Divine punishment? Is it needed?

[Saint Steven]

You brought up 1Co 15:44 into the discussion. How do you interpret this verse?

It was in my quote of your post, but...
The "soulish" body is physical (physical death) and more specifically referring to an earthly burial. Seeds are "sown" into the ground. When the soul is raised (out of the ground/sheol/the realm of the dead) it is a spiritual body. (John 12:24)

The whole thing is an analogy of life and death like seeds that are sown. Every analogy breaks down at some point. So, let's not over-analyze it.

1Co 15:44
it is sown a soulish body, it is raised a spiritual body.

 

[Saint Steven]

2Co 5:1 For we know that if the tent, our earthly home, is torn down, we have a building from God—a home not made with human hands, eternal in the heavens. 2 For in this we groan, longing to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling— 3 if indeed, after we have put it on, we will not be found naked.

Is this your understanding, also? How do you interpret these verses?

Yes.
The earthly tent is our physical body. When that is "torn down", we have a heavenly "dwelling" (spiritual body).

This seems specific to believers though. What about the others?

 

[Saint Steven]

Some of the verses you quoted, and many others, suggest that the soul is unconscious after death and many Church writers over the centuries (including Luther) understood them as such. I stress the fact that the spirit is conscious.

Tell us more about the spirit being conscious.
Not my intention to suggest that "the soul is unconscious after death".

 

[public hermit]

Could it be that this is confusing because the scriptures present two paradigms:

1. Soul and body
2. Soul, spirit, and body (flesh-Paul).

Perhaps 1 is the OT paradigm that developed into 2, which is only found in the NT (perhaps due to Greek influence)? Does that sound right?

 

[Saint Steven]

Could it be that this is confusing because the scriptures present two paradigms:

1. Soul and body
2. Soul, spirit, and body (flesh-Paul).

Perhaps 1 is the OT paradigm that developed into 2, which is only found in the NT (perhaps due to Greek influence)? Does that sound right?

That's an interesting observation/question.
I just did a quick search that found 193 uses of the word spirit in the OT. 370 in the NT. Greater emphasis in far fewer pages.

Would have to dig through the OT references (193) to see if it is ever referring to the human spirit.

BibleGateway - Keyword Search: spirit

 

[public hermit]

That's an interesting observation/question.
I just did a quick search that found 193 uses of the word spirit in the OT. 370 in the NT. Greater emphasis in far fewer pages.

Would have to dig through the OT references (193) to see if it is ever referring to the human spirit.

BibleGateway - Keyword Search: spirit

It's usually"nephesh," I think. Maybe I used the wrong one, but it's not like they (Hebrews) made a distinction between spirit and soul, I don't think. I'm thinking that was a later development. It was a dualism and then the tri-part distinction came later? Maybe? I'm not sure.

 

[Saint Steven]

It's usually"nephesh," I think. Maybe I used the wrong one, but it's not like they (Hebrews) made a distinction between spirit and soul, I don't think. I'm thinking that was a later development. It was a dualism and then the tri-part distinction came later? Maybe? I'm not sure.

That makes sense, but we would have to research a bit to know for sure.

What is your understanding of the NT uses of soul and spirit?

Sorry, we've gone off on quite an interesting rabbit trail here.

 

[public hermit]

That makes sense, but we would have to research a bit to know for sure.

What is your understanding of the NT uses of soul and spirit?

Sorry, we've gone off on quite an interesting rabbit trail here.

I have generally taken soul to refer to sentience, which is had by all animals. It's basically consciousness and feeling.
I generally read spirit as the domain of personhood: a mind and will that enable agency. But it depends on the passage.

Some passages speak of soul (or spirit) as the whole package. In short, I think there are different presentations in the scriptures, which causes confusion.

ETA: I should add, I don't think the distinctions matter. There is personhood, and that is very much what images the divine. Some distinctions are real, but not actual. We can distinguish between will and mind, but those are not separable from personhood. It's the latter that is substantial. And since I'm not an inerrantist, the scriptural confusion is simply humans trying. Lol.

 

[RickReads]

Could it be that this is confusing because the scriptures present two paradigms:

1. Soul and body
2. Soul, spirit, and body (flesh-Paul).

Perhaps 1 is the OT paradigm that developed into 2, which is only found in the NT (perhaps due to Greek influence)? Does that sound right?

Perhaps there are two natures just as the Bible says. The soul is the part of you that is dominated by the needs and desires of your body. Your Spirit is the part of you that operates from what you think in your heart.

 

[public hermit]

Or it could be the two natures the Bible


Perhaps there are two natures just as the Bible says. The soul is the part of you that is dominated by the needs and desires of your body. Your Spirit is the part of you that operates from what you think in your heart.

Yeah, you seem to be making the distinction between sentience (which all animals have) and personhood. That works (except for those animals that act like humans lol).

 

[Saint Steven]

That works (except for those animals that act like humans lol).

What about humans that act like animals? - lol
Probably a larger population.

 

[public hermit]

What about humans that act like animals? - lol
Probably a larger population.

No doubt. It's strange that the aspects that are supposed to separate us from the animals just make us smarter at being brutal. I will point to the poll results of this thread as evidence.

 

[RickReads]

Yeah, you seem to be making the distinction between sentience (which all animals have) and personhood. That works (except for those animals that act like humans lol).

I really don't know what that means. All I can tell you is what the gospel says about it and that's all I can tell you.

 

[public hermit]

I really don't know what that means. All I can tell you is what the gospel says about it and that's all I can tell you.

You can tell me what you believe it says, and that's perfectly acceptable, but it's presumptuous to assume what you say it says is incontrovertible.

 

[Saint Steven]

No doubt. It's strange that the aspects that are supposed to separate us from the animals just make us smarter at being brutal. I will point to the poll results of this thread as evidence.

Yes.
There seems to be a big disconnect for those who have experienced grace toward those they consider lost.

They were overjoyed to learn about the life they have in Christ and what that means for the afterlife. But... they are happy to assign PUNISHMENT of the worst kind to those who. unlike them, didn't experience grace in this life.

That is skating awfully close to the act of unforgiveness that nullifies our own. (James 2:13)

 

[public hermit]

Yes.
There seems to be a big disconnect for those who have experienced grace toward those they consider lost.

They were overjoyed to learn about the life they have in Christ and what that means for the afterlife. But... they are happy to assign PUNISHMENT of the worst kind to those who. unlike them, didn't experience grace in this life.

That is skating awfully close to the act of unforgiveness that nullifies our own. (James 2:13)

Exactly. Romans 2:1, they do the exact same things (suppress the truth 1 18), but they are the judges, I guess.


"Therefore you have no excuse, whoever you are, when you judge others; for in passing judgement on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, are doing the very same things."

They always seem to stop reading at Romans 1:32. They don't catch how Paul turns the table in 2:1 and starts speaking directly to them (us).

 

[RickReads]

You can tell me what you believe it says, and that's perfectly acceptable, but it's presumptuous to assume what you say it says is incontrovertible.

The gospel is incontrovertible. My task is to articulate it correctly. it's pretty straightforward in many cases and the two natures are one of those.

 

[Andrewn]

Seeds are "sown" into the ground. When the soul is raised (out of the ground/sheol/the realm of the dead) it is a spiritual body.

Not my intention to suggest that "the soul is unconscious after death".

Do you see contradiction between the 2 statements quoted above?

Perhaps there are two natures just as the Bible says. The soul is the part of you that is dominated by the needs and desires of your body. Your Spirit is the part of you that operates from what you think in your heart.

Bingo.

 

[Saint Steven]

Do you see contradiction between the 2 statements quoted above?

Bingo.

No, I see no contradiction.
Probably because I take the John twelve verse as symbolic rather than explaining the actual mechanics of passing into the afterlife. John is comparing physical death and life in the next age to a seed sown in the ground and life spring forth from it.

Where do you see the contradiction? Sorry if I am being thick-headed. I want to understand where you are coming from. Thanks.

Saint Steven said: ↑
Seeds are "sown" into the ground. When the soul is raised (out of the ground/sheol/the realm of the dead) it is a spiritual body. (John 12:24)
Saint Steven said: ↑
Not my intention to suggest that "the soul is unconscious after death".

 

[Saint Steven]

Exactly. Romans 2:1, they do the exact same things (suppress the truth 1 18), but they are the judges, I guess.


"Therefore you have no excuse, whoever you are, when you judge others; for in passing judgement on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, are doing the very same things."

They always seem to stop reading at Romans 1:32. They don't catch how Paul turns the table in 2:1 and starts speaking directly to them (us).

On the other hand I don't want to go too far with this.

Those of us who were raised in the church knew about heaven and hell from the youngest age. And we heard about from people we trusted. Parents, the church, society at large. Even secular music and literature take it for granted as fact.

Most haven't given it much thought. Just an uncomfortable subject that came packaged with something wonderful. Even candy-coating it as "eternal separation from God".

Saint Steven said: ↑
Yes.
There seems to be a big disconnect for those who have experienced grace toward those they consider lost.

They were overjoyed to learn about the life they have in Christ and what that means for the afterlife. But... they are happy to assign PUNISHMENT of the worst kind to those who. unlike them, didn't experience grace in this life.

That is skating awfully close to the act of unforgiveness that nullifies our own. (James 2:13)