Soul Sleep (the unconscious dead)

[wopik]

Ben W

.....yet look a little further and you will see that New Testament Greek has grammer like any other language, albeit different.

You may be right, but.....

Here's what I found doing a Google search on punctuation and NT Greek ---

"If you are going to get to grips with the New Testament in Greek, you have to learn that the punctuation marks you see in printed editions represent modern convention rather than what was originally written."
http://www.ntgreek.fsnet.co.uk/ntgreek/m06-punc.html

-------------------------

When the New Testament was first written there were no punctuation marks. In fact, the words were run together one after another without any separation. Punctuation and versification entered the text of manuscripts at a much later period.

http://www.teknia.com/level1/04%20punctuation.html

 

[GODzThunder]

This is why one must rightly divide the word of truth.

 

[Marcia]

Originally posted by Marcia:
The cults put the comma after today only for the reason to support their doctrine of soul sleep.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Finally, we get to Jesus' words on the Cross. He said to the criminal next to him - "Truly, truly, I say unto you, today you will be with me in paradise."

Adventists and others will immediately jump in here to say that the punctuation here is in error. In the original Greek there was no punctuation, and it always had to be supplied by the translators. Thus, they tell us, this verse can also be translated like this: "Truly, truly, I say unto you today, you will be with me in paradise." If that is what Jesus is saying, then he is saying today that the person will be in paradise with him at some point in the future.

But can this verse really be translated this way, or is it a ploy to try to make us accept this false doctrine ?

If we take a concordance, and look up every instance where Jesus (or anyone) says "Truly, truly, I say unto you" or "Amen, Amen, I say unto you" or any of the various translations of this phrase, we will notice that in none of them do we ever find anyone saying, "Amen, Amen, I say unto you TODAY." The expression is ALWAYS "Amen, amen, I say unto you, [and then the promise or statement of fact]." Go and look this up for yourself, and go and look up the phrase involved - you will notice that it does not have a time clause in it. Because of the definite consistency in the way this phrase is used, and especially the way in which Jesus uses this phrase, we can be 100% sure that the "today" in the statement in question must belong to the second part of the statement, the promise to the thief on the cross. It cannot belong to the "Amen, Amen" or "Truly, truly" clause because it is never used that way. We must accept the grammar of this verse, and accept that that very day, the theif was with Jesus in paradise.

http://home.global.co.za/~skorsman/sda/soulslp.html

Third, even though the thief on the cross has been used to prove about every point in Christian theology, his case is still relevant here: "And He said to him, 'Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise'" (Luke 23:43). The Jehovah's Witness's New World Translation punctuates Jesus words as "Truly I say to you today, you shall be with Me in Paradise," giving the impression that "today" refers simply to the time of Jesus' statement. But the context demands that the "today" refer to when the thief on the cross would be with Jesus in paradise, because Jesus is responding to his request in the previous verse: "Jesus, remember me when you come in your kingdom!" The response, "Today you shall be with Me in paradise" can in this context only be taken to mean, "Not only will I remember you when I come in my kingdom, but already today you shall be with me in heaven."
http://www.desiringgod.org/library/theological_qa/heaven/bw_death_res.html

</font>[/QUOTE]Wopik, I went to all this trouble to post this info on page one but I don't think you read it. If you read it, you will see why the comma is not placed after "today."

Please read the above.

 

[wopik]

Marcia, thank you for all that work; I read it all. I guess you could say I have my comments about the thief on the cross posted in the thread "3 days and 3 nights".

"Jesus, remember me when you come in your kingdom!" The response, "....you shall be with Me in paradise"

".....To him who overcomes, I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the Paradise of God" (Rev. 2:7, New American Standard Version).

Revelation 22:1-2: These two verses are referring to "the holy city", new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God" (Rev. 21:2, ASV). In this city we find "a river of water of life, bright as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb, in the midst of the street thereof. And on this side of the river and on that was the tree of life" (ASV).


The new Jerusalem contains the tree of life. In the new Jerusalem is the Paradise of God.

Jesus said the repentant thief would be with Him in this Paradise. The new Jerusalem is not yet finished. Jesus is still preparing a place for us in it (John 14:2). Not until after the millennium will it be fully ready (Rev. 20:1-5). Not until then will it descend to earth -- not until then will the repentant malefactor enter Paradise.

 

[Marcia]

The beggar in Luke 16 was with God after death - he did not have to wait until the new Jerusalem.

In 2 Cor. 12.3, Paul talks about being taken up the 3rd heaven and calls it "paradise." That is not the new Jerusalem, either.

Paradise is being with God; Jesus clearly promised the thief that on that day, he would be with Jesus in paradise. To read it as something the thief had to wait for requires reading something into the text that is not there. Aside from which, this view is supported by other scripture which many have posted for you. Also, the issue of the comma being before "today" is supported by scripture as I posted.

 

[Trotter]

Wopik wrote:
Jesus said the repentant thief would be with Him in this Paradise. The new Jerusalem is not yet finished. Jesus is still preparing a place for us in it (John 14:2). Not until after the millennium will it be fully ready (Rev. 20:1-5). Not until then will it descend to earth -- not until then will the repentant malefactor enter Paradise.

Wopik, you are extreme confused, or extremely deluded. No, you can't be deluded, because several have shown you that your absurd notions do not line up with Scripture.

As for the above...all I can say is "Hogwash!"

So, let me see if I have this straight. You think that when you die, you will lie dormant, in stasis, until the end of the Millennium? And then you'll get to enter into the prescence oft he Lord?

Yeah...OK...want to by some ocean front property right outside Flagstaff?

Why have you refused to name the religious group (read as CULT) that you get this stuff from? Oh, I read the line about your "study group" that shows no partiality. In Vietnam those types of things were called "brainwashing".

The best thing that you could do would be to find a good Bible school and enroll, but to learn, not argue. You really need to distance yourself from these deviant doctrines.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

[GODzThunder]

Originally posted by Trotter:
[QB]

Wopik wrote:
Jesus said the repentant thief would be with Him in this Paradise. The new Jerusalem is not yet finished. Jesus is still preparing a place for us in it (John 14:2). Not until after the millennium will it be fully ready (Rev. 20:1-5). Not until then will it descend to earth -- not until then will the repentant malefactor enter Paradise.

Actually Wopit, Jesus said that THIS DAY thou shalt be with me in paradise. This means today this day within twenty four hours within our earthly time speaking in earthly terms. That thief ended up on paradise that very evening.

 

[wopik]

GODzThunder

Jesus said that THIS DAY thou shalt be with me in paradise.

"Today" was the day Christ made the promise, not the day they would be in paradise.


Jesus emphasized "today" because the thief repented and believed in Jesus that day. The previous day he was lost.

Moses uses the word "today" similarly in Deuteronomy 30:16-18. In verse 16, he commands them "today" to follow the Lord. He was not saying they only had to follow the Lord that day. Just as Moses gave the command that day, Jesus gave the promise that day.

 

[wopik]

Marcia,

Jesus clearly promised the thief that on that day, he would be with Jesus in paradise. To read it as something the thief had to wait for requires reading something into the text that is not there.

One should remember that the thief ask Jesus to remember him when He came into His Kingdom.

The term Paradise is used for the Garden of Eden (Gen. 2:15 and 3:23, LXX), for the plains of Jordan (Gen. 13:10, LXX), for the third heaven (2 Cor. 12:2-4), and for God's kingdom (Rev. 2:7).

Jesus heard the malefactor's plea for remembrance and told the man that his request was as good as done.

Obviously, the malefactor believed he could be resurrected if Christ would only remember him. Therefore, Christ assured him of the surprising truth that, even on that very day, he would be among the righteous - awaiting the resurrection (Jn. 5:28-29).

John 11: 23-24, the resurrection is the hope of the Christian for to live again.

 

[Marcia]

Awaiting the resurrection refers to the resurrection of the body, not the soul.

What the thief said showed that he believed who Jesus was. Jesus promised him that that day he would be with Jesus in paradise, a word used for being with God (see 2 Cor 12.4 and Rev 2.7).

 

[wopik]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Awaiting the resurrection refers to the resurrection of the body, not the soul.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the soul can mean many things, but nothing immortal.

http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/psuche.html

---------------------------------
God made man of two ingredients, dust material from ground, and breath of God. That's it.

Body + Breath of God = Living soul

Body - Breath of God(life) = Dead soul

******************

man is a living soul, not an immortal soul.

The words "immortal soul" are not in the Bible. Only God has inherent, self-sustaining immortality.

The immortal soul doctrine is completely false. Man is a soul, a living soul.

Body + Breath of God = Living soul (Gen 2:7)

Body - Breath of God(life) = Dead soul Lev. 19:28 - link

 

[Marcia]

Someone already addressed all this to you, Wopik. You used those very same verses and they were refuted in several posts.

Talking on this topic with you is, sorry to say, just swimming in circles; we never get anywhere.

 

[wopik]

Someone already addressed all this to you, Wopik. You used those very same verses and they were refuted in several posts.

why do you want to refute the Bible, when it says, "the dead know nothing" - Eccl 9:5.

you say the dead know nothing on earth; but the Bible doesn't render this statement like you do.

this verse is contrasting the differences between the living and the dead: the living KNOW, the dead DON'T know.

there is no knowledge in the grave - Eccl 9:10.

peoples' thoughts, their plans end when they go to the grave - psalms 146:4.

crystal clear!

Eccl 9:5

 

[HankD]

peoples' thoughts, their plans end when they go to the grave - psalms 146:4.

Sure, go to a funeral parlor and talk to a corpse, they won't answer. But that is their body, not the immaterial part of their being.

wopik, did you ever respond to me about the spirit of Samuel in 1 Samuel 28?

HankD

 

[wopik]

wopik, did you ever respond to me about the spirit of Samuel in 1 Samuel 28?

HankD .

yes I did! But was it really Samuel?

Samuel was dead (1Sam. 25:1).

If, as some believe, he went to heaven, Satan would not have been given permission to bring him down in response to the incantations of a wicked woman.

Also God had already refused to communicate by dreams, Urim, or prophets (1Sam. 28:6). The Lord's disapproval is recorded in 1Chron. 10:13, 14, noting that Saul died for his transgressions. He inquired of an evil spirit and not of the Lord.

The figure that appeared to the spiritualist woman was an impersonation of the prophet by an evil angel, perhaps by Satan himself. If he could transform himself to appear as an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14), he could also appear as the prophet Samuel.

In 1Sam. 28:11, we see Samuel was supposedly brought up. By modern theology we would expect righteous people like Samuel to come down. Pagan ideas assumed all the dead were below ground. The popular pagan idea about death slipped into the beliefs of God's people before Jesus' time.

[ July 18, 2004, 01:24 PM: Message edited by: wopik ]

 

[wopik]

If Saul had thought it necessary to his conversation with Samuel that the body of Samuel should be called out of the grave, he would have taken the witch with him to Ramah, where his sepulchre was;

but the design was wholly upon his soul, which yet, if it became visible, was expected to appear in the usual resemblance of the body; and God permitted the devil, to answer the design, to put on Samuel's shape, that those who would not receive the love of the truth might be given up to strong delusions and believe a lie.


That it could not be the soul of Samuel himself they might easily apprehend when it ascended out of the earth, for the spirit of a man, much more of a good man, goes upward, Eccl 3:21.

But, if people will be deceived, it is just with God to say, "Let them be deceived." That the devil, by the divine permission, should be able to personate Samuel is not strange, since he can transform himself into an angel of light!


nor is it strange that he should be permitted to do it upon this occasion, that Saul might be driven to despair, by enquiring of the devil, since he would not, in a right manner, enquire of the Lord, by which he might have had comfort.

 

[Marcia]

Also God had already refused to communicate by dreams, Urim, or prophets (1Sam. 28:6). The Lord's disapproval is recorded in 1Chron. 10:13, 14, noting that Saul died for his transgressions. He inquired of an evil spirit and not of the Lord.

The figure that appeared to the spiritualist woman was an impersonation of the prophet by an evil angel, perhaps by Satan himself. If he could transform himself to appear as an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14), he could also appear as the prophet Samuel.

It was Samuel who appeared, because God allowed Samuel to appear, not because the medium of Endor had the power to bring Samuel there. The reason we can know it was Samuel and not a demon is that 1. A rebuke was given to Saul for disobeying God
2. And a specific prediction was given to Saul that he and his sons would die the following day and the Philistines would defeat Israel. These events all happened as predicted.

Satan or a demon could not have told the future so specifically. Satan also would not rebuke Saul for disobeying God by not destroying the Amelikites.

Saul was punished for consulting a medium, which had been forbidden by God.

 

[GODzThunder]

Consider the parable of Luke 16. Though the parable of Lazarus and the rich man may be just a story to illustrate another point. The fact is this, Jesus used a parable of two men whose soul did not depart back to God but went to a place, an afterlife of sorts where they continued a conscious existance. If soul sleep were fact then Christ would not, nay could not have used a parable that would refute such an idea. No parable Jesus gave was one of preposterous impossibility. Every parable was believable and probably happened in life many times over. The only way Christ could have used this teaching was if a soul actually went to a place of conscious existance.

 

[Marcia]

GodzThunder, many scholars do not think the Luke 16 story is a parable. It has none of the characteristics of a parable and it gives the name of one of the characters, which no parable by Jesus ever does. I think it is a true account of a real event.

But parable or not, your illustration is right on.

 

[GODzThunder]

I believe that it is a true event too