Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Death God's friend or enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | DocTrinsograce | 207493 | ||
Hi, flinty... The Puritans used to say that showing kindness to the wolves was being cruel to the sheep. The false teaching of cults only brings harm (Jude 12-15). It is foolishness -- although a popular and common foolishness -- to speak of showing respect to ideas. You might as well respect a twig or a rock. Consequently, the presumption of your "forgiveness" warrants only a certain sadness and my own forgiveness for the false condemnation. That's not difficult, given that I have many genuine failings. Feel free to fault and forgive me for any of those things, rather than something silly like being disrespectful to heresy. Sheesh. Furthermore, I'll happily exchange an out-of-context, misapplied quote of 1 Peter 3:15 for the benefits of the verse that follows it. Nonetheless, my sympathies if you have more than a passing acquaintance with the Stone-Campbell Movement. So, let me try to ferret through the tangled posts to see how I've failed to answer your question. Uh... I don't see it... But if you want something explicit: The Bible uses the words soul and spirit interchangeably. I don't find any reason to do otherwise. However, if you are after an affirmation: I see a dichotomy in the Scripture's presentation of the nature of man. The Greek perspective of a trichotomy is a presupposition much more difficult to support Biblically. Nevertheless, our cultural perspective tends to assume the latter. My Jewish inculcation tends to more easily embrace the former. As to the other stuff: Are you asking for Bible support for annihilationism? Sorry, but it isn't possible to do that without abandoning a sound Biblical hermeneutic. In Him, Doc "In a relatively free and open society, the best forms of tolerance are those that are open to and tolerant of people, even when there are strong disagreements with their ideas. This robust toleration for people, if not always for their ideas, engenders a measure of civility in public discourse while still fostering spirited debate over the relative merits of this or that idea. Today, however, tolerance in many Western societies increasingly focuses on ideas, not on people. The result of adopting this new brand of tolerance is less discussion of the merits of competing ideas -- and less civility. There is less discussion because toleration of diverse ideas demands that we avoid criticizing the opinions of others… Exclusiveness is the one religious idea that cannot be tolerated. Correspondingly, proselytism is a dirty word. One cannot fail to observe a crushing irony: the gospel of relativistic tolerance is perhaps the most 'evangelistic' movement in Western culture at the moment, demanding assent and brooking no rivals." --D. A. Carson |
||||||
2 | Death God's friend or enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | bowler | 207510 | ||
Doc I read a lot of what you had to say to one Pastor Glenn I may freely assume that you view the use of the words "spirit" and "soul" in 1 Thessalonians 5:23 and Hebrews 4:12 to be interchangeable. I am trying hard to see this. I see from your posts on this that you view the concpet of Trichotism to be an invention of the Greek philosophers. I am wondering since two NT writers bothered to separate the words soul, spirit with the use of the word "and", and seeing as how they chose to use two different Greek words there is no such thing as a trichotimist view as being "Biblical", rather than as "Greek". How are we to say that the writers of the NT meant to use them interchangeably while in the same sentence used as two different aspects of the human spiritual essence? I saw your explanation that the "division of the soul and the spirit" means both were divided, as in searched out (bad paraphrase), rather than divided from one another. However, the writers of the NT did not say that both were divided in themselves but from one another, as if there were two things being put assunder from one another. Granted this is only found in two NT sources and that the case for dichotism if far stronger throughout the OT. Perhaps you could point me to some other posts than the long one I read all of with Pastor Glenn in it, if you don't feel like getting into this again. I happen to agree with your assessment, not as if you needed me to, but I do, that tolerance of people should be separated from tolerance of ideas. 1 Corinthians 1:20 Where is the wise man? Where is the Scribe? Where is the debator of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
3 | Death God's friend or enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | DocTrinsograce | 207554 | ||
Hi, bowler... An idiomatic phrase doesn't necessarily denote our view of reality. Hence, when we speak of something being scarce as hen's teeth, it doesn't mean that we think chickens actually have teeth. How about reading between the lines; dead as a door nail; by the skin of your teeth; from the horse's mouth; giving someone a piece of your mind; made of money; believe in your heart; etc. etc. Hebrews 4:12 is speaking of the Word of God, using idiomatic imagery. What its talking about isn't swords, bones, or human nature. It is speaking of the nature of the Word. The Word can resolve the indistinguishable and indivisible. We do not draw conclusions about swords and bones. That only get's us way off base. What we are uncovering what the Scripture has to say about the nature of human ontology, we look to passages that address that topic directly. For example, Jeremiah 17 is a lousy place to draw conclusions about Jewish botany. However, it is a good place to find out about the human heart. For further discussion see posts 179846, 196798, and 196995. In Him, Doc |
||||||