| Author | Message | ||
| Hrobinsonw Registered user Username: Hrobinsonw Post Number: 9 Registered: 7-2004 |
I have been bogged down at work, so I apologize for my absence. How do SDA relate or justify Jesus Christ's purpose and the Mosaic Law. It is from my own private study (Especially Acts 15)that I interpret that The Commandments are not nullified in a sense of them being no longer relevant and man can be immoral. But that they are nullified in a sense of their consequence. Christ being perfect in every since exemplifies the Law and all that is righteous. Because of faith in him the burden of the Law is no longer existent because he alone is our mediator to God. In Old Testament times, Christ did not exist so, the Mosaic Law served as connection with God through practice and action. I am curious is to how Adventist view Jesus Christ in relationship to the the Mosaic Law. | ||
| Hrobinsonw Registered user Username: Hrobinsonw Post Number: 10 Registered: 7-2004 |
Acts 15 is especially powerful to me because it excites me to try and picture the Counsel meeting. I would have loved to be there and see Peter address the Counsel on behalf of the Gentiles. The one that denied Christ 3 times, representing Christ before Jewish Counsel. I could almost feel the level of respect that they had for the Holy Spirit as he spoke. All that he had to do was mention The Holy Spirit's commission for him to spread the word to the Gentiles, and the Counsel listened. The Holy Spirit is a powerful thing once it lays upon your heart. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 500 Registered: 12-2003 |
Good question, Hrobinson. Adventist are not really clear about Jesus' relationship to the law. They say that He came to be our example, and that his keeping the law perfectly is our example; we, too, could achieve such perfection we lived long enough and/or had enough faith. They say that the Holy Spirit now helps us keep the 10 Commandments--which, they say, are now written on our hearts. They do not understand that the Holy Spirit literally brings us to life, and He IS the law of God written on our hearts. We live by the Spirit instead of by the law. Their interpretation of Jesus' fullfilment of the law is that He kept all its requirements perfectly. Much of their confusion stems from the belief that humans do not have a spirit that is volitional, conscious, and can grow and know God. (They say our spirit is our breath.) Without a spirit, all of our life is limited to our thoughts and actions, not to a spiritual reality of knowing God. Similarly, if we don't have spirits, neither did Jesus. His sinlessness consisted of the fact that he did not commit sins, and, they say, he had no advantage over us. If He could be sinless, so can we. They do not see that because He was born of the Holy Spirit, he was never spiritually dead as we are. They consider our inherited sin to be genetic. Hence all of Jesus' perfection is about His obedience to the law, not about His inheritance as a living Son of God who did not inherit sin. The church has never been able to reach a consensus about whether or not Jesus actually inherited Mary's sinful flesh or not. If He did not, then how can He be our example? If He did, how can He be sinless--except that He never broke the law? The answer if spiritual, not physical. They just can't go there, however, because they do not believe we have conscious, knowing spirits. That's perfectly clear, right?!! Colleen | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 781 Registered: 11-2002 |
Dear Hrobinsonw, I was raised SDA. As such, I learned in my upbriging that Jesus always had a choice if or not to commit sin. That he was tempted in every way as we are but because he had awsome self-control he never committed sin. They seem to dismiss the Christmas story where it says, "unto us, this day a savior is born". I was raised to believe Jesus did not become our savior until he proved that he overcame sin. At that time, after the resurrection He became the Chist. Since he became our Savior at the time of His resurrection then we are exactally like him as he was before His resurrection. Since He did not sin, and he is our example then we too if we try hard enough should be able to not sin. This tends to downplay the significance of Communion. This temds to downplay a lot of basic Christian understanding. It tends to warp forgiveness. Since Jesus never sinned then He had no reason to ever ask for forgiveness. So, to humble oneself and ask for forgiveness to an Adventist is to admit sin, to admit less than perfection. It skews why Jesus came. | ||
| Hrobinsonw Registered user Username: Hrobinsonw Post Number: 11 Registered: 7-2004 |
Colleen, the way that I see it, they can't possibly follow Jesus' examples and still be SDA. Jesus wasn't a synagogue minister at all times on the sabbath. Mattew 12 illustrates how the teachers of the Law criticized Jesus for having the disciples to do unlawful works on the sabbath. Christ later states that he is Lord of the Sabbath. Now if we are to follow Christ as an example, that doesn't especially make a case for Saturday service. Christ also stating that "it is not what goes into your body that is unclean, but what comes out." Take it how you want but that doesn't make a case for not eating certain foods. To be a Christian means to be Christ like. And it doesn't seem that he adhered to Jewish practice. The Commandments state that "thou shalt have no other God before thee." One of the main reasons that Christ was persecuted was because he was viewed a blasphemer due to his existence as the Son of God. For him to adhere to that Commandment would mean for him to denounce his existence as God's only on, since God's child would be a God as well. That is just my random thoughts on things as I journey through my NIV. Hey, talking to yall is better than writing my thoughts down in my notebook. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 508 Registered: 12-2003 |
Hrobinsonw, your observations are quite accurate. The reality is that the SDA explanations are actually quite "schiz-y", for lack of a better adjective! Adventists say that Christ broke the man-made Jewish traditions added on to the law's requirements for the Sabbath, and that He redefined the Sabbath for Christians. (I know, that doesn't make sense, but that's the way it is.) As far as the unclean foods and what comes OUT of the body making one unclean--they'll say that Jesus was referring to the Jewish hand-washing laws, not the food laws. At the time Jesus said that, the Pharisees had been asking why Jesus didn't adhere to the traditional (read that 'ceremonial") laws, and they refused food because their hands weren't ritually washed. (At least in the book of Matthew this is the context. Mark, I know, adds that by saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean. SDAs don't comment on that.) Adventism, when examined closely, falls apart. It simply does not make sense and is not Biblical. I love that song, "Ancient Words". We have these ancient words, the Scriputres, that change us; no more modern prophets and additional "present truth"! Colleen | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 21 Registered: 7-2004 |
Colleen and Hrobinsonw, good points, both of you. I'm sure I'm like most SDA's (or now like most formers). I appreciate Colleen's statement about the lack of knowledge about our spirit nature, and its eternal quality. Without that kind of certainty an SDA is awash in fear. Fear of death, fear of making a mistake, fear of... Remember that SDA's have many laws that are not stated in the ten commandments. They include dress codes, eating recommendations, entertainment restrictions, all sorts of things. I recently shared on here that after my sister's memorial her daughter, one of my brothers, and I all drank a toast to my departed sister. This was done in front of some still practicing Adventists, and of course they were shocked. For one thing they were used to all of us formers restricting certain behaviors when we were around them as "a courtesy." For another, they were still under the impression that our beliefs had to be exactly as they had been 20 or more years ago. They had a hard time facing facts. They were viewing as sin something that wasn't even mentioned in the Ten Commandments. Make-up and jewelry is regarded as sin--not mentioned in the Ten Commandments. Drinking alcohol is regarded as sin--not mentioned in the TC. Dancing, movies, the list goes on and on. All of those things were regarded as sin, or pathways to sin and to be avoided. I know I'm preaching to the choir, but if you thing about it, a lot of us are still restricted by those forbidden behaviors even when we now intellectually have accepted the ridiculousness of those restrictions. I still think twice about eating certain foods, analyze the types of movies I will attend, and alcohol consumption is limited to weddings, birthday celebrations, and sometimes at a memorial of someone I've lost. That means a couple of sips two or three times a year, and as you can see, I'm still justifying it. All I'm saying is that the behavior modifications imposed by the SDA church become deeply ingrained. My children are both adults and can drink, by law, if they so choose, yet I worry every time I find that they have "partied." I need to "butt out" and let the Holy Spirit deal with them, so I keep silent, but I worry inside about something that someone with a different background wouldn't even think about, because they are both careful and drink in moderation. All I'm saying is that intellectually I've been freed from all that SDA falderall, but as a momentary knee-jerk response, I still react as any SDA would. It's a burden, but it also allows me to understand my SDA friends and family better than if I hadn't had that knowledge. I had a whoa moment when Hrobinsonw pointed out that Jesus was born a savior. He is so right! Whether or not Jesus was ever subject to temptation, and we know he was in the wilderness, still whether or not he was subject to it is simply not a part of the equation. He was, is, and always has been God. God doesn't have to be good because he's still God. None of us can define a behavior pattern for Him. He created the laws of the Universe and he can break them himself if he so chooses. We are so fortunate that he is Good, and that he is Love. Any fool who reads the Gospels is going to come to the conclusion that Jesus was crucified for breaking the Sabbath (as his rabbinical judges saw it). He was mostly martyred for saying he was God, but had he not make those responses he would have been lying. I made a thorough search of all of Jesus' Sabbath healings and it appeared to me that he went out of his way to heal on the Sabbath. Either that was the way of it or those were the memorable healings because they occurred on the Sabbath and those were the ones the writers of the Gospels chose to write about. The Pharisees were so SDA in their approach that they kept a list of offenses rather than going to Jesus to speak to him about his perceived wrong behavior. It all depends on who you are and what your perspective is whether or not you think Jesus lived a blameless life. Obviously the Pharisees felt that Jesus was lawless and needed to be either controlled or eliminated. Ask any good Jew today and you will be told that Jesus was a prophet, or a teacher, or any other number of descriptions of a person, but they will never refer to him as a blameless man that was martyred. They will tell you that he brought his punishment upon himself. To them he was a law-breaker and a blasphemer. The Pharisiacal viewpoint lives on even today. I'm nearly 60 years old and I'm still trying to shake off concern about how I dress, eat, and what types of entertainment I choose. My need to please others, particularly family members, borders on the pathalogical. All of my life I've wondered what it would be like to just cut loose and enjoy myself without worrying that God would strike me dead if I danced, or laughed too loud, or ate indescriminately the foods and drinks put before me. I know that none of those things are sinful, but somehow they remain shameful for me. My relationships with Gospel believing Christians has been opportunity to heal, but these people are also very restrained in their behavior. I'd give anything to celebrate like the people do in the movie "My Big Fat Greek Wedding." Arms wide open, shouting for joy. I pray that Heaven will be more like that than like a SDA potluck! Thank you for giving me space to rant. I know that none of what I've said is very uplifting. The rest of you have done so well at that. Maybe the SDAs you guys know are rather like me--a party animal trapped in a wallflower body. Belva | ||
| Vchowdhury1 Registered user Username: Vchowdhury1 Post Number: 6 Registered: 7-2004 |
I would like to thank all of you for your very inspiring points regarding the "LAW". I was raised SDA (was one for 35 years before seeing the light). One of the main purposes for their existence is they seem to want to strive to follow the law of the old testimant perfectly as well as those set down by EGW. Yesterday, I went to the following website, www.ellenwhite.org, and re-read some of her writings, especially the early letters. Now I know that SDA's just take portions of her writings to justify why they follow the law. Its Ironic, because in reading most of her writings, I finally understand that SDA's only take a portion of her writings to apply to themselves. If they would take into considerations ALL of her writings, no one would take them seriously because EGW was "off the wall". (And of course if she is truly their prophet, they should take into consideration and follow all of her writings, right?)I was shocked when I read that in her early writings she wrote that "Masterbation causes mental illness, and other health problems. She said that "we should bind the hands and private parts of children to stop them from this vile habit". She also wrote that "Men should not sleep on feather matresses because it causes unpure thoughts...and should refrain from spicy foods because it causes private unpure behaviors (meaning masturbation)...and we should not read novels because it will cause us to do the same things. She also wrote that the habit of un-pure sexual acts with ourselves will cause our deaths...(literally). And THIS is their PROPHET??? Yesterday, I finally had the revelation that it was God who called me out of the SDA church. Now, its time to be a Christian...not an SDA. Also, while growing up SDA, people, even our own SDA church members would complain that SDA people were not very compassionate when it comes to visiting the sick, etc. I have a friend who left the SDA church because when she had cancer, she scarcely received a visit from any SDA. But she had a friend that was a Mormon who visited her all the time, and helped her with everything. This Mormon also brought other Mormons to help her whom she didn't even know. Consequently, my friend became a Latter Day Saint (Not that I'm sayings that the LDS beliefs are any better). I brought up this point because SDA's have a problem with compassion because they are to exhausted from trying to follow the "Law" to be compassionate. And when I was in the SDA church, I also notice that other Christians who convert to SDA-ism were mainly the ones that did so because they are having "personal" problems in their lives (wayward children, bad marriages, financial crises, etc), and SDA's convince them that their problems stem from not following God's Law. This is how they convert other Christians as well as non-Christians. Thank you for letting me get this "off of my chest". | ||
| Freeatlast Registered user Username: Freeatlast Post Number: 208 Registered: 5-2002 |
Amen Vchowdhury1, a hearty AMEN! | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 128 Registered: 4-2000 |
Colleen, I applaud your accurate commentary on SDA theology. As former Adventists, most of us well remember how the state of the dead was the very last doctrinal pillar to fall. Without doubt, Satan prefers the SDA view of death (a quick fix to a life filled with sin). When one does not understand the dualistic nature of man direct from the Creator's hand, body and soul, the rest of Scripture is completely blurred and confusing. Soteriologically (probably the longest word I have ever typed, but the grandest topic--the study of our salvation), it does make a huge difference if we have a soul to save. The Bible never once talks about the resurrection of the soul--only the body. It is important to know that both God's love and wrath are eternal attributes. His divine wrath makes grace even more amazing. When discussing these salvific topics, my heart silently aches when I realize all the lies that I have preached and taught to many people. Worst of all, I wholeheartedly and sincerely believed these things and was self-deceived for almost a half century. Praise God, the years that the locusts ate will be restored to us. He faithfully redeems our past. The "veil" is gone! I now see Jesus as the primary focus of Scripture. In his book, SPIRITUAL CRISIS: Surviving Trauma to the Soul, J. Lebron McBride, Ph.D. gives his brief testimony of how he left the "truth" of Adventism: "To put my experience in the form of a metaphor: As you know, I didn't move when a little water got into the ship--when the storm clouds gathered overhead. Many were leaving then and I too was tempted, but I hung on. I didn't leave when the storm hit full force. More left then and I grew more and more frustrated. I attempted to repair where I could even though at times I too wanted to jump. However, when things got back to normal and I realized no preparations were being made for the coming of another storm, that all was back to the same old rock-a-long status quo, and nothing--not even the storm had awakened the captains and most of the the sailors, I finally decided it was time to jump ship!" | ||
| Hrobinsonw Registered user Username: Hrobinsonw Post Number: 12 Registered: 7-2004 |
I saw that that the state of the dead is an issue mentioned. I hear it alot from the individuals that approach me. They won't explain it to me, I guess because they realize that I will cross reference it with the Bible. But can someone give me some insight. And good morning to all. | ||
| Bb Registered user Username: Bb Post Number: 10 Registered: 7-2004 |
Good Morning! I was reading my Bible this morning and read about the transfiguration where Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus. I remembered when I was talking with a non-SDA (back when I was involved in SDA church) and I said "The angels raised Moses after he died". The person said "where did you read that?!" Then I realized it was one of EGW's old fables. I was embarrassed that I couldn't point to a Bible text. Anyway, I was going to comment visiting the sick in the SDA church. My mother had to go 30 miles away to have surgery and lives in a SDA retirement community. There is a Catholic lady who works on the grounds and do you know she was the ONLY one who bothered to visit her or write her a note!! That is so sad. On a good note, my brother, who is an SDA but is a bit disillusioned with their lack of compassion and grace, has been working on my mother to read non-SDA authors such as "Waking the Dead" and some Phillip Yancy. She is so resistant to non-SDA literature, but he has been trying to talk to her about grace, and we are praying that she will "get it". Please pray for her to finally find some peace. I also feel that my brother is ripe to understand truth outside of EGW, but I don't know how to approach him on it. I guess I am scared of being thought of as "lost" because I don't believe in "her". Bb | ||
| Pw Registered user Username: Pw Post Number: 83 Registered: 6-2004 |
*Note: "I posted this scripture under another thread but felt this may help you with the state of the dead issue". I found this regarding the coming death of the King of Babylon in Isaiah 14:9-11: "The grave below is all astir to meet you at your coming, it rouses the SPIRITS OF THE DEPARTED TO GREET YOU. All those who were leaders in the world, it makes them rise from their thrones-all those who were kings over the nations. They will respond, they will say to you "You have become weak like we are, you have become like us. All your pomp has been brought down to the grave, along with the noise of your harps, maggots are spread out beneath you & worms cover you." This is some good ammo for the state of the dead issue if it ever comes up. It clearly says even in the Old Testament that our spirits live on and are aware of what is going on even after the body dies. I found this to be helpful in my own research. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 510 Registered: 12-2003 |
Hrobinsonw, the state of the dead, in Adventism, is the belief that when one dies, his body goes into the ground and his breath (spirit) returns to God. His "soul" is the combination of body plus breath, so it also ceases to exist--whatever it is! Adentists believe that humans die like animals; they have no spirit that knows God, they just have body plus breath. This belief is crucial for Adventists for a lot of reasons, one of the most obvious being that the investigative judgment wouldn't make sense unless people did not go to heaven or hades when they die. If, after all, God didn't begin the judgment until 1844, no one's spirit could be in heaven yet because God hadn't yet decided who was elible to get there. Hence "soul sleep"--annihilation until the resurrection. God holds each person in His memory, they say, and "resurrects" them (actually it would be "re-creating" them) at the second coming. This doctrine is crucial to Adventists, and they hang onto it, generally, even longer than they hang onto the Sabbath. It is terrifying and somehow threatening to them to think the spirit might actually be conscious and volitional, and that the essence of a person goes to God and experiences Him after death. It is twisted and, as mentioned above, has serious implications for sin, salvation, and the Savior. Interestingly, our friend Larry Poland who has the ministry Master Media which reaches out to the decision makers in the entertainment industry, says that cults always have aberrant beliefs about the three S's: sin, salvation, and the Savior. When we explained Adventist's "soul sleep' to him a few days ago, he was shocked and said, Well, they have problems with each of the three S's. Praise God for LIFE! Colleen | ||
| Hrobinsonw Registered user Username: Hrobinsonw Post Number: 13 Registered: 7-2004 |
Now that is one of the most interesting scenarios that i have ever heard. Colleen I wish that you had aol instant messaging so i could talk to you faster and on a regular basis. So, if this spirit leaves the body and maintains in God's memory until the specified time of judgement, then what about Luke 23:42-43. Jesus told him TODAY you will be with me in paradise. Not tomorrow, or next Sabbath, 1844, 2010, etc. TODAY is the word that he chose to use. Tell me more, I am so ignorant to this way of thinking. | ||
| Doug_s Registered user Username: Doug_s Post Number: 52 Registered: 7-2004 |
The state of the dead. Boy did you open a can of worms. I'm not sure if I should get into this here or whether we should open up another thread. I feel pretty sure that I'm standing alone on this one, because that pillar has yet to completely fall for me. I think I've done as much or more study on this topic as anything else. I guess mainly because I know I am not in agreement with most of you I hesitate to even discuss it. One thing I've learned is that the perspective one has on an issue will lead one to rationalize that position. That's why my goal is to allow the bible to establish my perspective. If I know I have the perspective established from the scriptures then I have God's perspective. And if I have that then I can accept what ever is taught. For now I will say that I do not believe everything that the SDA church teaches in regards to the state of the dead. I believe the spirit is more than just breath. I believe it is rational, emotive, conscious. But the bible is very clear that there is a difference between the soul and spirit. They are not the same thing and should not be confused with one another. Both the OT and NT have words for each and use them differently. Admittedly they have been used in some places that may cause one to think they are the same. They are very closely related but are not the same. The bible is clear that we are not just body and soul but rather we are body, soul, and spirit. The bible distinguishes between all three. That's all I have to say for now. Since this is a pretty big deal to me I would welcome discussion either here or in another thread or through email privately. If I'm wrong, maybe someone out there can drive some sense into my granite head. I sent an essay I prepared on this subject to Dr. Verle Streifling and Greg Taylor. Both responded graciously with their own belief and have encouraged me to continue to seek the Lord's guidance. This I have done and continue to do, but as of now I am still under the same conviction. Doug | ||
| Hrobinsonw Registered user Username: Hrobinsonw Post Number: 14 Registered: 7-2004 |
Doug, I don't know enough about it to righteously discuss it with you. But give me a few days and I will get back to you on it. I have read about body, soul, and spirit in the Bible. My issue is more with this state of the dead in relation to judgement. And is the soul even mentioned. The Bible mentions all three. But does SDA mention all three in relation to judgement. Or is the soul part left out. The soul being included or not could send one into several directions as far as research is concerned. | ||
| Doug_s Registered user Username: Doug_s Post Number: 53 Registered: 7-2004 |
Hrobinsonw, I have an answer to your question. It's not necessarily the correct one but it's mine. And it has nothing to do with a misplaced comma. This has been on my mind for some time and so I went to Luke 23:42-43 to read again the famous texts. First I read the entire chapter then I broke it down and read the greek for each word in verses 42-43 to gain some insight as to what is being said. I'm not a greek scholar and so I rely on the concordance for help in getting the meaning. What initially struck me was the "remember" in verse 42. The man on the cross asked Jesus to remember him. Does that sound like a man who expects to be with the Lord immediately after his body dies? No, he wants Jesus to remember him when Jesus gets to heaven. What a strange request from someone who is asking to be saved yet does not expect to go immediately to heaven. Was his understanding of salvation skewed or did he have the kind of understanding of salvation that all common people would have? Here's what really struck me. What was Jesus' answer? The usual response is "Jesus said to him, Truly (Verily) I say unto you, Today you will be with me in Paradise." A couple things I have to say about this. If you look at the Greek you will see that the greek pronoun soi (to you) - is used in the first half of the verse "Truly I say to you" but not the second half. So the words "Today, you will be with me" Can be read "Today, will be with me". The greek word for Today is semeron which also carries the meaning "The events of today" or "what has happened today". So, this verse could be read as "...Truly I say to you, what has happened today will be with me in Paradise. Or in other words, Yes I will remember you and what has happened here today. I will remember you and what you testified of me today here on this cross. I will remember you when I enter into my Father's kingdom, in Paradise. This brings up another important point. Did Jesus go into Paradise that day? Did He enter into His Father's kingdom that day? No, he did not. He went into the grave that day. Jesus did not enter into His Father's kingdom until later, when He ascended to heaven. That's my view. Doug | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 514 Registered: 12-2003 |
Hrobinsonw, the typical Adventist response to Luke23:42-43 is that the comma is in the wrong place. Because Greek has no punctuation marks, they say that the phrase should be rendered, "I say unto you today, you will be with me in Paradise." Our pastor (who is actually a Greek scholar) says that such a rendering is inconsistent with all the other places Jesus said, "Verily, verily I say unto you..." There is no reason to think that in this instance Jesus put the "today" into the phrase "I say unto you." It has to mean that whateer he is talking about would be "today". Yes, Doug, I believe spirit and soul are two different things. I believe that the spirit is what returns to God. Stephen, in Acts 7:59 said, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit" as he died. Jesus said in Luke 23:46, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit" as He died. The word spirit (Pneuma) is used at least 40 times throughout the NT to refer to the part of a person that knows God. (For example, see, Matthew 26:41; Luke 1:80; John 4:23-24; 1 Corinthians 5:3; 2 Corinthians 7:1; 1 thessalonians 5;23, etc.) The word "soul" is a different word, and according to Genesis, when God breathed the breath of life (something He did not do for the animals) into Adam, he became a living soul. The breath of Life (spirit), is apparently our "spirit", the part of us that is directly from God, is what sets us apart from the animals, and gives us the ability to worship God, who is spirit, in spirit and in truth. (see John 4:23-24) Our soul, it seems, is our personality, our "presence" that is the result of our spirits being in a living body. It is our spirits that return to God. The Bible doesn't say our souls go to Him. But our spirits, according to the Bible, are not just theoretical parts of ourselves. They are conscious, knowing, growing, and the essence of us. They are the parts of ourselves that, when awakened by the Holy Spirit, know God, grow, understand spiritual things, perceive the Holy Spirit's promptings, etc. We really don't know exactly what these parts of ourselves are. Yet I believe that anyone who has been born again understands that the spirit is more than an inanimate part of our composition. It's more than breath; it's not simply a theory. It KNOWS. And, as for where Jesus went when He died, it's true that all of Himself did not enter His Father's kingdom. His body was clearly in the grave. Yet he told the Father, "Into your hands I commit my spirit." We are redeemed as whole people, not simply redeemed spirits or eternal bodies. But our redemption, like Adam's fall, is in two stages. When we accept Jesus, our spirits are brought to life by the Holy Spirit. Before our conversion we are dead people in living, mortal bodies. (see Ephesians 2:1-4) At the resurrection we will receive spiritual, immortal bodies, and our redeemed spirits will again be clothed, but this time in immortal bodies instead of in temporary tents. (see 2 Corinthians 5) Conversely, when Adam sinned, his spirit died immediately. He suddenly was naked and ashamed, and he hid from God. Yet his body did not die until a few hundred years later. I believe that both the thief's and Jesus's spirits were in Paradise that day, as Jesus said. But it was only at the resurrection that Jesus established our future hope--that we will live forever as complete humans, alive in Christ and also alive physically. That's how I see it at this time. Praise God for continuing to teach us! Colleen | ||
| Hrobinsonw Registered user Username: Hrobinsonw Post Number: 15 Registered: 7-2004 |
I fear for religions that knowingly twist the word of God to fit their own cause. |
