (Rom.6:23). The animal was put to death.Isaac was to be put to death. Christ "died FOR our sins." Christ died PHYSICALLY for our sins. However, death is but separation, and Christ by his own admission on the cross suffered death in a greater sense than physical (Psa. 22:1, 3). The evidence that Christ "DIED" for our sin and paid THIS PENALTY in full is the resurrection as the resurrection demonstrates God was satisified with the penal substitionary death of Christ so that now Christ holds the keys of death and hades.

Christ died not merely for "sin" but for "sinners" and for their "sins".

 

[The Biblicist]

Yes, the Father offered the Son as a guilt offering, an atonement, a propitiation, for our sins. He borne our griefs and carried our sorrows. He was seen as stricken and smitten of God (i.e., stricken for his transgressions against God) when instead he was stricken and smitten for our transgressions. He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities, and the chastisement of our wellbeing was on him, and with his stripes we are healed (parallels stating the same thing - it was God's will to sacrifice His Son as an atonement for us, as a propitiation for our sins....when we think of him setting aside his glory and becoming man, being born as a baby in Bethlehem, growing and learning, teaching and discipling, being mocked, being betrayed and arrested, suffering, being beaten, carrying his own cross, hanging and dying...all of this....we need to remember that it is for our transgressions that he became obedient even unto the death of a cross, and our our iniquities that he suffered and died. And for our redemption that he arose from the grave as the firstborn.

I am not sure of your point here. But yes, by his stripes we are healed. I did not know that this was even in question.

That is the point, your argument had no point. The son was the LEGAL object of God's wrath in the LEGAL place of sinners because of their sins as sin is a VIOLATION of Law and death is the penalty for that violation.

You can't deny the Law is not LEGAL. You can't deny sin is not the violation of the Law. You can't deny death is the condemnation, thus penalty of the law and you can't deny Christ suffered DEATH, thus suffered the penalty of sin in our stead as a LEGAL SATISFACTION of the penalty of the Law.

It is oxymoronic to claim that Christ died "FOR SIN" as SIN needed no redemption as sin IS the condemnation upon SINNERS. Christ died for sinners to satisfy the laws penalty against SINNERS due to their sins, thus in the place of the sinners the law's condemnation was poured out upon the substitute = Christ suffered death, physical and spiritual as he was separated from the Father on the cross "My God, My God why hast thou forsaken me."

Death is inclusive of suffering, pain,anguish, affliction, chastisement, etc. Death is the penal condemnation for violation of the Law of God.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Yes, God made him a sin offering

I don't think this works. We can agree that the Greek word hamartia may be translated as either 'sin' or 'sin offering,' but surely Paul did not write in 2 Corinthians 5:21, 'God made Him who know no sin offering to be a sin offering for us....' Also, 'sin' and 'righteousness are obviously in apposition in the verse.

The meaning of the verse is quite clear: God made Jesus Christ, the sinless One, to be the very epitome of sin. Why did He do it? For us, that we, in the eyes of God, might be regarded judicially as the epitome of righteousness. How was He made sin? '...The LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all' (Isaiah 53:6). I don't know how this could have been done other than by imputation, but this is Luther's great exchange- that on the cross our sins were laid upon His sinless shoulders, and His perfect righteousness credited to us who believe.

This does not mean that, as Father, God does not see our sins and lovingly chastise us for them (Heb. 12:4ff), but as Judge, He sees no sin at all.

When Satan tempts me to despair
And tells me of the guilt within,
Upwards I look and see Him there
Who made an end to all my sin.
Because the sinless saviour died,
My sinful soul is counted free;
For God the just is satisfied
To look on Him and pardon me.

 

[JonC]

I am not going to die.

John 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

2 Corinthians 5:8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

HankD

I was born dead, but made alive in Christ. And I am going to die a physical death as the consequence of sin. But my hope is in Christ, who conquered sin and death, as I look to the resurrection.

God laid my sins on Jesus, and he died as propitiation for my sins - as an atonement for me. He became a man like me and became obedient even to the cross. He bore that punishment, that penalty, of sin for mankind. Not in such a way that he was punished with our punishment, but with the consequence of sin (his own punishment in becoming man, in bearing our sins, in taking on flesh and paying that penalty due mankind because of sin). I will still face the consequences of sin. I was stillborn, spiritually. And I will die a physical death (unless Christ comes before that time). But my hope is in Christ because therein is life and my life..

 

[JonC]

I don't think this works. We can agree that the Greek word hamartia may be translated as either 'sin' or 'sin offering,' but surely Paul did not write in 2 Corinthians 5:21, 'God made Him who know no sin offering to be a sin offering for us....' Also, 'sin' and 'righteousness are obviously in apposition in the verse.

The meaning of the verse is quite clear: God made Jesus Christ, the sinless One, to be the very epitome of sin. Why did He do it? For us, that we, in the eyes of God, might be regarded judicially as the epitome of righteousness. How was He made sin? '...The LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all' (Isaiah 53:6). I don't know how this could have been done other than by imputation, but this is Luther's great exchange- that on the cross our sins were laid upon His sinless shoulders, and His perfect righteousness credited to us who believe.

This does not mean that, as Father, God does not see our sins and lovingly chastise us for them (Heb. 12:4ff), but as Judge, He sees no sin at all.

When Satan tempts me to despair
And tells me of the guilt within,
Upwards I look and see Him there
Who made an end to all my sin.
Because the sinless saviour died,
My sinful soul is counted free;
For God the just is satisfied
To look on Him and pardon me.

I believe it does work. Jesus, who had no sin, was made a sin offering for us. Paul's use of hamartia can mean both "sin" in the first use and "sin offering" in the second. Jesus used penuma much the same way in his dialogue with Nicodemus. We know it cannot be taken literally (that God was made evil). Regardless, I think that we end up at the same place - Jesus was looked upon as a transgressor, as sinful man.

Jesus became man, but without sin. There is a dichotomy here. To be man is to be sin. And God made him who knew no sin to be made sin for us. Although he uses both, I believe in this passage Paul is leaning on the imagery of atonement rather than law-court. I am not really sure that the difference is enough of a hill to merit taking a stand.

One point that I will make, as it is often brought up concerning the nature of Christ, is that I am not sure we can separate God's justice and love so easily. I often hear that Jesus suffered in his humanity but not his divinity. And, as you say here, that God lovingly disciplines us for our sins, but as Judge sees no sins at all. Peter wrote that since we call on Him as Father who judges according to each one's deeds we should conduct ourselves with fear during our life here on earth.

Sometimes we separate these things to handle them, to make them simple. In one of his works, Leon Morris accused Käsemann of oversimplifying, of making a case that is crystal clear, uncomplicated, and straight forward regarding the divinity and humanity of Christ within Johannine theology. What Käsemann had done was develop a concise doctrine that failed to encapsulate the whole truth of Scripture, and because of that failing the truth that was presented became distorted and twisted. My concern with the atonement is that we not do the same. That we have is evident in statements about penal substitution being the primary view of Scripture, as if other aspects were of less significance.

 

[JonC]

Death is the penalty of sin. Gehenena is simply the filling out of death. Death was the penalty for eating of the tree in the garden (Gen.2:17). Death entered the world by one man's sin (5:12,17,18,19). We entered into this world "condemned already" and death is the condemnation of the Law for sin (Jn.3:17). We are already under the wrath of God (Jn. 3:36) and death is the evidence. Death is the wages of sin (Rom.6:23). The animal was put to death.Isaac was to be put to death. Christ "died FOR our sins." Christ died PHYSICALLY for our sins.

I agree.

However, death is but separation, and Christ by his own admission on the cross suffered death in a greater sense than physical (Psa. 22:1, 3).

Physical death is separation, from life. The spiritually dead are those who are perishing, those without understanding, those who will not believe. The "second death" is a separation from God (death and Hades cast into Hell, into the "outter darkness"). I don't think we can base a doctrine on two separate verses in Psa 22, but it does certainly show that Christ sufferings were more significant than a physical death. He was bearing our sins, being offered an atonement, representing mankind on the cross.

The evidence that Christ "DIED" for our sin and paid THIS PENALTY in full is the resurrection as the resurrection demonstrates God was satisified with the penal substitionary death of Christ so that now Christ holds the keys of death and hades.

Agreed.

 

[JonC]

That is the point, your argument had no point. The son was the LEGAL object of God's wrath in the LEGAL place of sinners because of their sins as sin is a VIOLATION of Law and death is the penalty for that violation.

You do realize that the atoning sacrifices offered in the Old Testament are done so under the Law...right? My argument is that God is not bound by the Law, but instead became man and fulfilled the Law.

You say that Jesus was punished with your punishment. You say that this is both a physical death and a separation from God. Yet you were born spiritually dead and you will die a physical death. You will not experience the "second death", but neither did Christ (this judgment is Christ-centered). What you seem not to grasp is because of the cross all will be resurrected, some to life and some to judgment. At the center of judgment is Christ, not the Law because the Law is fulfilled in Christ.

 

[HankD]

I was born dead, but made alive in Christ. And I am going to die a physical death as the consequence of sin. But my hope is in Christ, who conquered sin and death, as I look to the resurrection.

God laid my sins on Jesus, and he died as propitiation for my sins - as an atonement for me. He became a man like me and became obedient even to the cross. He bore that punishment, that penalty, of sin for mankind. Not in such a way that he was punished with our punishment, but with the consequence of sin (his own punishment in becoming man, in bearing our sins, in taking on flesh and paying that penalty due mankind because of sin). I will still face the consequences of sin. I was stillborn, spiritually. And I will die a physical death (unless Christ comes before that time). But my hope is in Christ because therein is life and my life..

Hi Jon, you keep inching toward the doctrine of "original sin".

BUT

NO, you will NEVER die brother!

There is no death at all for us.

When we were born anew (or from above) our dead human spirit was made alive and became partaker of the divine nature

2 Peter 1:4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

That new human spirit has been made alive in the Spirit and we no longer live in the flesh or in the city of the dead.

1 Peter 4:6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

The so-called "death" you address is a thing of the past, Jesus abolished it at His resurrection.
The temple you now occupy is due for a renovation.

1 Peter 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

We are to reckon this as a reality. Our only death is to sin.

Romans 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

John 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

HankD

 

[JonC]

Hi Jon, you keep inching toward the doctrine of "original sin".

I see how I can be inching towards that doctrine, and I suppose depending on how it is defined I may already be there. I believe that death entered the world through Adam's sin. And I believe that our sin (as mankind, not individuals) is linked to Adam's disobedience as representative of the flesh, just as our obedience can be said to be Christ in us.

We are playing a bit with the idea of death, (I do not think that you disagree we will experience a physical death, and I don't think that you will disagree with the verse I am posting here).

I affirm, brethren, by the boasting in you which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily. ... You fool! That which you sow does not come to life unless it dies;.... 1 Corinthians 15:31-41

 

[HankD]

I see how I can be inching towards that doctrine, and I suppose depending on how it is defined I may already be there. I believe that death entered the world through Adam's sin. And I believe that our sin (as mankind, not individuals) is linked to Adam's disobedience as representative of the flesh, just as our obedience can be said to be Christ in us.

We are playing a bit with the idea of death, (I do not think that you disagree we will experience a physical death, and I don't think that you will disagree with the verse I am posting here).

The body of the redeemed "sleeps" in the "grave" (not the soul and/or the spirit) when they make their exodus to the Lord.

Acts 7:60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.

1 Thessalonians 4:13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

1 Thessalonians 4:15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep.

I affirm, brethren, by the boasting in you which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily. ... You fool! That which you sow does not come to life unless it dies;.... 1 Corinthians 15:31-41

Of course I admit to that usage, but it was because they needed to be corrected, they did not believe in the resurrection so Paul accommodated them by calling them fools followed by logic and reason.
In verse 51 the word "sleep" is the word for the bodies (not the spirits/souls) awaiting the resurrection.

1 Corinthians 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed

"I die daily" - The flesh must be dealt with on a daily basis.

HankD