Hell

The Immortality of the Soul (Part 2)

Leave a comment


This is the fourth in a 13-part series wherein I give you Hell, a little booklet by the inimitable Dr. Jeff Obadiah Simmonds.

The resurrection of Jesus is central to the Gospel because it demonstrates that Christ conquered death (1 Cor 15.54-55). God became human in the Person of Christ, suffered death and was buried. But Jesus came through the other side of death, demonstrating that its power had been defeated: “The last enemy to be destroyed was death” (1 Cor 15.26). While ordinary humans might die and become extinct—Jesus, being God, was immortal and eternal. As such Jesus continued beyond the grave.

Jesus is called the firstfruits of the resurrection (1 Cor 15.20) because what is true of Jesus is also true for those who follow Him. Just as Jesus was raised to life, so too those who are saved will be raised to life and receive the gift of immortality which is bestowed by God:

For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. (1 Cor 15.21-22)

Paul says:

…this perishable body must put on imperishability, and this mortal body must put on immortality. (1 Corinthians 15.54)

There are a number of Old Testament texts which indicate that the dead do not continue to have conscious existence:

Humans’ fate is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them all… All have the same breath; humans have no advantage over the animal… All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return. (Eccl 3.19-20)
When their breath departs, they return to the ground, and on that very day their thoughts come to nothing. (Psalm 146.4)
The dead know nothing. (Eccl 9.5)
They are now dead, they live no more; those departed spirits do not rise. You punished them and brought them to ruin; You wiped out all memory of them. (Is 26.14)

We are used to hearing the words “eternal life” and understanding them to mean “salvation—an eternity in heaven” and contrasting them with “damnation—an eternity in hell.” But eternal life in the Scriptures is contrasted with death, not an eternity of suffering. We almost need to use new words to translate these terms so that their original meaning is presented. I would suggest that we could substitute “immortality” for “eternal life” and “extinction” for “death.”

For example, we would then read:

“I tell you the truth, whoever hears My word and believes Him who sent Me has immortality and will not be condemned. He or she has crossed over from extinction to life.” (John 5.24-25)

The most famous of Bible texts is John 2.16:

For God so loved the world that He gave His only son so that whoever believes in Him would not be extinguished, but may have immortality

Romans 6.23 would read:

The wages of sin is extinction, but the gift of God is immortality.

1 John 5.11-12 would say:

God has given us immortality, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; but he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.

The result of this is that those who are not saved are not eternally tortured in hell, but are extinguished. This teaching is called conditional immortality—it means that only those who are saved receive immortality or eternal life, while the unsaved remain mortal and do not continue on eternally.

If it were true that even the unsaved will live forever, Jesus did not come to bring eternal life, since even those in hell will live eternally.

 

Christian Libertarianism, Freedom, King James Bible

One Book Stands Alone by Dr Douglas D Stauffer Ch17.pt1.

Leave a comment

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/BTP/Dr_Douglas_Stauffer/one_book-17.htm

Chapter 17 — Bible Roots (Part 1)

“I build on no authority, ancient or modern, but the Scripture. I want to know one thing – the way to Heaven: how to land on that happy shore. God Himself hath condescended to teach the way. He hath written it down in a book. O give me that book! At any price, give me that book of God.” —John Wesley

John Wesley understood the value of the scriptures. His quoted words were not spoken of either the original Greek or Hebrew texts. He knew that God had also given man His word within the pages of a book. Regretfully, man no longer seems willing to accept this simple truth. The same book used by John Wesley is the very book that helped establish and guide America’s unprecedented achievement of individual liberty. It triggered the greatest revivals during the Church Age. But now, this same book has been “replaced” by hundreds of modernized versions which lack the power of their predecessor.

The influences of the modern Bible college and seminary must be examined to determine how they have helped spawn this move away from the book blessed by God more than any other. For the past several decades, many so-called conservative, fundamental Bible colleges and seminaries have weakened the faith of their students concerning the inerrancy of the scriptures.

Most of these schools require that the student, eager to learn the word of God, include Greek in his course of study. He is told that Greek is the language of the word of God, even though the Bible written in his own native tongue saved him and set his soul afire. He is placed under a teacher who may or may not believe in both the inspiration and the preservation of scripture. The purpose of these courses of study is not to strengthen the student’s faith in God’s infallible word, but to teach him to become its judge.

The young student’s final authority is changed from the book he once loved and cherished to the Greek faculty and their lexicons. Soon, he is convinced that he doesn’t have the word of God at his disposal and may even wonder if it exists at all. He is taught that better and more reliable manuscripts have been discovered that were not available to the translators of 1611. Gradually, he becomes convinced that the ignorant masses (uneducated in the original languages) have been led astray from the truth. He begins to believe that his education is the answer to the Church’s woes (II Timothy 3:1-2, 7). On the contrary, this philosophy of education has significantly contributed to the spiritual drought of these last days.

Eventually, the cycle continues when the Bible student graduates and moves on to serve in the pastorate. He unintentionally begins to convince his congregation that his knowledge of the original languages makes him spiritually superior to them. He becomes their final authority, and clergy/laity class divisions begin to emerge. One should recognize the similarities between this unfortunate scenario and that found in the Roman Catholic Church’s exclusive use of the Latin language and institution of the priesthood system to blind the multitudes. Thus, many “Protestant popes” emerge, each seeking elevation on a man-made pedestal.

When Jesus spoke, “…the common people heard him gladly” (Mark 12:37). In contrast, the majority of the scholars and religious leaders rejected and resisted Him. History repeats itself because “there is no new thing under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 1:9). Bible colleges and seminaries need to teach the Bible as infallible and the original languages as a means to convince the gainsayers (Titus 1:9), not as a tool to “correct” that which needs no correction. The moment a person runs to the Greek or Hebrew lexicon he is about to give you his private interpretation (II Peter 1:20). This is true because the lexicon will have a choice of words that could be used, and he will have to decide which is right. 1

The misdirection of one’s final authority may not be readily apparent, but the confusion caused by the various versions of the bible is easily recognizable. Are all of the different versions necessary or inspired of God? Do multiple textbooks (bibles) make sense? Consider this: No teacher would ever teach a history, science, or math class and instruct everyone to bring his favorite textbook version to class. However, this identical situation is repeated in churches every Sunday. The preacher “preaches” out of one version and the people in the pews potentially have a dozen or more other versions from which they “follow along,” creating confusion and chaos (I Corinthians 14:33)!

The King James Bible is the word of God for the English-speaking people. There is no other. God provides, and Bible believers cite, many reasons for this truth. In any analysis, we should first consider the scriptural testimony. The Bible irrefutably tells us that God will preserve His word, and not allow it to pass away. Furthermore, scripture tells us that God magnified His word above all of His name. For these reasons and many others, Satan has reveled in creating doubt concerning the authority of the words of God.

As we study some of the facts concerning manuscript evidence, the first point to be understood is that there are over 5,200 ancient manuscripts in existence today. The vast majority of these manuscripts from all over the world (including Greece, Asia Minor, England, Ireland, Constantinople, Syria, Africa, Gaul, and Southern Italy) support the King James Bible. However, the two ancient manuscripts that are the major foundation for the modern versions come from one locale – Alexandria, Egypt. During the early Christian centuries, Egypt was a land in which heresies were rampant. Today, we find that the Muslims are the predominant group controlling this region. The same was true two thousand years ago – except under a different name.

One Bible stands alone, originating from a completely different source than all of the modern versions. The evidence supporting the rejection of the Alexandrian (Egyptian) texts and the acceptance of the manuscripts underlying the KJB is overwhelming. Keep in mind that many works have been dedicated to uncovering the scriptural truths and historical facts presented in summary form here. In any discussion, we must first consider the scripture supporting one’s Bible position.

To be continued… (Or click the link at the top)

Hell

The Immortality of the Soul (Part 1)

2 Comments


This is the third in a 13-part series wherein I give you Hell, a little booklet by the inimitable Dr. Jeff Obadiah Simmonds.

The 2nd and 3rd century Christians attempted to defend their faith to Greeks by presenting the Gospel in Greek ways of thinking. They sought to demonstrate that the Gospel was rational by showing that it was compatible with Greek philosophy. In doing so they created a synthesis of Biblical truth and Greek philosophy. There were a number of ideas of Greek philosophy and pagan thought which crept into Christian theology. One of those ideas was the view that the body was bad, and was a prison of the soul, which was good. Salvation, for Greeks, was the release of this immortal soul from the mortal, sinful body. This was a Greek, not a Hebrew (or Biblical) idea.

Jostein Gaarder, in his novel on the history of philosophy, Sophie’s World (Phoenix House, 1995), writes:

Remember that from the Jewish point of view there was no question of the “immortality of the soul” … that was a Greek … thought. According to Christianity there is nothing in man—no “soul”, for example—that is in itself immortal. Although the Christian Church believes in the “resurrection of the body and eternal life”, it is by God’s miracle that we are saved from death and “damnation”. It is neither through our own merit nor through any natural—or innate—ability. (134)

The idea that the soul is immortal—and even that we have a soul at all—was derived from Plato and other Greek philosophers, though second century Christians adopted this teaching into their own writings. While this idea was incorporated into Christian theology quite early on, it is not a Biblical idea. The Bible never speaks of an “immortal soul.” The Bible certainly does affirm that there is life after death, but this is on the basis of the resurrection of the dead. This is something which God decrees—if He did not raise the dead then the “souls” of the departed would be forever dead.

The Bible declares that “God alone is immortal” (1 Tim 6.16). God alone possesses immortality by nature. Humans are by nature mortal. The book of Job asks: “shall mortal man be more just than God?” (Job 4.17).

After the Fall of Adam and Eve the humans are removed from the Garden so that they will not become (or remain) immortal:

The Lord God said: “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” (Genesis 3.22)

Death was part of the curse of the Fall—as a result of their actions, Adam and Eve were deprived of immortality. Romans 6.23 says that “the wages of sin is death”—and we should probably think of this not simply as physical death—but as extinction.

Paul says that the ultimate fate of the unredeemed is “death” (Rom 6.21, 23), or “destruction” (2 Thess 1.9; Phil 3.19). Ezekiel says that “the soul that sins will die” (Ezk 18.4).

However, the Good News of the Gospel is that God has offered eternal life—immortality—as a free gift through His Son. Romans 6.23 goes on to say that “the gift of God is eternal life.” We should clarify this by saying that those who do not receive this gift of God do not have eternal life—they have only death. It is not that all people are eternal—and that some have an eternity of bliss while others have an eternity of suffering and torment. Rather, some have eternal life, or immortality, while others do not have eternal life at all.

Because humans are mortal, their natural end is death—there is nothing beyond the grave. However, God has offered a gift of eternity, so that those who believe may continue on beyond the grave in His Presence.

 

Jihad on Drugs™, National Party

One trick pony?

2 Comments

New National Party MP Mike Sabin gave his maiden speech yesterday. Here are some excerpts.

With that in mind my policing career was soon focused in the area of drug enforcement, primarily because I felt the best way to make a difference was to focus on the cause of the problems and one quickly comes to the conclusion in that vocation that drug and alcohol abuse is the cause more often than not.

My career in the police shadowed the introduction of Pure Methamphetamine (or P) into NZ, an area I developed and expertise in, but while working on squads running undercover and electronic surveillance operations I literally saw NZ explode from virtually no P problem to the worst in the world within 5 years.

Our well-developed drug culture saw us primed for the only hard drug in the world that can be made on your kitchen bench from readily available retail chemicals.

Those 5 years have changed NZ forever and led me to the conclusion that the fight needed to go back to the top of the cliff. Quite simply Mr Speaker I knew we wouldn’t win the war trying to heal the wounded.

This desire to find a better way gave rise to MethCon Group, a drug education and policy company I founded and operated from 2006. The mission was simple; empower employers, students and community with education while looking for policy solutions to help provide government with better tools.

I sprang to public prominence over this time, a deliberate effort to give the issue a voice and sense of urgency.

It was a long, difficult and often lonely journey Mr Speaker, one that many told me was futile, one that many told me was someone else’s problem to fix. Nevertheless I stuck to the task for no other reason than my belief that something needed to be done. …

Mr Speaker, while there are some who would say I am a one-trick-pony, here to further the anti-drug cause, far from it, my journey into politics has come about as an evolution of many professional experiences leading me to the conclusion that if one wants to support their community and nation to reach its real potential there is a need to be around the tables where the decisions that most affect our communities are being made.

The reality is Mr Speaker, my efforts with the P issue demonstrate more my on-going willingness to try to make a difference than my focus on that particular issue alone. … I just wanted to try and find solutions, while many others were finding ways to tolerate the problem.

Mike Sabin is a prohibitionist.

I’d now like to share a little about what I believe in.

I am proud to be a representative of the National Party because its founding values resonate with who I am as an individual, central to this – personal responsibility, reward for hard work and enterprise, limited government and equality of opportunity and citizenship. …

Personal responsibility, the very source from which self-respect springs is intrinsically related to the individual’s willingness to accept responsibility over one’s own life. To do so is to give value, purpose and freedom to the soul. To refuse it leaves a hole from which the spirit of the individual will slowly but surely drain.

Yet years of socialist ideology, welfarism which has evolved to provide perverse incentives to opt out and the insidious encroachment of government on the minds and lives of citizens has seen the notion of personal responsibility pilloried like it were the ramblings of capitalist zealots.

Personal responsibility is a good thing. But it has a flip-side. The flip-side to personal responsibility is individual freedom and it, too, is a good thing.

So in conclusion Mr Speaker who am I?

A proud family man with a blended family of 6, richer in spirit for the good AND bad experiences in my personal life – poorer (financially) for the fact that I have managed to amass so many children in the process!

I am passionate about Northland and NZ and the pursuit of potential therein.

What do I believe in?

That personal responsibility is just that – the responsibility of the person – not the government

That carrots work better than sticks, but both are necessary.

That the first question we should be asking of New Zealanders is what is your dream? And then aim to create a social and economic climate to help make those dreams possible.

And why am I here Mr Speaker?

For the implementation … quite simply I want to help turn visions into reality.

Sabin believes in personal responsibility, but when it comes to individual freedom he’s going to hit us with sticks.

Enjoy the carrots of office, Mike.

Give me Liberty, or give me Death!