Tree of Life

[Thinkingstuff]

HP: I believe God has something far better for us than the bondage and limitations mere flesh genders. :thumbs: :godisgood:

I'm not sure what you mean by flesh genders. I know when we're resurrected we will be beyond sex. But we'll still have a physical resurrection. And being human isn't a bondage. Sin is.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Thinkingstuff: And being human isn't a bondage

HP: Tell that to my father who has passed on to be with the Lord. The closest he ever got to the heavens was peering through the tiny fuzzy little lens of a backyard telescope, but he loved to do even that.

As some might say, you came too late to tell him that being capsulated by human flesh was not bondage. :godisgood:

PS: I would not be surprised if you do not hear from many that are in some bondage, limitation, or incapacity the bondage the flesh genders for us humans.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

HP: Tell that to my father who has passed on to be with the Lord. The closest he ever got to the heavens was peering through the tiny fuzzy little lens of a backyard telescope, but he loved to do even that.

As some might say, you came too late to tell him that being capsulated by human flesh was not bondage. :godisgood:

PS: I would not be surprised if you do not hear from many that are in some bondage, limitation, or incapacity the bondage the flesh genders for us humans.

That condition came with sin. I don't believe God created us that way. I believe we will be resurrected as human beings not in bondage to sexuality but human biengs none the less (glorified body?). I don't believe we'll be angles are some such.

 

[Brother Bob]

Adam brought physical death (flesh) to all mankind, when he fell. He also brought death to his own soul and was in need of a Saviour. That is why the flaming swords were put to keep the way of the Tree of Life which is the word of God. Adam was no different then we after the fall, he was in need of a Saviour and in order to get there had to go through the word of God.(The flaming swords). It was once appointed unto man to die, that is the flesh. When we come to know God and glorify him not as God, We sin and therefore bring forth death. The flesh already had the appointment of death, so it is the "soul that sinneth" shall die, and then is in need of a Saviour.

BBob,

 

[BobRyan]

Bob said

When you take your picture you capture your image on film.

Your point about "A living soul" vs an "immortal soul" or "eternal soul" is a good one. Why do you suppose the Word of God doesn't ever use terms like "immortal soul" or "eternal soul"?

HP: I cannot follow you clearly on this one BR. There was no intention on my part to make any distinction between a living soul and an immortal or eternal soul.

I am simply asking for the reason that you think neither term is ever mentioned in scripture.

Certainly the soul/spirit of man is not immortal in the same sense that God alone is immortal, but immortal carries more than one meaning. We both realize that we are created beings and as such have had a beginning. God had no such beginning.

Agreed.

Still if one is to use a common definition of ‘immortal,’ that being simply “possessing life that will have no end,” (Noah webster) we are indeed immortal.

In fact 1Cor 15 uses the term "immortal" for just that very purpose as you have mentioned -- pointing to the time when we "put on immortality".

So -- this is also agreed.

We are indeed in possession of an "eternal soul", one that will spend eternity in either heaven with God or in hell with the devil and his angels.

I agree that some do teach that --and I agree that the term "eternal soul" conveys that idea perfectly.

I am simply asking if you have a guess about why it is a term never used in scripture.

I can think of no plainer concept in the Word of God than that which would be in support of the existence of man possessing an "eternal immortal soul".

I think the term "eternal immortal soul" identifies the teaching you are speaking to perfectly.

I am just asking about the lack of reference to that or even to "immortal soul" or even "eternal soul" in scripture.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[LeBuick]

It is right in the verses you quoted though you leave out a very important word: vs. 13"For before the law was given, sin was in the world but sin is not taken into account when there is no law. vs.14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses,"

But there was a law between Adam and Moses from the order of Melchisedec.

Note that these verses also are about a contrast between Adam and Christ where Adam stands for mans condemnation and Christ for mans justification.

Paul explains this here;

1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

Christ sacrifice was for our spiritual being.

Man is a three part being (have you read watchman nee?) Body Soul and Spirit. When man sinned he died in all three catagories of himself. Christ physically died for us taken all our condemnation onto himself. Now this is key. He rose physically from the dead so that:.

He risen form clearly had flesh and bones as he stated this to his disciples. However he did walk through a closed door so it was not flesh as we know it. His physical death was the sacrifice, shedding of sinless blood, the slaying of the lamb etc...

I can't prove definitively that man didn't die in all three categories just as you can prove man died in all three categories so this is a discussion with no true conclusion. My point was that Christ died that our soul should not be lost and if the body gets to ride along them so be it. He didn't die for our flesh.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

But there was a law between Adam and Moses from the order of Melchisedec.




Paul explains this here;

1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

Christ sacrifice was for our spiritual being.




He risen form clearly had flesh and bones as he stated this to his disciples. However he did walk through a closed door so it was not flesh as we know it. His physical death was the sacrifice, shedding of sinless blood, the slaying of the lamb etc...

I can't prove definitively that man didn't die in all three categories just as you can prove man died in all three categories so this is a discussion with no true conclusion. My point was that Christ died that our soul should not be lost and if the body gets to ride along them so be it. He didn't die for our flesh.

I believe God intended to redeem man entirely everything soul, and body. We agree then to disagree. However, I have a serious question for you. What separates you from the gnostics of the early church?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

My last post seems harsh (sorry). Its very early. What I mean is that what you're saying sounds very close to certain gnostic beliefs mentioned by the Early Church Fathers. Most of their believes came from Platonism where he believed matter was corrupt and so there was this conserted effort to separate Christ, and christians from matter.

 

[trustitl]

Do you believe in a bodily physical resurrection? I believe the intent of the Genesis story is to indicate that Man would have lived for ever in his body until sin entered the world. Neoplatonist and gnostic have this idea that the material world is by nature corruptable. For Scientist would say that this is one of the laws of thermodynamics. Things degenerate back into energy. The thing about Einstien is that he showed how energy (enough of it) could be translated into matter. Who's to say that by mans disobedience the material world then became corrupt? Now if you told me that Genesis is just a legend and that everything is symbolic then you would have an argument. But using Genesis as it is writen you come close to gnostic and neoplationic beliefs. You may get away with it because you don't believe Jesus is a demurge.

Yes I believe in a physical resurrection. I am not aware of the Neoplatonists and gnostics ideas on the material world. Do they think corruptible means evil by nature or merely subject to corruption? I think it is the latter. I think there was corruption prior to the fall of man but man was kept from it because of the Tree of Life. This corruption was part of creation and God saw it as good because it was natural. For example, the leaves would have changed color and "regenerated" in spring. These leaves would break down and provide food for worms. When a dinosaur stepped on a mouse it would have died and subsequently decayed. These are "good" functions in a perfect creation.

Also, I do not think Genesis is a legend but rather an account of real events that occurred as written.

Finally, I do not see Jesus as an agent created by God who then went on to create the world. The Son did create the world but not in the form of some subordinate to God.

 

[LeBuick]

I believe God intended to redeem man entirely everything soul, and body. We agree then to disagree. However, I have a serious question for you. What separates you from the gnostics of the early church?

Couple of thousand years... :laugh:

 

[LeBuick]

My last post seems harsh (sorry). Its very early. What I mean is that what you're saying sounds very close to certain gnostic beliefs mentioned by the Early Church Fathers. Most of their believes came from Platonism where he believed matter was corrupt and so there was this conserted effort to separate Christ, and christians from matter.

Understood, I'm not saying the body won't rise from the grave. Just as Jesus rose, flesh and bones, so shall we rise to be with him forever. I also believe the resurrected body is different from our current flesh. Mainly, blood will no longer be the life and we won't be constrained to earthly influences or physics.