Spiritual Death

[The Biblicist]

I will follow up shortly, maybe tonight? Maybe tomorrow.

Point being--Adam's PERSON and BEING was never able to be a LIFE GIVING entity. Only CHRIST. That IS in the Text and I will show it later.

At best it is an inference as the comparison is between YOUR OWN BODY AS A CHILD OF GOD with the future resurrected body. Your straining at gnats and swallowing elephants. Moreover, it is speaking of the body Adam had being without "incorruption" as his was mutably corrupt,, whereas the resurrection body due to completed salvation in Christ is "incorruptible." So, there is no argument here for sinless life prior to the fall transitioning to, experiencing "spiritual deadness" due to sin.

 

[JonShaff]

At best it is an inference as the comparison is between YOUR OWN BODY AS A CHILD OF GOD with the future resurrected body. Your straining at gnats and swallowing elephants.

Maybe i am, but i still love Jesus and i love you, too! Follow-up to come...

 

[The Biblicist]

I am not making an argument here, i am just making sure we are clear on what i am REALLY focused on.

The context is between a CORRUPTIBLE body which became corrupted versus an INCORRUPTIBLE body which cannot be corrupted. This does not prove that the quality of Adam's prefallen life was the LIFE OF GOD in a mutable state.

 

[JonC]

You have to be kidding?? Don't you fellas believe in context as a primary factor for interpreting scripture????

You have to read into the text what is not there. It is a contrast between "soul" and "spiritual" and a contrast between a physical NATURAL body and a PHYSICAL resurrected body. The natural body is soul centered, meaning the pre-resurrected body of both saved and lost is "soul" centered as the soul is the administrative center. Even saved people in non-glorified bodies are attempting to "put on" the new man, and dealing with all the issues relating to death. The glorified PHYSICAL body is "spiritual" or "spirit" centered and free from all sin consequences.

This has NOTHING to do with our discussions.

I was kidding. I knew it wouldn't really settle it.

You are starting to sound a bit new age with this one, Obi Wan

 

[The Biblicist]

Maybe i am, but i still love Jesus and i love you, too! Follow-up to come...

I am sure you are superior to me, but the context is about a body that is able to corrupt and did corrupt versus one that cannot due to completed salvation in Christ. This text says nothing about the quality of LIFE directly infused into Adam by God, the LIFE OF GOD imparted in a mutable condition based on obedience, which could endure eternally based on continued obedience.

The life by rebirth is SUPERIOR only because it is immutable but it is the same LIFE OF GOD and that superiority will be evidenced in an incorruptible body versus a corruptible body that was corrupted by sin.

 

[The Biblicist]

I was kidding. I knew it wouldn't really settle it.

You are starting to sound a bit new age with this one, Obi Wan

The context is about the mutability of the Adamic body that could be corrupted and was corrupted by sin as incorruptibility was conditioned on ongoing obedience. The glorified body is superior as it is based on an immutable union with the Life of God in Christ which cannot be corrupted and its incorruptibility will be evidenced in the glorified body, but it is the same LIFE OF GOD enjoyed by Adam before the fall by a mutable union with God based on obedience.

 

[The Biblicist]

STRAW MAN ASSERTIONS

The double jons keep asserting that union in Christ and the life obtained is superior to the mutable life given to Adam as though we don't beleive that. They keep asserting that the new creation is better than old creation as though we don't beleive that. These are not subjects of disagreements at all.

The difference is whether Adam had a mutable, corruptible life with God and body received directly from God prior to the fall that transitioned from corruptible to corrupted and from life with God to spiritual death that separated him from God.

Most of the arguments and scriptures advanced to defend our position have been totally ignored and for good reason- they can't provide answers, so they ignore and redirect like good little politicians do on tv every day when they are directly confronted with what they can't answer.

 

[JonC]

The context is about the mutability of the Adamic body that could be corrupted and was corrupted by sin as incorruptibility was conditioned on ongoing obedience. The glorified body is superior as it is based on an immutable union with the Life of God in Christ which cannot be corrupted and its incorruptibility will be evidenced in the glorified body, but it is the same LIFE OF GOD enjoyed by Adam before the fall by a mutable union with God based on obedience.

Perhaps God left that out of the actual Bible because it lacked the flow the rest of Scripture maintained.

The issue I have with your view is that very little is actually in the text of Scripture and none of it is dependent on Scripture.

I do not understand why people believe that God would reveal only fractions of doctrines and leave it up to men to fill in the blanks and put it all together.

Add to this the fact that Scripture makes sense without your additions and the cards are stacked against your tradition actually being correct.

 

[Benjamin]

all in whose nostrils is breath of a living spirit -- of all that is in the dry land -- have died. Gen 7:22

What was that, breath of living spirit, doing in all those spiritually dead people?

Well, obviously God the took the breath back and recreated man in the fall or otherwise the Calvinists' doctrinal view of Total Depravity would fall flat right on its face.

 

[JonC]

The thread is approaching its life expectancy and I will close it in the morning if it is still open.

Don't worry, @The Biblicist , we can start another.

 

[Aaron]

Yep.

People have argued that divine justice demands spiritual death as punishment. Therefore Jesus had to suffer what the lost will experience at Judgment (spiritual death) by God separating form Christ in some form.

The scapegoat, upon which the sins of the nation were laid, and sent away from the dwelling place of God and His people:

Who did that represent?

 

[JonC]

The scapegoat, upon which the sins of the nation were laid, and sent away from the dwelling place of God and His people:

Who did that represent?

Good topic. At Yom Kippur there were two goats. One was offered to God and the priest symbollically put the sins of Israel on the head of the other and released it to an uninhabited place. The latter (the one not killed) is the scapegoat. To the Jews it represented the removal of sin (forgiveness).

Since we are at the tail end of this thread why not start a thread to look at the topic.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The caution is when people hold to certain traditions as if they were Scripture. That is what we see here.

Many men rightly applaud Calvinism, for example, for its logical consistency. It is a remarkably reasonable theological system. Each theory feeds into and from another. But this is also why it is the weakest of all theories. It is based on a theoretical construction of several philosophical ideas. It is, essentially, a house of cards.

What does this have to do with your theory here?

I’m glad you asked, Martin.

This extra-biblical notion (this idea that is reasoned out but not actually present in Scripture) is like a loose thread. We all have loose threads in our theology. These are debatable items, typically matters of interpretation. If you find one in error, simply pluck it off and toss it aside. But you have several of these threads woven into the fabric of your tradition. That’s a problem. They are foundational. Start pulling this thread and your tradition unravels.

And this is only one. As we have seen, your tradition holds several ideas that are humanly reasoned from Scripture but not actually present in Scripture. Again, the issue is that these theories (these exercises in human wisdom) are foundational to your tradition. That is an issue.

Even though I find your question a bit absurd, I will answer it. God did not make Adam sin. He created Adam and Adam sinned. Read your bible and you will find this is true.

No argument, no interaction with what I posted, just the usual smear of 'traditionalism and a bald assertion.
This is what is ruining this board. What is the point of taking time to deal with and present the Scriptures if this is what you get?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I do not admit spiritual death is a biblical reality.

I am saying man is "flesh" and not "spirit". I am saying natural man is not spiritually alive and needs life in Christ.

Will you please explain what the difference between 'spiritual death' and 'not spiritually alive' is? Reference to Ephesians 2:5 would be appreciated.

 

[Iconoclast]

Given what Scripture actually states, I wonder how Barcellos got enough material to write a book.

This is my problem with relying on tradition as if it were Scripture, @Iconoclast. I do not believe God gave us His Word in order to spark our imagination so that man would expound on Scripture and write an entire book about what Scripture gives in a very short revelation.

I'd ordered that book and I'll let you know I have fallen a little behind in my reading so I'm looking to read what I have but in light of this thread maybe I'll have to pick up the book and see if I missed a few things. Now John Owen d
Wrote several hundred pages on just Romans 8:6 call the grace and duty of being spiritually minded that's available online but in doing so he used about two or three hundred verses throughout the Bible to help explain an open up the one verse so inexperienced person can do that I don't think God has given us the Bible as unassembled puzzle and what messages puzzle over it and not know what to believe throughout our whole life. I have to do a lot of driving tonight still so I'm using voice to text so if the grammar and don't put some words get in there that I can't edit right away you'll have to forgive me of that

 

[JonC]

Will you please explain what the difference between 'spiritual death' and 'not spiritually alive' is? Reference to Ephesians 2:5 would be appreciated.

Sure.

Scripture presents natural man "not spiritually alive", i.e., dead. Dead is a state of not being alive.

However, what was being claimed was that this state of being spiritually dead must mean that at one time we were spiritually alive. This is not how Scripture handles the topic. Scripture tells us there is "of the flesh" and "of the spirit". Not "of the spirit/flesh" died spiritually to be "of the flesh" and then will be born again "of the spirit" and fixed in that state.


Ephesians 2:1-7
And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.


We (you and I) were dead in our trespasses and sins. We (you and I) lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind. We (you and I) were by nature children of wrath.

But because of God's great love with which He loved us (reminds us of Deuteronomy 7, doesn't it) even when we were dead in our transgressions (living in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, by nature children of wrath) God made us alive together with Christ and raised us up with Him and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.

Are you suggesting that that verse implies there was a mutable state of "spiritual life" outside of Christ?

Or are you suggesting that the passage implies that man was spiritually alive and then died and can be made spiritually alive again in Christ (for good this time)?

 

[JonC]

I'd ordered that book and I'll let you know I have fallen a little behind in my reading so I'm looking to read what I have but in light of this thread maybe I'll have to pick up the book and see if I missed a few things. Now John Owen d
Wrote several hundred pages on just Romans 8:6 call the grace and duty of being spiritually minded that's available online but in doing so he used about two or three hundred verses throughout the Bible to help explain an open up the one verse so inexperienced person can do that I don't think God has given us the Bible as unassembled puzzle and what messages puzzle over it and not know what to believe throughout our whole life. I have to do a lot of driving tonight still so I'm using voice to text so if the grammar and don't put some words get in there that I can't edit right away you'll have to forgive me of that

Yea, let me know.

I am apprehensive when people write at much length on topics that Scripture is fairly short about. I worry about how they fill in the space, I suppose.

When I studied ANE thought (at a secular university) they made interesting comparisons about paganism and the Hebrew ideas. Pagan temples were set up along a general idea represented in the Garden of Eden. There was a temple, out of the temple there was a symbolic river (sometimes a real one, or a stream) which fed into an area where people served deity. Sometimes (often) there were ziggurats which gave cities (temple cities) great reputations. The idea was to entice deity to dwell in the temple. The similarities are, IMHO, evident - the temple itself is like an idea of Eden proper, with the river (blessings of deity) supplying the people.

Anyway, that was an interesting topic.

Later in seminary I became interested in Eden as a temple-type for the Hebrew people as well.

So there are very interesting topics to explore.

https://www.amazon.com/Getting-Garden-Right-Adams-Christ/dp/1943539081

 

[JonC]

No argument, no interaction with what I posted, just the usual smear of 'traditionalism and a bald assertion.
This is what is ruining this board. What is the point of taking time to deal with and present the Scriptures if this is what you get?

Thus far you have only tossed out a few unrelated passages - nothing stating that Adam or anyone else was at one time spiritually alive and then died spiritually.

You have assumed that for God to have made Adam "upright" He must have created Him "in Christ". But the problem there is it ignores Christ as the Lamb slain form the foundation of the world. It assumes "upright" means "spiritually alive"/ "in Christ" rather than without sin (which points to the Fall).

Here are a few options to get the conversation rolling:

Show me a verse that states the lost die spiritually (that the lost are born again so they can experience a spiritual death).
Show me a verse that states anyone was spiritually alive and then they died spiritually.
Show me a verse that describes spiritual life as being temporary.
Show me a verse that speaks of a spiritual life outside of Christ.

You can't and we both know it. This is what I mean by "tradition". Your beliefs are not found in Scripture itself. I prefer "mythology", but thought that may be less well received.

 

[kyredneck]

So, I'll ask again--when does a person experience "spiritual death"?

When did you experience spiritual death?

(And I agree @InTheLight )

When did you experience spiritual death?

When did you experience spiritual death?

9 And I was alive apart from the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died; Ro 7

What does this mean?

 

[JonC]

9 And I was alive apart from the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died; Ro 7

What does this mean?

Romans 7:7-12 NASBS
What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting f if the Law had not said, “ YOU SHALL NOT COVET g .” [8] But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. [9] I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died; [10] and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me; [11] for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. [12] So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.

I believe Paul is explaining the nature of the Law and that the Law itself (like God's command to Adam) is not evil but instead brings knowledge of sin.

I do not believe Paul was claiming he was "spiritually alive" before he was considered "under the Law" (their custom was 13 years old, if I remember correctly) and then he died spiritually and later was made alive again in Christ.