Divine punishment? Is it needed?

[Hmm]

This scenario I cannot agree with. God wants with mature free will, as far as I understand.

I only consider it because the scenario itself is vanishingly unlikely - to all intents and purposes impossible. We would be talking about someone who sees God and his own inter-dependence on Him clearly and yet still persists in holding out against Him. I doubt this could actually happen because could anyone have the power to hold our against God forever and would anyone want to anyway once they have been restored to their true nature, which is in the image of God?

So we're talking about a very hypothetical circumstance and one which I don't believe could happen for the reasons I gave. But just suppose for the sake of argument that it could. Then, I think God would have the right to overrule that person's decision in his own interests or even simply because He wanted to save His impossibly stubborn child.

 

[Fervent]

It could be argued that we could still be against God even if we know that He is where our greatest happiness lies. But I would say that this would be so irrational and against our own interests that it would be as reasonable for God to overrule this decision as it would be for a father to overrule his child who wants to run across a busy the road - the strawman of God respecting free-will simply doesn't come into either scenario.

This last paragraph is exactly where your wrongheadedness lies. You have God in service of man, to an extent that it is man's pleasure that is central to the question. While God came to serve in the role of Christ that service was to a higher purpose than simply being the redemption of men. Salvation is not about us, it is for those who love Him and ultimately for Him. And any who God has to "overrule" their will in order for them to love Him rightly condemn themselves and are more likely to be hardened to resist something like stockholme syndrome setting in than to be "overruled."

 

[sawdust]

What's your source for the idea that non-christians do not have spirits?

Jn.3:6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

The word translated "natural" is psuchikos which corresponds to mind, heart, soul and is the opposite of spiritual (so no such thing as a "natural" spirit). You cannot be having God the Spirit give birth to an "unspiritual spirit", the idea is nonsensical.

You believe in annihilation immediately after death? No resurrection?

I think you read my post back to front or forgot to take into account what I said prior. I was saying if the soul is destroyed at the same time as the body (which is what you opt for), then there is no need to create Sheol as a holding cell, either for believers prior to the Cross, but especially for unbelievers as there is nothing to hold. I believe Sheol was/is a place of holding for the souls of believers until the Cross and for holding unbelievers until the Great White Throne judgement.

 

[Andrewn]

The word translated "natural" is psuchikos which corresponds to mind, heart, soul and is the opposite of spiritual (so no such thing as a "natural" spirit). You cannot be having God the Spirit give birth to an "unspiritual spirit", the idea is nonsensical.

The process of being "converted" or "born again" is often called "regeneration." I like this word because unbelievers do have spirits but those who are born from above have regenerated spirits. The problem is that all of us, including me, are used to talking about the "rational soul" while in most of the Bible the correct term is the "human spirit," this is the seat of personality. But all of us have adopted the Greek terminology, and very frequently apply it to the Bible.

The expression "psychikos de anthropos," I would translate as "the soulish person." That person doesn’t accept the things of God’s Spirit. This is because her spirit is not regenerate, she lives in the desires of her "animal soul".

I think you read my post back to front or forgot to take into account what I said prior.

Guilty as charged .

I believe Sheol was/is a place of holding for the souls of believers until the Cross and for holding unbelievers until the Great White Throne judgement.

I agree. This is the biblical view of the animal soul unaffected by Greek terminology. But the difference between your view and mine is that you think the personality is in the animal soul while I think the personality is in the spirit / rational soul.

In the Bible, the Greek word "psyche" translates the Hebrew "nephesh." Beside being translated as "soul" these words are frequently translated "life" or "being." The following is a good discussion of that shows the origin of my view:

nephesh chayyah - creation.com

 

[Clare73]

.

 

[Clare73]

. . .one way somebody could be saved without formally recognizing Christ is to nevertheless be found in Him, which is to say, to be found in love. Someone could theoretically trust their Creator and be thankful to Him and strive to love Him in whatever ways are known to them, and strive to love their neighbors, and thus
be saved without ever hearing the gospel of Christ. Theoretically.

Which disposition, of course, is the work of the Holy Spirit in rebirth, which rebirth is his salvation.
His good works are not his salvation, they are only a manifestation of his rebirth,
which is not to say that all good works manifest a true faith, rather than a counterfeit faith,
that one is actually wheat instead of a tare.

 

[Oleaster]

Which disposition, of course, is the work of the Holy Spirit in rebirth, which rebirth is his salvation.
His good works are not his salvation, they are only a manifestation of his rebirth,
which is not to say that all good works manifest a true faith, rather than a counterfeit faith,
that one is actually wheat instead of a tare.

Still on about salvation by faith? That's a really nice gourd. How much for the gourd? I'll give you 1 for it.

 

[Clare73]

It's not his loving that saves him, it is his rebirth that redeems him, makes him a son of God and co-heir with Christ.
His loving is part of his good works to sanctification.

Still on about salvation by faith? That's a really nice gourd. How much for the gourd? I'll give you 1 for it.

Is that nice gourd not the gospel we are commissioned to take to the world (Mark 16:15)?

You give only 1 for the gospel?

Surely not!

 

[Oleaster]

Is that nice gourd not the gospel we are commissioned to take to the world (Mark 16:15)?

You give only 1 for the gospel?

Surely not!

I think I paid $29.99 + S&H on Amazon for four gospels and the psalms.
This is about having a go at the puppies now (and gourds).
Consider the Lilies

 

[Clare73]

Which disposition, of course, is the work of the Holy Spirit in rebirth, which rebirth is his salvation.
His good works are not his salvation, they are only a manifestation of his rebirth,
which is not to say that all good works manifest a true faith, rather than a counterfeit faith,
that one is actually wheat instead of a tare.

It is not his loving that saves him, it is his rebirth that redeems him, makes him a son of God and co-heir with Christ.
His loving is part of his good works to sanctification.

I think I paid $29.99 + S&H on Amazon for four gospels and the psalms.
This is about having a go at the puppies now (and gourds).

Tsk, tsk, tsk. . .

The two of you in a repartee would put me in the hospital with a case of the side splitting.

 

[sawdust]

The process of being "converted" or "born again" is often called "regeneration." I like this word because unbelievers do have spirits but those who are born from above have regenerated spirits. The problem is that all of us, including me, are used to talking about the "rational soul" while in most of the Bible the correct term is the "human spirit," this is the seat of personality. But all of us have adopted the Greek terminology, and very frequently apply it to the Bible.

Only God can generate a human spirit (Jn.3:6) yet like so many others, you have Him creating something initially that is anti-Him. Why?
It's called born "again" because the text is comparing physical and spiritual birth not because it is something that happens twice to the human spirit. The actual wording says born form the "upward place" or from "above". This is how we know it is a birth from God and there is no "getting it wrong the first time" scenario only to have to redo it later on. There is nothing in the text of John 3 to suggest there are two spiritual births so that is not the meaning of regeneration.

The soul is rational, as well as the seat of emotion. There are so many verses that speak of seeking the Lord with your soul or saving your soul or how my soul rejoices in the Lord, I could easily fill the next ten pages. Even the pre-incarnate Lord Jesus speaks of His soul.

Lev.26:11 11 I will set My tabernacle among you, and My soul shall not abhor you.

I agree. This is the biblical view of the animal soul unaffected by Greek terminology. But the difference between your view and mine is that you think the personality is in the animal soul while I think the personality is in the spirit / rational soul.

In the Bible, the Greek word "psyche" translates the Hebrew "nephesh." Beside being translated as "soul" these words are frequently translated "life" or "being." The following is a good discussion of that shows the origin of my view:

nephesh chayyah - creation.com

So unbelievers have no personality? They can't think rationally?

I see nothing in scripture that splits the soul into two different types of soul, (animal/rational) but let me read your link so I might see how you come up with this view before I comment further.

 

[sawdust]

nephesh chayyah - creation.com

Read the link and I agree with it. The only thing I believe it fails to realise is that when the scripture speaks of "life being in the blood" it is referring to animals.

There is nothing in that link that suggested to me the human soul and spirit are one and the same thing, only different in their degree of capacity as you seem to be suggesting.

I believe the heart of soul (nephesh) is consciousness. The difference between nephesh in animals and nephesh in humans is that when blood in animals stop flowing they no longer have consciousness whereas humans still have consciousness. Our consciousness is independent of matter because our souls are created in the image and likeness of God who is independent of matter. Animals don't have that independence, they rely on matter for existence hence, their life is in the blood.

 

[Clare73]

Read the link and I agree with it. The only thing I believe it fails to realise is that when the scripture speaks of "life being in the blood" it is referring to animals.

That being a type, pattern of the blood of Jesus being our eternal life.

There is nothing in that link that suggested to me the human soul and spirit are one and the same thing, only different in their degree of capacity as you seem to be suggesting.

I believe the heart of soul (nephesh) is consciousness. The difference between nephesh in animals and nephesh in humans is that when blood in animals stop flowing they no longer have consciousness whereas humans still have consciousness. Our consciousness is independent of matter because our souls are created in the image and likeness of God who is independent of matter. Animals don't have that independence, they rely on matter for existence hence, their life is in the blood.

 

[Andrewn]

We would be talking about someone who sees God and his own inter-dependence on Him clearly and yet still persists in holding out against Him. I doubt this could actually happen because could anyone have the power to hold our against God forever and would anyone want to anyway once they have been restored to their true nature, which is in the image of God? So we're talking about a very hypothetical circumstance and one which I don't believe could happen for the reasons I gave.

The interesting thing is that that is exactly what Premillennialists believe. Namely, that people will be ruled by Christ, see Him in person, and talk w/ Him for 1000 years. Then at the end, they will join Satan in a war against Jesus!!!

You're not a Premillennialist, are you?

 

[sawdust]

That being a type, pattern of the blood of Jesus being our eternal life.

Exactly, a type. As I explained, the life (consciousness) of an animal is literally tied to their blood. Our life is in our soul. Christ put His soul on the line for us. He experienced (and He is the only one who ever has) the consequences of sin, that is, to be utterly forsaken by God. That mission (to die for our sins) was completed before His blood stopped flowing. He knew it was finished because He was restored to fellowship with the Father.

 

[Mark Quayle]

There are none, there is no heading whatsoever on your post, nor on several others lately.

Weird. Is it all of them now, or just occasionally? I've tried responding and getting error messages, but so far very limited.

 

[Clare73]

Exactly, a type. As I explained, the life (consciousness) of an animal is literally tied to their blood. Our life is in our soul. Christ put His soul on the line for us. He experienced (and He is the only one who ever has) the consequences of sin, that is, to be utterly forsaken by God. That mission (to die for our sins) was completed before His blood stopped flowing. He knew it was finished because He was restored to fellowship with the Father.

Yes, it is the death that atones.

It's not in the amount of blood that is shed, it's in the death that shed blood causes.

 

[Clare73]

Weird. Is it all of them now, or just occasionally? I've tried responding and getting error messages, but so far very limited.

No, it was only a few for a moment.
Maybe that was the time of the hack.

 

[Mark Quayle]

And you always end up at home, right? - lol

Seems I rarely get clear around the block, usually not even to the first corner! That St Bernard is faster than I am, and bigger.

 

[Hmm]

The interesting thing is that that is exactly what Premillennialists believe. Namely, that people will be ruled by Christ, see Him in person, and talk w/ Him for 1000 years. Then at the end, they will join Satan in a war against Jesus!!!

You're not a Premillennialist, are you?

Not at all. I had no idea that they believe that. I agree that our relationship with God continues in the next age but the 1000 years and joing Satan in a war seems a bit random. I'm a Christian universalist and believe the purpose of encountering God after death is to learn about Him and where we went wrong, for those of us who need to and of course I've no idea of the percentage of that, so that we will all eventually freely and gladly confess that Christ is Lord. To me, this is a simple reading of scripture and nothing esoteric.