Am I dead wrong when it comes to death and life?

A Devil's Advocate

Active Member
Nov 2, 2023
48
20
55
Alberta
✟12,795.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Palms forehead while shaking his head

I truly hope you do not read into the scriptures what you want them to say, or use them out of context by taking a verse and running with it like you have done with what I said.

I did not say an evil person could speak truth as being a "matter of fact!" I said "if an evil one speaks it (truth)" as an example to stress the point that truth (God's word, first principles, the nature and character of God, as examples) is unchanging. They are not determined by, or relative to who speaks them.

If you think I am an evil man here to deceive, then all the power to you. Please run with it.

I say Jesus is lord and Savior... I must be evil! I rely upon Jesus and Jesus alone for salvation.... I must be evil! I do not say things you agree with... I am most definitely EVIL!!!!
 
Upvote 0

Placed_son

Member
Nov 2, 2018
8
3
61
San Jose
✟16,438.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

Good thoughts, your posts are interesting I might add. It's always good to think "outside the box" so to speak.
With regard to this particular post, I just would like to clarify what you're saying here. Please pardon my grammar, I'm writing this hastily as I'm pressed for time.

Absolute truth = Anyone can declare it, evil or not. No problem there.

Foundational truths (or First Principles) = I'd argue these can relative. How you might ask? I'll cover the principle of Noncontradiction. The principle of Causality is more of an absolute truth to me - get it? It's relative - just kidding. Contradiction is found throughout the scriptures. The various paradoxes and contradictions that arise with a traditional interpretation serve as clues to a deeper meaning.

I'll share one that's not readily known as a contradiction, but a contradiction nontheless. The most interesting part of it is that someone in scripture notes a contradiction in his reading of scripture!

This is the account of Phillip and the Ethiopian eunuch. Acts 8:26-40 Focus on verses 32-33, where the eunuch was reading. Specifically in verse 31, He stated that he could not understand what he was reading. A particular phrase did not make sense to him.

and who shall declare his generation? - The eunuch thought the prophet (Isaiah) spoke of another eunuch like himself who could not raise up seed (his generation). The eunuch also noted that the prophet wrote later in the passage that this man shall see his seed. Isa 53:10 This was an apparent contradiction to eunuch (contradiction relative to him because he couldn't understand what he read, but Phillip could, Acts 8:35). The eunuch therefore was confused and needed interpretation of the passage he was reading. Acts 8:34

I can't offer the explanation to this conundrum, as that's the Lord's job. But thanks for sharing your thoughts!

All the best in Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Saltyjames

Newbie
Oct 25, 2010
19
2
Visit site
✟15,958.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Interesting concept that death is not evil. It appears it is not itself evil. I can't believe I never considered this. It shows there is no ending to learning of the things of God.
Death is though the closing of the humans physical and temporal dimension, and thereby ending his opportunity to act in that dimension, thereby sealing his eternal fate. Every soul living knows that's spooky on a whole new level.
It says, "we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life". Many answers on this lie in this verse. Being reconciled to God is not the same as being saved.
Strongs says reconciled is:
to change ((very interesting concept as it relates to death!)) , exchange, as coins for others of equivalent value
to reconcile (those who are at variance)

Regarding good and evil I see it this way:
Evil is simply the absences of God's attributes. And so there is no place for neutrality. More on this in a minute.
Examples:
All my friends will be in Hell. Ok, but there is no friendship in Hell.
When faced with the chance of lying or telling the truth, there is never a third option. Because deception via silence or more words is still lying.

Paul also says: “Whatever is not from faith is sin.”

Neutrality:
I have believed that the percentage of humans that get saved is the same percentage that:
1. Left Egypt.
2. Entered the land / crossed Jordan (of course discounting Moses)
This number is roughly 1.8% or 18 out of a 1000 people that die. It amazed me that Howard Pittman in his book Placebo said the exact same thing from his heavenly experience.

I further believe that most of the lost are simply trying to be neutral. Consider the cross. Some were crying, some were scoffing, but 98% just walked right by.
I often meditate that I am at the foot of the cross holding it while He is above me. I do this to work out forgiving others and rooting out my own issues. I've come to see that I am not a POWER Christian like Paul, Peter, Isaiah etc etc. and that I would have probably walked right by like most people. But I have been known to be wrong from time to time... what year is this? haha
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Watching and Praying Always
Oct 22, 2019
7,522
2,345
43
Helena
✟208,781.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single

I think death in this sense was mostly meaning a separation from God, so spiritual death. As to whether physical death was going to exist on the world or not? I don't know. It seems kind of impossible that creatures could reproduce and fill the earth and never physically die and never need to be physically replaced by offspring. Like think insects or Bacteria. they'd completely overwhelm the Earth by sheer biomass if they never died. Fish spawn by the thousands, they'd choke up the rivers with their numbers if all of them were immortal. So.. I don't know if physical death was intended to be a thing or not. Some reproductive strategies rely on death to work. Conifer trees require fire to spread their seeds. Were humans going to be specifically immortal?

I have the idea that to solve the overcrowding problem in the new creation, well, we will colonize other planets, and spread life throughout an infinitely expanding creation, like we'd never run out of room to grow we'd just .. have more to reach out to.

Other people have the idea that life just stops reproducing, and it's just the same old people 24/7/365 forever, you never meet anyone new, never see new life again, and I find that a stale and horrible future.

But it could also be that non humans do still physically die. Not gonna lie, I find the idea of immortal mosquitoes and wasps kind of unnerving.
 
Upvote 0

A Devil's Advocate

Active Member
Nov 2, 2023
48
20
55
Alberta
✟12,795.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I couldn't help but laugh in agreement at your last statement about wasps and mosquitoes.

I've found the answer to my question; whether physical death was a part of God's creation. God actually answers it in an indirect way. In Gen 3:22 (funny I didn't catch this before) God is clear on the fact that if we had access to the tree of life, we could essentially live forever with a sinful nature. This means that physical death cannot be a result of sin. It would be impossible for the tree of life to give eternal life to a sinful being if sin results in physical death. They contradict one another.

So, the fact we have physical death means it had to have been a part of God's creation, and therefore good. When God told Adam he would die, he had to have been referring to spiritual death.

Because I have no other way to account for the serpent deceiving Eve, I also have to conclude there was evil in the world before Adam sinned. However, there wasn't any evil within Adam's relationship with God. My analogy of this being a new marriage. Although there is hatred in the world, there is none in your marriage. But, given the right deception or lie, hate could enter your marriage, thereby destroying it.

When Paul, in Rom 5:12, speaks of sin and death entering the world, I have to conclude he was speaking in the context of man's relationship to God. Since physical death was already a part of the world, we know Paul had to be referring to spiritual death, which is always in the context of man's relationship to God. So, if Paul is speaking in context to relationship, then it makes sense that when he mentions evil, this too is in that same context.

Also, we have to understand that sin didn't result in spiritual death like a cancer resulting in death. Spiritual death was the punishment, or the wages of sin. This punishment is God's justice being carried out. This is why all the yearly sacrifices for sin. Although these would cover man's sin, as soon as man sinned again, he was right back where he started. The proper sacrifice would have to be human and free of sin in order to stand in our place. Jesus, the lamb of God, took the punishment for all sin for all time. There is now no longer any punishment to be handed out. No more spiritual death. Through belief, you receive new spiritual life, this being eternal life because there is now no way of ever losing it, even though we still sin.
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Watching and Praying Always
Oct 22, 2019
7,522
2,345
43
Helena
✟208,781.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Yeah good catch on the tree of life, I know that's a part of the eternal state, Perhaps it just regenerates and heals us (the leaves ARE for the healing of the nations).. healing from what?
an interesting question
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,291
5,252
45
Oregon
✟962,897.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
You make a good point about the physical possibly not being eternal, or that it was meant to die at some point in time even in the Garden, etc, but other than maybe seeing a bug, or an insect die occasionally possibly, I think the Garden of Eden was an isolated place from the rest of the world at that time, and that all mammals in it, lived a very, very long time, etc, and that they still had not experienced even physical death yet even, or seen the red blood shed from seeing a mammal be slain, or die, etc. And I think the very first time they saw that, or did experience that for the very first time, etc, was only after they disobeyed, and God Himself took a mammal/animal and killed it/she'd it's blood/skinned it, etc, maybe right in front of them for the very first time, etc, to make clothing for them now to now cover the shame they now felt or experienced due to their own nakedness now for the very first time, etc. And this was probably quite a shock to them at that time, etc. And I think this was part of God's teaching them a very valuable lesson for the very first time, etc, about the consequences of their own sinning or of their own disobedience to God for the very first time, etc.

No one knows how long Adam and Eve were, or how long they existed before they chose to disobey for the very first time, but I don't think it was a very, very long time, etc.

Maybe if they hadn't disobeyed, or they were given more time, maybe they would have eventually experienced physical death themselves maybe, or might have maybe seen other creatures (mammals) maybe die, etc, and maybe they would have seen what having offspring was like, for both they themselves, and maybe other mammals maybe, etc, if they had not disobeyed, and immediately spiritually died, etc. As I do believe that was the original plan, for Adam and Eve to eventually have children, and for them and their descendants after them, to establish a very special people and unique Kingdom that would spread, or that they would make spread, and that would rule over all others after them after that time, had they not disobeyed God before that maybe, and immediately spiritually died.

God Bless.
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Watching and Praying Always
Oct 22, 2019
7,522
2,345
43
Helena
✟208,781.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Sacrifices were always to show that sin has a cost, death, and if not your own death than the death of someone or something you valued. Ultimately pointing to the death of God's own Son.
No one knows how long Adam and Eve were, or how long they existed before they chose to disobey for the very first time, but I don't think it was a very, very long time, etc.
I'm not entirely sure. I mean the evidence is that the world is very old, Adam and Eve not counting their years until they were exiled from Eden is one "possibility" I hold for the Earth seeming so old but still adhering to the Biblical creation narrative. The other is that God has created and destroyed the Earth multiple times, because He plans to destroy and recreate this world too, and He simply hasn't revealed to us everything, just enough for us to know who He is.

Either one of those I like better than "well God just made the world look older than it is to trick people into believing something other than the bible. That doesn't line up with God's character.

But either way we have a young earth story and physical evidence of a much older Earth. I don't know how they reconcile but Adam and Eve basically living in the garden for a long time before sinning is one possibility I guess.


It's an interesting idea at least, Like if Adam, or us after the resurrection were to fall off a cliff, what would have happened? Would they just bounce off harmlessly? Would it break their bones and they just get healed from it? Would they die and then God resurrect them? If we just stop eating, would that have 0 consequences?
 
Upvote 0