Death

[Jonathan_Gale]

It seems that the more I think about heaven, the less I really understand about it. I am content to accept a wide range of possibilities, including this one, but I refrain from offering them as any more than my personal speculations. As I said previously, I Corinthians 15 is my lodestar concerning the resurrection of believers.

Then just think about it in this way: heaven is eternal union with Jesus and eternal separation from idols; hell is eternal union with idols and eternal separation from Jesus. That's it.

 

[Studyman]

I understand that most Christians and mainstream Christianity believes that something that is in human beings continues to exist when a human being dies, and I understand that many believe that if something doesn't continue to exist, that is if a human being ceases to exist completely, then they believe a human being can't be brought back to life.

I disagree with this because from what I have read and studied from the scriptures the scriptures don't say a human being has a living soul or living person in the human body. The scriptures teach, from what I have read and understand, that human beings are living souls or living persons. Genesis 2:7 is very clear to me, it teaches me that if the breath(spirit) of life is separate from the flesh and blood human body, then that breath(spirit) of life separately on it's own, not being in a flesh and blood human body isn't a living soul or living person. It takes the breath(spirit) of life and a flesh and blood human body combined together for there to be a living soul or living person. So if the breath(spirit) of life leaves the flesh and blood human body there is no living soul or living person in existence anymore that living soul or living person has ceased being a living soul or living person. To say otherwise from my understanding of Genesis 2:7 would be saying that Genesis 2:7 isn't true that it's A lie, and I don't believe that to be true. When someone says that if a human being ceases to exist completely and says they can't be brought back into existence as a living person again then I believe those people to be without faith.

I don't agree that a human beings spirit is preserved by God so that spirit will be resurrected.The spirit in human beings is the same spirit in animals so is impersonal, which means it has no personal traits of a living person. So since you're saying God is preserving the spirit what exactly is he preserving that you say is to be resurrected.

Luke 20: 37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. 38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Luke 20: 37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. 38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.

All this scripture means from what I have read and understand is there is going to be a resurrection of the dead. It doesn't mean that there's a spirit with God in heaven that was once in a human body that will be resurrected back to life. The spirit that's in humans is the same spirit in animals. This spirit doesn't have personality it doesn't take on the personal traits of the human being.
I have never denied the resurrection of the dead. But it's a resurrection of the dead, meaning these people who have died that God has judged worthy of a resurrection will be resurrected, which means a raising up from the lifeless condition of death.

 

[Studyman]

All this scripture means from what I have read and understand is there is going to be a resurrection of the dead. It doesn't mean that there's a spirit with God in heaven that was once in a human body that will be resurrected back to life.

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

The spirit that's in humans is the same spirit in animals. This spirit doesn't have personality it doesn't take on the personal traits of the human being.
I have never denied the resurrection of the dead. But it's a resurrection of the dead, meaning these people who have died that God has judged worthy of a resurrection will be resurrected, which means a raising up from the lifeless condition of death.

"Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?"

It seems to me, in my study, that God knows the difference between the spirit of man that goes up to Him, and the spirit of animals that doesn't.

Whatever state we are in upon resurrection, we will be judged by our works. We will know our brothers and we will know who we were and what we did on earth, which is unique for every person ever born. So what makes me, "ME", will be raised. Just as Noah and Abraham. So it seems, according to Scriptures, that what is preserved is what makes me, me. This is called my "spirit" in the Bible.

I'm OK with that.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

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




"Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?"

It seems to me, in my study, that God knows the difference between the spirit of man that goes up to Him, and the spirit of animals that doesn't.

Whatever state we are in upon resurrection, we will be judged by our works. We will know our brothers and we will know who we were and what we did on earth, which is unique for every person ever born. So what makes me, "ME", will be raised. Just as Noah and Abraham. So it seems, according to Scriptures, that what is preserved is what makes me, me. This is called my "spirit" in the Bible.

I'm OK with that.

There are Roman Catholic and Protestant scholars that present an entirely different view. In the “Glossary of Biblical Theology Terms” appearing in the Catholic New American Bible (published by P.J. Kenedy & Sons, New York, 1970) it reads: “When ‘spirit’ is used in contrast with ‘flesh,’ . . . the aim is not to distinguish a material from an immaterial part of man . . . ‘Spirit’ does not mean soul.” At Ecclesiastes 12:7 this translation uses, not the word “spirit,” but the expression “life breath.” The Protestant Interpreters Bible observes regarding the writer of Ecclesiastes: “Koheleth does not mean that man’s personality continues to exist.”

In the original-language text of Ecclesiastes 12:7, the Hebrew word translated “spirit” or “life breath” is, ruahh." The corresponding Greek term is, "pneuma." While our life does depend on the breathing process, the English word “breath” (as numerous translators often render the words ruahh and pneuma) is not always a suitable alternate translation for “spirit.” Furthermore, other Hebrew and Greek words, namely, "neshamah"(Hebrew) and, "pnoe" (Greek), are also translated as “breath.” (Genesis 2:7 and Acts 17:25.) It is nevertheless noteworthy that, in using “breath” as an alternate rendering for “spirit,” translators are showing that the original-language terms apply to something that has no personality but is essential for the continuance of life.

I know from reading and studying the scriptures man’s life depends on the spirit (ruahh or pneuma) this is definitely stated in the Bible, at Psalm 104: 29 which reads: “If you [YHWH] take away their spirit [ruahh], they expire, and back to their dust they go," and James 2:26 reads, “The body without spirit [pneuma] is dead.” So, the spirit is that which animates the body.

But this animating force is not simply breath, because life remains in the body cells for a brief period after breathing stops. For this reason efforts at resuscitation can succeed, also body organs can be transplanted from one person to another. But these things have to be done quickly. Once the life-force (spirit) is gone from the cells of the body, efforts to prolong life are futile. All the breath in the world could not revive even as much as one cell. Viewed in this light, the “spirit” evidently is an invisible life-force, active in every living cell of a human beings body.

But this life-force (spirit) isn't active only in human beings. The Bible help us to reach a sound conclusion on this life-force (spirit) at Genesis 7:22 which teaches us regarding the destruction of human and animal life in a global flood, and says, “Everything in which the breath [neshamah] of the force [ruahh, spirit] of life was active in its nostrils, namely, all that were on the dry ground, died.” At Ecclesiastes 3:19 the same basic point is made in connection with death when it reads: “There is an eventuality as respects the sons of mankind and an eventuality as respects the beast, and they have the same eventuality. As the one dies, so the other dies; and they all have but one spirit [ruahh], so that there is no superiority of the man over the beast.” So, human beings are not superior to animals when it comes to the spirit animating the human body. The same invisible spirit or life-force is common to both human beings and animals.

 

[Hawkins]

The primary purpose of NT is to show God's Grace through Jesus Christ. It is for the preaching of the good news (not hell) to all nations for humans to be rebuilt. Hell is a distraction in this process. Hell itself is a Pharisaic concept widely accepted by at least the Hebrew speaking Jews. The concept is enforced by the Pharisees. However, even Paul who is a famous Pharisee seldom mentioned hell during the whole life of his minitry.

So NT is not the right place to accommodate the concept. OT on the other hand is censored by the Great Sanhedrin which is made of both Pharisees and Sadducees. The Sadducees will censor supernatual literatures, such as the book of Enoch to avoid them being canonized. So even OT is not the right place to accommodate the concept.

As a result, the NT only shows that hell is a widely accepted concept by the Jews. Just as Josephus put, the Pharisees own people's heart for Judaims to be enforced by them. That's why the OT Canon is actually a Pharisaic Canon of which the Sadducees only accept the first 5 books.

The hell concept which is Pharisaic was better explained by Josephus in his explanation to the Greeks on what the Jewish concept of Hades/sheol is. To me, it means God embedded the concept to the Jews and in turn Josephus explained the concept with some details, as Josephus himself is a Pharisee. What Josephus mentioned is a legitimate Pharisaic Jewish concept.

To me, the concept is carefully laid, such that even ancient humans can accommodate the concept and for modern humans (i.e., Christians) to possibly figure out more about what it is.

 

[Studyman]

There are Roman Catholic and Protestant scholars that present an entirely different view. In the “Glossary of Biblical Theology Terms” appearing in the Catholic New American Bible (published by P.J. Kenedy & Sons, New York, 1970) it reads: “When ‘spirit’ is used in contrast with ‘flesh,’ . . . the aim is not to distinguish a material from an immaterial part of man . . . ‘Spirit’ does not mean soul.” At Ecclesiastes 12:7 this translation uses, not the word “spirit,” but the expression “life breath.” The Protestant Interpreters Bible observes regarding the writer of Ecclesiastes: “Koheleth does not mean that man’s personality continues to exist.”

In the original-language text of Ecclesiastes 12:7, the Hebrew word translated “spirit” or “life breath” is, ruahh." The corresponding Greek term is, "pneuma." While our life does depend on the breathing process, the English word “breath” (as numerous translators often render the words ruahh and pneuma) is not always a suitable alternate translation for “spirit.” Furthermore, other Hebrew and Greek words, namely, "neshamah"(Hebrew) and, "pnoe" (Greek), are also translated as “breath.” (Genesis 2:7 and Acts 17:25.) It is nevertheless noteworthy that, in using “breath” as an alternate rendering for “spirit,” translators are showing that the original-language terms apply to something that has no personality but is essential for the continuance of life.

I know from reading and studying the scriptures man’s life depends on the spirit (ruahh or pneuma) this is definitely stated in the Bible, at Psalm 104: 29 which reads: “If you [YHWH] take away their spirit [ruahh], they expire, and back to their dust they go," and James 2:26 reads, “The body without spirit [pneuma] is dead.” So, the spirit is that which animates the body.

But this animating force is not simply breath, because life remains in the body cells for a brief period after breathing stops. For this reason efforts at resuscitation can succeed, also body organs can be transplanted from one person to another. But these things have to be done quickly. Once the life-force (spirit) is gone from the cells of the body, efforts to prolong life are futile. All the breath in the world could not revive even as much as one cell. Viewed in this light, the “spirit” evidently is an invisible life-force, active in every living cell of a human beings body.

But this life-force (spirit) isn't active only in human beings. The Bible help us to reach a sound conclusion on this life-force (spirit) at Genesis 7:22 which teaches us regarding the destruction of human and animal life in a global flood, and says, “Everything in which the breath [neshamah] of the force [ruahh, spirit] of life was active in its nostrils, namely, all that were on the dry ground, died.” At Ecclesiastes 3:19 the same basic point is made in connection with death when it reads: “There is an eventuality as respects the sons of mankind and an eventuality as respects the beast, and they have the same eventuality. As the one dies, so the other dies; and they all have but one spirit [ruahh], so that there is no superiority of the man over the beast.” So, human beings are not superior to animals when it comes to the spirit animating the human body. The same invisible spirit or life-force is common to both human beings and animals.

Yes, there are "many" who come in Christ's Name, who have created many religious businesses and sects, by professing to know God and convincing others of the same. The Catholic religion is one of the most successful religious corporations on the planet, and her Protestant daughters have also created very successful religious businesses. However, I'm not Catholic, nor am I a promoter of her Protestant daughters, therefore I don't go to their religious philosophers to teach me what God's Word means. I am convinced that the Rock of Israel can reveal Himself to me in a one-on-one relationship between me and the Word of God, apart from any other voice in the garden God placed me in.

The very first recorded deception was from listening to a voice who claimed to know the meaning of God's Word and convinced Eve of the same. Perhaps I am being over cautious and certainly old fashioned. But I am convinced God has placed everything I need to know about Him, in the Scriptures HE had written for "my admonition". Trusting Catholic or Protestant philosophers to define God's Word is a popular tradition in this world God placed me in, just as trusting the religious philosophers of the religious sects of the Sadducees and Pharisees was popular in Paul's Time. But Paul, after his conversion, didn't go to them for his knowledge. He knew about all these other religious voices out there, and warned the Body of Christ about them.

2 Tim. 3: 13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. 14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.


Death, and this world's religious traditions around it, has become a huge business of this world, so I understand how they must promote a certain doctrine or philosophy regarding it.

I'm simply advocating for man to have Faith in the "Word of God" to define God's Word for them, as instructed.