The problem with people not wanting to believe in hell is that they think sinners are not worthy of the divine judgement God has appointed to those who are evil and ungodly. They always try to say that a "loving God wouldn't throw someone into a place like that for all eternity." They will continue to twist scripture until they finally decide to cast off all works of darkness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word which is able to save your souls (James 1:21).

I say that justice hinges on the law of love, as justice defends the innocent and gives workers of iniquity their due reward.

"Yea, surely god will not do wickedly, neither will the Almighty pervert judgment." Job 34:12

Who are you to reply against God? You are a human who, on your own, has no proper definition or perspective on evil and righteousness. If hell truly bothers you that bad, repent from your heretical doctrine and go tell the lost and dying world about Jesus. Quit fooling yourself.

Before I do refute your arguments I am going to make my case for soul sleep and we are not born immortal.

Lets look at the beginning of time.

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Genesis 2:7 states for one to have a soul they must has a) physical body and the breath of life. With out these two things one is not in existence, this is why Solomon talks about:

Ecc 9:5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
Ecc 9:6 Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun.

Now I am looking at this in the context. Solomon understands that sheol is the grave. In the grave their is no envy, no love, no hatred, all memory is forgotten.

Solomon doesnt even consider what happens to the soul, as that is a pagan belief. Without a body and the breath of life you have no soul.

Further more Adam and Ever were not made immortal, as they would of never died.

Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.


The word 'die' is rather a simple one to comprehend. it means to cease to exist. It does not mean to enter another kind of world, an under world. It means simply to cease to exist. In fact the only time an 'under world' is mentioned is the Witch of Endor.

As God commanded the Israelites:

Deu 18:10 There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch,

It would be rather foolish to believe God would use a witch to reveal Himself. What about Baalam? Balaam was an over seer - a prophet. A prophet is much different than a witch. Infact through the whole Bible God NEVER reveals Himself in any shape or form to witches, neither does He grant them the power to do such supernatural events, but rather this is of the devil. The battle between good and evil is rarely shown and explained one key place to understand the power of the Devil is in the 10 plagues, Satan was able to do certain supernatural events, but not all.

Paul states:

2Co 11:13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
2Co 11:14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
2Co 11:15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

Paul understands how evil and decitful the devil is, the devil can be transformed in an angel of light.

At the witch of Endor it was not Samuel, but it was the devil.

Why had God commanded that no one should engage with witch craft? God commands all witches to be slain, so why would He reveal Himself to them?
Seances, divinations are all part of the devil uses, in the past and in the present. One should not be fooled.



Jesus reaffirms that not all recieve eternal life.
As He states:

'For God so love the world that He gave His one and only son, that who so ever believeth in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.'

Jesus shows the two paths one can choose to take- Eternal life (Immortal being) and Eternal death (Perish) These are the only two paths one can choose.

Eternal life is only granted by God. as Paul states:

'For the wages of sin is death BUT the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord' Eternal hell is just a fantastic understand of the after life, which originated in paganism. (if you dont believe me check it out) There is only two paths to death and to eternal life.

Eternal torment is not death, but is rather eternal life.

You have not taken these specific verses in context (chapter and subject) YET AGAIN. They do not apply to the spiritual realm, because the context (for this chapter and verses) is purely about the physical life and death.





Quoted sections from Gotquestions.org

You have no case for soul sleep either.

If you don't believe me, then look it up for yourself. Until then, your positions on the immortal soul (if you believe that humans do not have an immortal soul) and soul sleep (if you believe our souls DO sleep), are wrong. Pure and simple. I don't mean to offend you, but I'm not going to fudge either. You are basing these positions off false assumptions, decontextualization, and proof-texting. None of them make your positions correct.

If you are willing to give and take, asking questions and being asked, then we could have a dialogue. Until then, I'm afraid we're at an impasse.

As all people who know what a parable is, know that for a parable to be a parable it MUST have a meaning.

So, does the story of Lazarus and the rich man have a meaning? Yes it does.

At the start of the chapter, Jesus is telling His disciples a parable about a rich man and a steward...then the pharisees came:

Luk 16:14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.

Jesus begins speaking to them:
Luk 16:15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

So we understand that Jesus speaking directly to the Pharisees, this is story for them to hear.

Luk 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
Luk 16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

Note: These two verses are the most important!

Luk 16:19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:

So Jesus goes into the story again.

Since the audience is the pharisees, this is directed at them, as the pharisees were like this as it says in verse 14.

Luk 16:20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

So two characters.



So both have died.

This is the key verse:

Luk 16:25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

Jesus is showing them that since they have are living a high and presitigous life, this is where they will go.

As Jesus says:

Mat 6:19 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
Mat 6:20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:

The last two verses in the story are the most amazing!

Luk 16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

This is first of all saying that they do not heed to the law and prophets (underlined part) But a rather interesting point is that they will not be persuaded if one rose from the dead. (bolded part)

Now what does that mean?

Who died again and rose three days?

This story is rather and ambiguous, it shows that if one does not hear Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded through one who rose from the dead.

This is just stating they will be ignorant to Him dying and rising again.

As I have clearly shown, the story of the rich man and Lazarus was a parable, story for the Pharisees.



I dont see how I have taken it out of context, I know they dont apply to the spiritual realm and I never said they did.

Although there are many more arguements for soul sleep (The Greek and Hebrew blow immortality out of the sea)

Act 23:6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
Act 23:7 And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided.
Act 23:8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.
Act 23:9 And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees' part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.


I would like someone to explain have I take this verse out of context. Paul believed in a resurrection of the dead. It clearly states it.

I would like to end my rather long contention with quoting 1 thessolonians 4:

1Th 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.
1Th 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

As the Gaithers sing, 'What a day that will be.'

It surely will be a great day. Soul sleep is Biblically proven.

I challenge the people who are saying I am taking verses out of context to show me how? and what it actually means.

--sigh--. I'll get back to you tomorrow, with the Greek and Hebrew you falsely claim supports soul sleep. Right now, I want to relax. You sir, need to take several college-level or higher classes in sound hermeneutics and exegesis. In the meantime, please don't twist excellent Southern Gospel to support a heresy. Furthermore, why don't you pay more attention to my posts and refute the scriptures (both contextually and linguistically) that Gotquestions.org quoted against Soul Sleep? If the Greek and Hebrew REALLY support soul sleep (which they don't), then I want you to show me. RIGHT NOW.

Just because Paul believed in a PHYSICAL resurrection of the dead does not mean he automatically believed our souls slept either.

This post has been edited by jarkaimaster: Nov 5 2009, 09:04 PM

Have shown twice and in my recent post I showed in more depth.



You are dead right. Thats why it was the devil.



muy facil.

2Co 5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

So there is an earthly tabernacle and a Godly house

2Co 5:2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:

This is just saying that Paul earnestly waits to be clothed with a Godly house

2Co 5:3 If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.

Referring to Godly house

2Co 5:6 Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:
2Co 5:7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)

This is meerly stating what the above verses stated that while we are in our earthly tabernacles we are from God.

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

This rather self explanatory, would you rather be in your sinful body? or in heaven with the Lord?

1Co 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

That is what paul is referring to having new bodies and living on Earth and looking forward to heaven.



Yet, you cant prove that. That is your assumption.



I am working through this chronologically. But I have to study soon, but I will tonight when I have ample amount of time.

Interesting concept.

Before I explain what I think of this quote.

Lets look at Genesis 2:7

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

This is a key understanding.

God created man out of ground, there was still no living soul. Adam did not have soul at this point in time. God then breathed into man's nostrils the breath of life. The combination of the breath of life and a physical body became a dwelling place for a soul. Now if Adam and Eve didnt sin, they would of never experienced death. Death occurs due to the body failing. eg. Heart attack.
So now from understanding Genesis 2:7, man is immortal if he has some sought of body (which does not die) and the breath of life.

In heaven we will be immortal. God created us to be immortal, God created us never to die...but with the fall of humanity we have to taste death:

Gen 3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

we return to the dust, I am not talking about the soul. Without a body the soul is inanimate.

BUT there is good news

Romans 6:23 'For the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ Our Lord'

We have a chance to be redeemed, redeemed by the blood of the lamb.

You are right with that quote, but as I have shown above we have lost immortality...





Now as I have said aion is poorly translated to mean, for ever. It doesnt mean for ever, it means an unknown time period.

Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

The word, 'worlds' is aion

Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

If you need some more example, there are plenty.

BUT

Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

The word for everlasting or eternal in greek is: aiōnios

Jud 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Rev 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,

I would also like to quote Basil Atkinson, “When the adjective aionios meaning ‘everlasting’ is used in
Greek with nouns of action it has reference to the result of the action, not the process. Thus the phrase
‘everlasting punishment’ is comparable to ‘everlasting redemption’ and ‘everlasting salvation,’ both
Scriptural phrases. No one supposes that we are being redeemed or being saved forever. We were redeemed
and saved once for all by Christ with eternal results. In the same way the lost will not be passing through a
process of punishment for ever but will be punished once and for all with eternal results. On the other hand
the noun ‘life’ is not a noun of action, but a noun expressing a state. Thus the life itself is eternal"

Punishment is just once not an aionios (eternal) punishing.





I've shown 2 out of the 5 verses, that they relate to soul sleep, the others are easy as well.





Thank you for your quotation from wikipedia. I do apologise for not explaining myself properly.


I would like to end with quoting, John Hick states: "The idea of bodies burning for ever and continuously suffering
the intense pain of third-degree burns without either being consumed or losing consciousness is as
scientifically fantastic as it is morally revolting. . . . The thought of such a torment being deliberately
inflicted by divine decree is totally incompatible with the idea of God as infinite love.”

I will be looking forward to an in depth reply.



I believe the person (not the soul) gains immortality at the second coming of Christ.

All these verses support my contention.

Psa 22:26 The meek shall eat and be satisfied: they shall praise the LORD that seek him: your heart shall live for ever.

I dont disagree with that.



I agree with this as well, (spirit doesnt equal soul)



We need to understand the context what this verse means, to understand that lets see what Jude 7 says:

Jud 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

We have been given an example of eternal fire/contempt - Sodom and Gomorrah. Sodom and Gomorrah suffered the eternal fire, is it burning still? No. BUT the it was eternal. Go to Sodom and Gomorrah and you will see nothing but wilderness, which was a beautiful and fertile place. This is the same thing, people do go to everlasting contempt and everlasting life, the Bible explains what everlasting contempt is:

Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Being wiped out of existence completely.



lol.



As I have shown extensively, that one can not have a soul with out a body and the breath of life (Both are gone when one dies)

Now Hebrews 9:27 is taken out of context

Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

It never says the next moment (although, due to soul sleep, it is basically the next thing).



Dumbest thing I have heard this week.



Yes! Hades = grave. So I do agree with you there.



John 8:32



I have spent hours today explaining myself. Answering questions, show bible passages.

So I have a question for you.

What is the point of the second coming?

This post has been edited by Solja247: Nov 6 2009, 04:22 AM

Well, I would like to discuss how you took it all out of context like Jarkaimaster but I prefer to point out your fatal flaw. You stated "Solomon doesnt even consider what happens to the soul." That is wrong, he does right here: "Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was; and the spirit shall return to God who gave it." (Ecclesiastes 12:7)



You do not understand what it means to spiritually die. Which is very clear from your misrepresentation of this passage.

I

God doesn't use evil?

"Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech:" (Judges 9:23)

"And Saul's servants said unto him, Behold now, an evil spirit from God troubleth thee." (1 Samuel 16:15)

"...when the evil spirit from God is upon thee..." (vs. 16)
"...the [evil] spirit from God was upon Saul..." (vs. 23)

"And it came to pass on the morrow, that the evil spirit from God came upon Saul, and he prophesied in the midst of the house: and David played with his hand, as at other times: and [there was] a javelin in Saul's hand." (1 Samuel 18:10)



You have made no point with your long drawn out quotes of scripture which you constantly take out of context. Second, the Bible clearly states it was indeed Samuel, unless your calling God a liar or trying to change what God meant, in which case your like the Devil, quite literally. You have no ground to stand on in saying it was not Samuel.




Yes, eternal torment is death, They are in a state of eternal decay, pain, suffering, and etc. It is quite literally eternal death. Your trying to equate the concept of physical death to that of spiritual. They are not the same thing.



I stated, "In this case, the witch is shocked and displaced when she calls upon Samuel because rather than the familiar spirit she was calling, Samuel actually came."

You put I'm dead right. Therefore it can't be the devil. Again, scripture states it was Samuel. Also, are you telling me the Devil can prophesy? and why would the devil say what Samuel said? You have no ground to stand on.


It's far from an assumption. It's a fact. Please show me how it is not true. What argument do you hold against it? Only a fool would say because it does not follow his or her beliefs. That's called eisegesis.












Welcome again to the field of eisegesis. It does not matter what you think or anyone's opinion is. What matters is the text. This comment already shows that anything on the part of this guy is going to all be under eisegesis, interpreting everything according to what he is willing to believe or not.


Without the spirit, the soul is dead. They do equate together and you can hardly separate them, the same way with the Trinity.


Actually, that's not true.


"And in one day these populous cities became the tomb of their inhabitants, and the vast edifices of stone and timber became thin dust and ashes. And when the flames had consumed everything that was visible and that existed on the face of the earth, they proceeded to burn even the earth itself, penetrating into its lowest recesses, and destroying all the vivifying powers which existed within it so as to produce a complete and everlasting barrenness, so that it should never again be able to bear fruit, or to put forth any verdure; and to this very day it is scorched up. For the fire of the lightning is what is most difficult to extinguish, and creeps on pervading everything, and smouldering. And a most evident proof of this is to be found in what is seen to this day: for the smoke which is still emitted, and the sulphur which men dig up there, are a proof of the calamity which befell that country" (Philo, On Abraham 27).

"The length of this lake is five hundred and eighty furlongs, where it is extended as far as Zoar in Arabia; and its breadth is a hundred and fifty. The country of Sodom borders upon it. It was of old a most happy land, both for the fruits it bore and the riches of its cities, although it be now all burnt up. It is related how, for the impiety of its inhabitants, it was burnt by lightning; in consequence of which there are still the remainders of that Divine fire, and the traces [or shadows] of the five cities are still to be seen, as well as the ashes growing in their fruits; which fruits have a color as if they were fit to be eaten, but if you pluck them with your hands, they dissolve into smoke and ashes. And thus what is related of this land of Sodom hath these marks of credibility which our very sight affords us." (Josephus, The Wars of the Jews, IV.8.4).

"The fire which burns beneath the ground and the stench render the inhabitants of the neighboring country sickly and very short lived" (Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca Historica, II.48).

"Lake Sirbonis [most historians agree that Strabo has confused Lake Sirbonis with the Dead Sea] is large; in fact some state that it is one thousand stadia in circuit; however, it extends parallel to the coast to a length of slightly more than two hundred stadia, is deep to the very shore, and has water so very heavy that there is no use for divers, and any person who walks into it and proceeds no farther than up to his navel is immediately raised afloat. It is full of asphalt. The asphalt is blown to the surface at irregular intervals from the midst of the deep, and with it rise bubbles, as though the water were boiling; and the surface of the lake, being convex, presents the appearance of a hill. With the asphalt there arises also much soot, which, though smoky, is imperceptible to the eye; and it tarnishes copper and silver and anything that glistens, even gold" (Strabo, Geography, XVI.42).




Wrong. The soul can exist outside of the body, because it is with the spirit. The body can not exist without the soul and spirit.


Eisegesis


I take it this means you have no refutation.


This post has been edited by God-Sent: Nov 6 2009, 04:45 AM

I know people who want to sound smart use big words, but really do you have to use every second word.

I spent hours to make sure that I explained myself and it was all Biblical. If you dont want to accept truth then be my guest continue to believe a pagan deprived doctrine.



You are jumping over hurdles mate! show me from the Bible, come on.

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

or is it eisegesis again? dang, I am never going to get the hang of this (sarcasm)

Lets look at your assumption.

The word 'soul' in Hebrew is found 396 times, the Hebrew word is nephesh

Which simply means:

properly a breathing creature, that is, animal or (abstractly) vitality; used very widely in a literal, accommodated or figurative sense (bodily or mental): - any, appetite, beast, body, breath, creature, X dead (-ly), desire, X [dis-] contented, X fish, ghost, + greedy, he, heart (-y), (hath, X jeopardy of) life (X in jeopardy), lust, man, me, mind, mortality, one, own, person, pleasure, (her-, him-, my-, thy-) self, them (your) -selves, + slay, soul, + tablet, they, thing, (X she) will, X would have it.

Lev 7:18 And if any of the flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offerings be eaten at all on the third day, it shall not be accepted, neither shall it be imputed unto him that offereth it: it shall be an abomination, and the soul that eateth of it shall bear his iniquity.
Lev 7:19 And the flesh that toucheth any unclean thing shall not be eaten; it shall be burnt with fire: and as for the flesh, all that be clean shall eat thereof.
Lev 7:20 But the soul that eateth of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings, that pertain unto the LORD, having his uncleanness upon him, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.
Lev 7:21 Moreover the soul that shall touch any unclean thing, as the uncleanness of man, or any unclean beast, or any abominable unclean thing, and eat of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings, which pertain unto the LORD, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.

How can a soul eat?

Num 15:30 But the soul that doeth ought presumptuously, whether he be born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people.

Lets look at what a spirit is rûach it means:

wind; by resemblance breath, that is, a sensible (or even violent) exhalation; figuratively life, anger, unsubstantiality; by extension a region of the sky; by resemblance spirit, but only of a rational being (including its expression and functions): - air, anger, blast, breath, X cool, courage, mind, X quarter, X side, spirit ([-ual]), tempest, X vain, ([whirl-]) wind (-y).

1Sa 19:20 And Saul sent messengers to take David: and when they saw the company of the prophets prophesying, and Samuel standing as appointed over them, the Spirit of God was upon the messengers of Saul, and they also prophesied.

1Sa 19:20 And Saul sent messengers to take David: and when they saw the company of the prophets prophesying, and Samuel standing as appointed over them, the Spirit of God was upon the messengers of Saul, and they also prophesied.

Ecc 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

Now a spirit is breath, wind things like that not a soul. From Hebrew a soul just means a living being (like it says in Genesis 2:7 or this just my eisegesis?)

Now lets crack the witch of Endor open again.

1Sa 28:7 Then said Saul unto his servants, Seek me a woman that hath a familiar spirit, that I may go to her, and enquire of her. And his servants said to him, Behold, there is a woman that hath a familiar spirit at Endor.

Familiar spirit, in Hebrew, is just one word obe

which is very different to rûach.




Perhaps you should use that word sparingly, I quoted someone and it was their interpretation so yes of course, you get a gold sticker *Places it on the chart*



Please enlighten me.



As I have shown, rûach is spirit here, meaning breath, wind etc. Please use Hebrew to instead of trying to twist the language.

BTW: I never said God doesnt use evil, He does. But He hasnt EVER used a witch. Comprende?



Untill you can prove that from the Bible, its an assumption.

This post has been edited by Solja247: Nov 6 2009, 06:06 AM

Okay, seriously, if it wasn't Samuel coming from the ground, the Bible would have told us it was Satan in the guise of Samuel, but know it says IT IS SAMUEL!

He keeps ignoring that and everything else.

All you have shown there is that we have lost PHYSICAL immortality. Nowhere in Scripture can you (truthfully) claim that the soul actually "dies"; that is, ceases to exist. It is entirely within the power of God (or the ordinary spiritual order) to sustain a spirit/soul in a process of eternal death.



How about this: you take each verse you believe supports soul sleep, and explain them individually. Specifically, explaining how you believe each verse applies.

Who in the world is Basil Atkinson? Do you personally have the qualifications to exegete scripture on the basis of the Greek and Hebrew? My guess would be no. Unless you use a respected, well-known, applicable source as your authority for such things, you cannot claim any reliable, logical support. If you are using your own study to definitively say : "THIS IS IT", and you are not qualified, then you are committing a logical fallacy known as the "Appeal to Unreliable Authority". In short, your arguments hold little weight, regardless of whether they are right or not, because they don't come from a respected source (respected does not necessarily mean majority).



Then, by accepting Wikipedia's definition and affirming it, you ADMIT that you commit faulty, misleading, and sloppy practices such as proof-texting? Does this then mean that you know such practices usually result in completely wrong theological interpretations?



No in-depth reply needed. God is Love, but God is also Justice. The act of human sin is so offensive to the holy character and nature of God that the ONLY acceptable punishment is an eternal living death. God's holy, perfect Nature is at such a level as to be partly incomprehensible. We understand the concept of "perfection", but humans do not comprehend it. Thusly, we do not comprehend the full magnitude of our grievous offenses against God. For any other punishment to suffice would mean that God is NOT fully Just. God's Love is the only reason we are given a chance at salvation, the only reason we are not cast into such punishment from the moment we sin. Furthermore, "morally revolting" is an opinion. If it is Just, it cannot be morally revolting, except to those whose morals are skewed to start with. "Scientifically fantastic" has nothing to do with the spiritual realm, because science is unable to study the metaphysical in its totality.



Once again, you are using Psalms 22:26 out of context to support a conclusion the passage has nothing to do with. If the chapter and books are clearly talking about one thing, it is a mistake to say a single verse is referring to something else entirely. Yet again, this is another example of proof-texting. You may believe your conclusions are scripturally sound, but you aren't going to convince me, and it's mostly because of the methods you use. They are theologically unsound, and almost always result in unscriptural conclusions.

Just look at the immediate context (the few surrounding verses), and the overall message (a lament about why God seemed to have forsaken His servant):

24 For he has not despised or abhorred

the affliction of the afflicted,

and he has not hidden his face from him,

but has heard, when he cried to him.

25 From you comes my praise in the great congregation;

my vows I will perform before those who fear him.

26 The afflicted shall eat and be satisfied;

those who seek him shall praise the Lord!

May your hearts live forever!

27 All the ends of the earth shall remember

and turn to the Lord,

and all the families of the nations

shall worship before you.
Psalms 22:24-27 (ESV)



As I've said before, the mere mention of the word "death" does not carry the same connotations in Greek, or the context, as in English. It does not mean the "cessation of existence".



There is nothing in the Greek construction of Hebrews 9:27 that allows for (either explicitly or implicitly) the passing of time between death and judgment, as far as I know.



1. You have not explained yourself OR your evidence in a satisfactory manner, nor have you used correct exegetical principles. My advice to you: Go to college, university or seminary at a full-gospel institution, take classes, and learn how to exegete Scripture (discover what the text actually means), as opposed to eisegesis (giving Scripture the meaning you want it to say). Until you know the correct methods for hermeneutics and exegesis, I suggest not trying to continue this argument: it will save you trouble in the long run, and it is the wisest course of action.

2. What does the Second Coming have to do with this discussion? The Rapture, at least, has a visible component to this discussion. The purpose of the Rapture is to reunite all of the physically dead saints with their physical bodies, renewed and transformed in the twinkling of an eye. It's second purpose is to gather all of the living Saints, transforming them also in the twinkling of an eye.

On the position of soul sleep: I went to several physical authorities on doctrine and theology, and managed to gather the following information:



My last say on the Witch of Endor thing: God can choose to limit or use whatever and whoever He wants. Accordingly, and according to the correct contextual, linguistic meaning of the text, I still believe that the person the witch saw was Samuel, not a familiar demon, as she expected. This was an instance of divine irony of sorts, and one instance where God also demonstrated His authority over the occult. (Incidentally, unless God allows you to talk with the dead like that, no one really talks to the dead. They talk to an impersonation of the dead, a demonic familiar).

This post has been edited by jarkaimaster: Nov 6 2009, 02:59 PM

Thats right if you go to a modern witch and ask for your great great great grandfather to come back, it will be him right? *rolls eyes*



I fail to see what I am ignoring. I have shown that the story of Lazarus and the rich man was just a parable.

I have shown using Greek and Hebrew, that you dont understand words like, 'spirit' and 'for ever'



That is true. It just stops living. If one looks at Genesis 2:7 objectively, it takes the breath of life and a physical body to become a living soul. You seriously cant disprove that.



http://homepage.ntlworld.com/alan.pibworth...es/atkinson.htm



This is rather absurd I can not copy and paste Greek and Hebrew words from Strongs?
Because I am not qualified?



Thankyou for twisting my words around, I did admit to just quoting Genesis 2:7 (for example) and not explaining, but yesterday I took the time to explain it all. so a big fat NO.




I dont see how I took that out of context, it says:

Psa 22:26 The meek shall eat and be satisfied: they shall praise the LORD that seek him: your heart shall live for ever.

KJV. But your translation said, 'may' so it may be 'may' or it may be just how the KJV says. Now I would look it in Hebrew but I forgot that to copy and past one needs to do 4 years of theology.



I find this rather offensive you just sound like that fat kid who says, 'I know you are you said you are but what am I?'

I do intend to college. But I will tell you what if this was a live time debate, and instead of crying out exegesis! I would kick your but.

I am going to a college which teaches the Biblical Truths.



Are you serious? Who do witches worship and get their power from? tell me.



Clearly he hasnt read Genesis 2:7



I would love to see some verses showing that Paul believed that one goes to heaven straight away...



I suppose if you understand core Biblical Truths you would understand.

So where are the dead saints when they are dead? They cant be in heaven?

EXACTLY my point. You do not yet understand how to properly interpret Scripture. You cannot take the second half of one verse and use it to support a point that is not supported in the chapter or book, and expect to get good results.

26 Oppressed people will eat until they are full.

Those who look to the Lord will praise him.

May you live forever.
Psalms 22:26 (GW)

The meek shall eat and be satisfied; they shall praise the LORD that seek Him. Your heart shall live for ever. Psalms 22:26 (KJ21)

The poor will eat and be satisfied;
they who seek the LORD will praise him—
may your hearts live forever!

Psalms 22:26 (NIV)

The afflicted will eat and be satisfied;
Those who seek Him will praise the LORD
Let your heart live forever!

Psalms 22:26 (NASB)

The afflicted shall eat and be satisfied;
those who seek him shall praise the LORD!
May your hearts live forever!

Psalm 22:26 (ESV)

The humble will eat and be satisfied;
those who seek the LORD will praise Him.
May your hearts live forever!

Psalms 22:26 (HCSB)

The above translations contain a variety of different implications, because of different choices made in translation. Neither the verse nor the chapter contains references to eternal life or death, or even a reference to the soul. It is thus completely incorrect to apply such conclusions where they do not exist.

I'm not going to get into what the verse actually means (because that's a rather involved process sometimes, and because for the purposes of this post, the surrounding verses make your interpretation of Psalm 22:26 faulty). I CAN tell you that one of the key words in your boldened phrase, "heart" is the Hebrew word lebab, and it has about TWELVE DIFFERENT POSSIBLE MEANINGS.

1. The literal, physical heart of the body (2 Samuel 18:14).
2. The inner or middle part of a thing (Exodus 15:8).
3. The inner man, contrasted to the outer man, sometimes compounded with the separate word "soul" for emphasis (2 Chronicles 15:12).
4. The personality of a man, or the man himself (Genesis 17:17).
5. The seat of desire, inclination or will (Exodus 7:14).
6. Signifying two people in agreement (2 Kings 10:15).
7. The seat of emotions (Deuteronomy 6:5).
8. The seat of knowledge, wisdom, and a synonym of the mind (Deuteronomy 29:4).
9. The seat of conscience and moral character (Job 27:6, 2 Samuel 24:10).
10. The "heart" is the source of man's deeds (Genesis 20:5, 6).
11. The "heart" may be the seat of rebellion and pride (Genesis 8:21, Ezekiel 28:2).
12. It stands for the inner being of a man, the man himself (Proverbs 4:4).

Now, you tell me which one applies in Psalms 22:26 (and none of the answers are "soul"). It's hard to do correctly without the proper training.

You don't seem to understand that simply quoting Strong's doesn't mean you are right about your interpretation of Scripture. Strong's is not meant to be an end-all for those who are linguistically unlearned. It is meant to be an addition to your own research, when you know the original Biblical language already, or are using a reliable commentary by someone who DOES know the required language. Strong's gives you every possible meaning, not the correct meaning for a particular passage of Scripture. To find that, you need to be trained to do so. You may be in school, but until you take classes and learn how to interpret Scripture properly, you aren't qualified to use your own authority for definite statements (neither am I, btw, which is why I try to say "to my knowledge", or "from my readings", or try to quote a reliable authority in the field). Strong's is a good tool, but it never replaces direct knowledge--which is what you need. Strong's Concordance (with Vine's Expository Dictionary included) gave me those twelve possible meanings, but it offers no help whatsoever in discerning which meaning goes in the passage in question.

Do you see why I say you need to be trained to interpret difficult passages of Scripture, or to correctly apply some Scripture?

The ONLY reason I'm telling that you are using the wrong methods and coming to the wrong conclusions is because I know enough to know what I DO NOT know. I'm in college, majoring in Biblical Studies, and my professors are all authorities on how to interpret scripture. Without that knowledge; gained by smarter people than I, I wouldn't be telling you ANY of this. I'm not better than you, but I do know about the correct way to interpret Scripture. I haven't mastered it yet, but I know right now that you are violating the basic principles of such methodology.

The basic reason why you fail to convince me at least, is because you're using some mixture of fallacy and poor technique. Take the witch at Endor, for example. Is God the direct creator and ruler of evil? No. Does He have ultimate power over EVERYTHING, even witchcraft? YES. THAT is why I say I believe He used that power to allow the witch's rituals to work, OR He overrode her power with His own. Another thing to remember is this: Everything happens either because God wills it, or God allows it. God sometimes allows evil in the world because He can work through it, to bring His plan to bear. In the case of Saul, God's plan was already defined: Saul was going to be deposed. The manner in which God delivered such a proclamation (He either allowed the witch's power to work, or He overrode her power completely) is but one example of divine irony in the Old Testament. To say "God did not do that" in this instance, is limiting God, I believe, and certainly not true, since God is capable of doing anything He wishes.

^^ That brings me to another point. The Bible is not easy to understand in some places because it was written to completely different cultures from yours or mine. We MUST look at Scripture from their point of view to understand the meaning God wanted to give to THEM. This approach will also illuminate figures of speech, instances of humor, irony, plays on words, acrostics, etc, in both the Old and New Testaments. Such a view is difficult or impossible to obtain without training.

Even though you deny proof-texing, you STILL do it. If you are confident in your beliefs, submit them to standard interpretational methods and see if they hold up. If they are correct, then they will hold up.

You may intend to go to college, even one that teaches biblical truth, but unless you take Hermeneutics or Exegetical classes, you will not learn how to properly interpret Scripture. You are young--and you don't know everything. I'm not intending to offend you, so please accept my apologies for that in advance, but I know of no other way to get my point across. (Oh, and if we were really debating, then you might THINK you could overwhelm me, but I think it would turn out pretty much the same way).

Genesis 2:7 has nothing to do with soul sleep. The word "soul" in the KJV is the Hebrew word Nephesh, which means:

1. A breathing creature.
2. An animal of abstract vitality, used widely in a literal and figurative sense (bodily or mentally).
3. When used in a specific sense, nephesh refers to soul, self, life, or heart.

The thing is, as far as I know, Genesis 2:7 doesn't use nephesh in a specific sense, especially since the first occurrence in Genesis (1:20) uses nephesh to refer to the animal life. Sometimes context is a tricky thing to determine, and it can be easy to mess up, so I can understand how you might think that one supports a mortal soul.

Let's see if I missed anything:

You haven't shown Luke 16 to be a parable convincingly enough, because your logic and interpretational methods are faulty.

The burden of proof is upon YOU, not me, to provide consistent, correctly interpreted Scripture that shows the existence of soul sleep, or that Paul ever believed that we actually sleep at the time of death. The Bible, either explicitly or implicitly, teaches that when we die, we go to be with the Lord, without implying or allowing for any sort of pause in between death and being in the presence of God. The following verses are one example.

So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, 7 for we walk by faith, not by sight. 8 Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord.
2 Cor 5:6-8 (ESV)

Does your jab about "knowing Biblical Truths" mean you don't want to answer my question? What does the Second Coming have to do with the concept of either an immortal soul, or soul sleep? Specifically, what do YOU think it has to do with this topic?

Finally, yes, all the dead saints are in Heaven right now. They are incomplete though, because God created us to be with a body AND spirit. This is partly why the Rapture happens: to reunite the sainted dead with their physical bodies, renewing them into bodies like Jesus' in the twinkling of an eye. Read Revelation 21.

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. 4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. 5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
Rev 21:1-5 (KJV)

It clearly states that the current Heaven and Earth are not going to be around forever. Instead, they will be made new, into the New Heaven and Earth, and we will live forever with Christ. Until that time, however, the saints who have died live in Heaven, in the presence of God (refer to 2 Cor 5:6-8 above).

A quote from GotQuestions.org:



If you don't agree with the above, then state which part, why you disagree, and then proceed to deconstruct it. It would be a good idea to start from scratch if you're going to tackle that passage, since you know we already have issues with your previous explanations.

Now, after ALL that, I was to say that I do not mean to offend you. I am not an authority in myself, but I am under such authorities. I am pointing out what is wrong in your interpretational method. It is not something you cannot fix, should you so choose, and you will be better for it if you do. The best possible thing you could do is to take classes on Exegesis and Hermeneutics, learning directly from the authorities on the subject. I'm only telling you what I've learned, and what I can easily check.

If you don't understand some things I say, then TELL ME, and I'll try to clarify them. It is NOT my intention to discourage you, or anger you, etc--only to HELP you be a better exegete. As I said before, I don't know everything, but I know enough to know how much I DON'T know. (And incidentally, four years of theology is the bare bones beginning. Most go to seminary for a Master's or Doctorate's in their specific subjects).

Jarrax Volk, Thank your for your kind post.
I dont know everything so I am going to quote the most academical person who agrees with me:

Dr Samuele Bacchiocchi, was the first non-catholic to graduate from the pontifical Georgian University in Rome. He recieved a gold medal from the Pope Paul VI for earning the academinc distinction of summa cum laude

Anyways, before I go on, I would like to quote What Samuele has to say on the witch of endor:





As I have said, I am just going to quote Samuele, if that doesnt annoy you too much.







I will get back to the other things you wrote, but lets look at a verse:

Gen 35:18 And it came to pass, as her soul was in departing, (for she died) that she called his name Benoni: but his father called him Benjamin.

I will let you guys go first.

I will get back to the other things you wrote, but lets look at a verse:

Gen 35:18 And it came to pass, as her soul was in departing, (for she died) that she called his name Benoni: but his father called him Benjamin.

I will let you guys go first.

http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/eti_14.pdf

(What I quoted from)

This is a MUCH better beginning. Thank you! (And no, it doesn't annoy me at all).

I took the liberty of looking up Dr. Bacchiocchi, and I found this:



The two bolded terms are relevant here, though the italicized sentence is also of note.

Just a general reference from Wikipedia.

Now that you have an authority, it comes down to which of our sources is more reliable. I won't post names, for reasons of security, but I will post qualifications. (Don't let them overwhelm you--its a rather long list).

Source 1:

Professional Information: M. Div. Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary '72
B.A. Evangel College '67 Speech Education/ English

Source 2:

Professional Information: B.A. Evangel University (Biblical Studies & Biblical Languages)
M.Div. Harvard University (Old Testament Emphasis)
Ph.D. Emory University (Old Testament)

Source 3:

Professional Information:
D.Min. Pentecostal Leadership –
Assemblies of God Theological Seminary Springfield, MO, August 16, 2002
(Dissertation/Project: Believer Empowerment Seminar for a local church)
Th.M., Bethel Theological Seminary – St. Paul, MN
M.Div., Northwestern Lutheran Theological Seminary – St. Paul, MN
MRE, Central Baptist Theological Seminary – Minneapolis, MN
B.A., North Central University – Minneapolis, MN, June 1968

Source 4:

B.A. degree in Christian Ministry from Southwestern Assemblies of God College, 1974
B.S. degree in Greek from the University of Texas, 1983
M.A. in Theology from St. Mary’s University
Ph.D. in Religion from Baylor University

Source 5:

M.A. & ABD from the University of Missouri 2007
PhD projected by spring 2010
B.A. from Evangel University 1998

Source 6:

BA in Biblical Studies, Mississippi College ('78)
MA in Hebrew Language, Institute of Holy Land Studies (Jerusalem, '83)
MA in OT Studies and Hebrew, Reformed Theological Seminary ('86)
MPhil in Hebraic and Cognate Studies, Hebrew Union College ('91)
PhD in Hebraic and Cognate Studies, Hebrew Union College ('92).

Source 7:

Ph.D. Marquette University (Milwaukee, Wisconsin), 2000.
M.Div. Providence Theological Seminary (Winnipeg, MB, Canada),1990.
B.Th. Central Pentecostal College (Saskatoon, SK, Canada) and University of Winnipeg, 1986.

----

As I believe you can see by now, we come from two very different theological schools of thought. My main concern with your source would be this:

A. I'm not sure your source isn't overstepping his area of expertise. As stated in the wiki article I found, he has been criticized for doing exactly that. It makes me wonder if he isn't doing the same here.

Basically, my sources back up what I say, and your source backs up what you say. One difference is that my sources are all in person (therefore I cannot post exactly what they say to me).

As for the Rapture:

"All Christians who have died will one day rise from their graves and will meet the Lord in the air. Christians who have not yet died will be raptured or caught up with them, to be with the Lord. Then Christians of all ages will live with God forever. The scriptural truth of the Lord’s soon return is ‘the blessed hope’ (Romans 8:23; 1 Corinthians 15:51,52; 1 Thessalonians 4:16,17; Titus 2:13).

"This doctrine is very important because it provides a primary motivation for witnessing and living a holy life. For the believer, the return of Christ for His redeemed is a blessed hope indeed. The translation or ‘snatching away’ of living Christians, commonly called the Rapture (‘to catch up’), will bring an end to suffering, pain, hardship and difficulty. We as Christians will then be with the Lord forever. Though the body is not alive between death and resurrection, the soul does not sleep but is consciously alive in the presence of the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:8).

"For the sinner, however, the Rapture is anything but a blessed hope. To be left behind will involve indescribable suffering as God judges a rebellious and disobedient world. God desires that all mankind should ask forgiveness and be restored to fellowship with himself. He places this burden for the lost and their waiting eternal punishment on the hearts of those who already know His love and salvation. It is for this reason that a primary mission of the church is evangelizing the world, seeking to save as many as possible from the judgment to come."

Source: Today's Pentecostal Evangel

My basis for opposing "soul sleep" comes from a contextual reading of Scripture and logical implications and inferences drawn from the same.



The thing is, the Bible does not say Saul "concluded" that the spirit was Samuel. It says he KNEW it was. No reservations. I believe Saul would have been able to tell whether the spirit actually was Samuel or not--purely from his long association with the prophet.

He said to her, “What is his appearance?” And she said, “An old man is coming up, and he is wrapped in a robe.” And [i]Saul knew that it was Samuel, and he bowed with his face to the ground and paid homage.
1 Sam 28:14 (ESV)[/i]

Many eminent writers (considering that [i]the apparition came before her arts were put in practice; that she herself was surprised and alarmed; that the prediction of Saul's own death and the defeat of his forces was confidently made), are of opinion that Samuel really appeared.—Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary[/i]



The thing is, there is no prophecy except Godly prophecy which can come true every single time with the same degree of accuracy. Even demons are capable of prophecy, but it is not THAT EXACT.

Your source said:

This is not quite true. God prohibited divination because it attempted to see the future without going through God Himself. God has no rules against wanting to see deceased loved ones. He only commands that we go to Him, the bringer of Life, to do so. Communication with the dead is possible, but it is not the norm. The vast majority of the time, the "dead" that mediums and such claim to speak to are actually familiars, demons. Your source does not refute the belief that this is also an example of divine irony (you wanted Samuel, you'll get Samuel--but you'll be sorry for it), as well as a demonstration of God's complete control over every power, both holy and unholy.



Actually God prohibited HUMANS from practicing necromancy. God can choose to override (not operate through) any occult powers He wishes to in order to convey whatever message He wishes. It is a logical implication and inference of God's omnipotence. Again, this relates to the concept of divine irony, and your source does not refute it.



This is a superficial objection: Since God was working in this encounter, He could make Samuel appear in whatever guise He wanted. As it happened, He allowed Samuel to appear in the guise most familiar to Saul. The issue of how a spirit wearing clothes determines the source of the event is a logical fallacy known as the ignoratio elenchii, a Red Herring--a false objection.



As per source 1--which I mentioned earlier--I asked about Sheol. He said that the Hebrew connotation of Sheol was basically a large, underground hole, divided into two compartments: one for the righteous dead (Abraham's Bosom), and one for the wicked dead. In essence, yes, both Saul and Samuel went to Sheol when they died, however they were not in the same areas of Sheol, according to the traditional Jewish and Biblical understanding of Sheol. Again, this is no objection.



Can Satan do that? Most certainly--however, he cannot tell the future unless God allows him to, and he cannot tell the future with such accuracy as found in this instance.

As for Genesis 35:18, the wording "departed" merely means that her soul was leaving her body and the physical earth, bound for Abraham's Bosom. It does not imply that her soul slept, or that it ceased to exist.

As for your source on soul sleep, he fails to make the context of nephesh clear in the verses he cites. I could go through and look at each of them, but it's getting late. I'll settle with my previous explanation on nephesh--though I can go in-depth, if you wish.

All in all, a much better post. Thank you for quoting a source.

This post has been edited by Jarrax Volk: Nov 7 2009, 12:54 AM

Source wars debate? Sounds fun, but I wont waste my time.

This post has been edited by God-Sent: Nov 9 2009, 08:00 AM