HOME CHAT ROOM #1 CHAT ROOM #2 Forum Topics Within The Last 7 Days REGISTER ENTER FORUMS BIBLE SCHOOL CONTACT US

Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine Christian Family Fellowship Forums
(formerly Maritime SDA OnLine)
Consisting mainly of both members and friends of the Seventh-day Adventist Church
Welcomes and invites other members and friends of the Seventh-day Adventist Church to join us!

Click Here To Read Legal Notice & Disclaimer
Suggested a One Time Yearly $20 or Higher Donation Accepted Here to Help Cover the Yearly Expenses of Operating & Upgrading. We need at least $20 X 10 yearly donations.
Donations accepted: Here
ShoutChat Box
Newest Members
ekoorb1030, jibb555, MBloomfield, Dina, Nelson
1323 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums118
Topics9,189
Posts195,525
Members1,323
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
Seventh-day Adventist Church In Canada Links
Seventh-day Adventist Church in Canada

Newfoundland & Labrador Mission

Maritime Conference

Quebec Conference

Ontario Conference

Manitoba-Saskatchewan Conference

Alberta Conference

British Columbia Conference

7 Top Posters(30 Days)
Rick H 16
kland 15
Daryl 4
March
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Member Spotlight
Kevin H
Kevin H
New York
Posts: 625
Joined: November 2004
Show All Member Profiles 
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Live Space Station Tracking
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
Last 7 Pictures From Photo Gallery Forums
He hath set an harvest for thee
Rivers Of Living Water
He Leads Us To Green Pastures
Remember What God Has Done
Remember The Sabbath
"...whiter than snow..."
A Beautiful Spring Day
Who's Online
3 registered members (Karen Y, 2 invisible), 2,795 guests, and 4 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
7 - The Nature Of Man #38776
07/22/00 01:24 AM
07/22/00 01:24 AM
Daryl  Offline
OP
Site Administrator
23000+ Member
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 25,118
Nova Scotia, Canada
7. The Nature of Man

Man and woman were made in the image of God with individuality, the power and freedom to think and to do.

Though created free beings, each is an indivisible unity of body, mind, and spirit, dependent upon God for life and breath and all else.

When our first parents disobeyed God, they
denied their dependence upon Him and fell from their high position under God. The image of God in them was marred and they became subject to death.

Their descendants share this fallen nature and its consequences. They are born with weaknesses and tendencies to evil.

But God in Christ reconciled the world to Himself and by His Spirit restores in penitent mortals the image of their Maker.

Created for the glory of God, they are called to love Him and one another, and to care for
their environment.

(Gen. 1:2628; 2:7; Ps. 8:48; Acts 17:2428; Gen. 3; Ps. 51:5; Rom. 5:1217; 2 Cor. 5:19, 20; Ps. 51:10; 1 John 4:7, 8, 11, 20; Gen. 2:15.)

------------------
In His Love, Mercy & Grace

Daryl Fawcett :)


Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man #38777
07/21/01 06:22 AM
07/21/01 06:22 AM
M
Mogens H. Sorensen  Offline
Posting New Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 25
Fredericton, NB, Canada
The Nature of Man (After Sin)
Seventh-day Adventist Believe…A Biblical Exposition of 27 Fundamental Doctrines, Pages 88-93.

The first consequence of sin was a change in human nature that affected interpersonal relationships, as well as the relationship with God.

Many scriptural passages, including particularly the account of the Fall, make it clear that sin is a moral evil-the result of a free moral agent’s choosing to violate the revealed will of God. (Gen. 3:1-6; Rom. 1:18-22).

Biblical definitions of sin include: “the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4, KJV), a failure to act by anyone “ who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it” (James 4:17), NIV) and “whatever is not from faith” (Rom. 14:23). One broad inclusive definition of sin is: “Any deviation form the know will of God, either of neglect to do what He has specifically commanded or of doing what He has specifically forbidden.”

Sin knows no neutrality. Christ states “He who is not with Me is against Me” (Matt12:30). Failure to believe in Him is sin (John 16:9). Sin is absolute in its character because it is rebellion against God and His will. Any sin, small or great, results in the verdict “guilty”. Thus “whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumbles in one point, he is guilty of all” (James 2:10).

Frequently sin is spoken of only in terms of concrete and visible acts of lawbreaking. But Christ said that being angry with someone violates the sixth commandment of the Decalogue, “You shall not kill” (Ex. 20:13, RSV), and that lustful desires transgress the command “You shall not commit adultery” (Ex. 20:14). Sin, therefore, involves not only overt disobedience in actions but also thoughts and desires.

Sin produces guilt. From the Biblical perspective, guilt implies that the one who has committed sin is liable to punishment. And because all are sinners, the whole world is “guilty before God” (Rom. 3:19)

If not cared for properly, guilt devastates the physical, mental, and spiritual faculties. And ultimately, of not resolved it produces death-for “the wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23)

The antidote for guilt is forgiveness (Matt. 6:12), which results in a clear conscience and peace of mind. This forgiveness God is eager to grant repentant sinners. To the sin-burdened, guilt ridden race, Christ graciously calls, “Come to Me, all you who labour and are heavy laden and I will give you rest” (Matt:28).

The seat of sin is what the Bible calls the heart-what we know as the mind. From the heart “spring the issues of life” (Prov. 4:23). Christ reveals that it is the person’s thoughts that defile, “for out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies” (Matt. 15:19). It is by the heart that the entire person-the intellect, will, affections, emotions, and body-is influence. Because the heart is “deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked” (Jer. 17:9), human nature can be described as corrupt, deprave, and thoroughly sinful.

How great was the depravity of humanity? At the cross humans murdered their Creator-the ultimate parricide! But God has not left man without hope.

History reveals that Adam’s descendants share the sinfulness of his nature. In prayer, David said, “In Your sight no one living is righteous” (Ps. 143:2; cf. 14:3). “There is no one who does not sin” (1 Kings 8:46). And Solomon said, “Who can say, ‘I have made my heart clean, I am pure form my sin’?” (Prov. 20:9); “There is not a just man on earth who does good and does not sin” (Eccl. 7:20). The New Testament is equally clear, stating that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23) and that “if we say we have no sin, we deceive e ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:8).

Paul said, “In Adam all die” (1 Cor. 15:22). In another place he noted, “Through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Rom. 5:12).

The human heart’s corruption affects the total person. In this light Job exclaims, “Who can bring a clean thing out an unclean? No one!” (Job 14:4). David said, “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me” (Ps. 51:5). And Paul stated that “the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom. 8:7,8). Before conversion, he pointed out, believers were “by nature children of wrath,” just like the rest of humanity (Eph. 4:3).

Although as children we acquire sinful behaviour through imitation, the above texts affirm that we inherit our basic sinfulness. The universal sinfulness of humanity is evidence that by nature we tend toward evil, not good.

How successful are people in removing sin from their lives and from society?

Every effort to achieve a righteous life through one’s own strength is doomed. Christ said that everyone who has sinned is “a slave of sin”. Only divine power can emancipate us from this slavery. But Christ has assured us, “If the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed” (John 8:36). You can only produce righteousness, He said, if “you abide in Me” because “without Me you can do nothing” (John 15:4,5).

Even the apostle Paul failed to live a righteous life on his own. He knew the perfect standard of God’s law but he was not able to achieve it. Recounting his efforts, he said, “I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate.” “I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do.” Then pointed to the impact of sin in his life: “Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me.” In spite of his failures he admired God’s perfect standard saying, “I delight in the law of God, in my inmost self, but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin which dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?” (Rom. 7:15, 19, 20, 22-24, RSV).

Paul finally acknowledged that he needed divine power to be victorious. Though Christ he put aside a life according to the flesh and began a new life according to the Spirit (Rom. 7:25; 8:1).

This new life in the Spirit is the transforming gift of God. Through divine grace, we who are “dead in trespasses and sins” become victorious (Eph. 2:1 3, 8-10). The spiritual rebirth so transforms the life (John 1:13; Johan 3:5) That we can speak of a new creation-the “old things have 0passed away” and “all things have become new” (2 Cor. 5:17). The new life, however, does not exclude the possibility of sinning (1 John 2:1)


Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man #38778
08/05/06 09:34 PM
08/05/06 09:34 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

10 TOPICS THAT DEMONSTRATE THE SUPERIORITY OF THE HOLISTIC VIEW OF HUMAN NATURE OVER THE DUALISTIC VIEW


The dualistic view of the human nature and destiny (belief in the immortality of the soul) cannot be considered superior in any way to the holistic understanding of these themes. We would challenge the advocates of that position to present what superior aspects they could find in their understanding of the question in comparison with the enumeration that we present below of items in which one can perceive the indisputable superiority of the holistic view over the understanding of immortality of the soul.

1.) Much more Christ-centered. The holistic understanding stresses that only in Christ we have hope of obtaining immortality, at the resurrection of the just ones, not being something we already possess inherently in the form of an immortal soul. “He who has the Son has the life” (cf. John 5:28, 29; 1 John 5:12; 1 Corinthians 15:51-54).

2.) Greater foundation on the basic doctrine of righteousness by faith. There is only one who is good, Jesus said (see Mat. 19:17). In an absolute sense only God is just, while we are infinitely far from possessing justice of our own. The holistic vision highlights that as we have no justice in ourselves by which to appear before the Supreme Judge to obtain approval (see Isaiah 64:6), we also don’t have inherently the gift of immortality, which only belongs to God (1 Timothy 1:17; 6:16) and is granted to us through the gospel of Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 1:10).

3.) Greater emphasis and valuation of the theme of Christ’s advent. For those who believe in the immortality of the soul the theme of Christ’s second coming doesn’t receive the same importance, for, in practical terms, such event becomes irrelevant, since the eternal inheritance occurs at death. This explains the emphasis on the second advent and the conclusion of the evangelization work among Seventh-day Adventists by every means possible (radio, TV, literature, personal witnessing, public lectures, health and social assistance). The fulfillment of Matthew 24:14 is the great preoccupation and motivation of the SDA Church, which has the largest number of penetrated lands and proportionally the largest number of missionaries among all those who are engaged in the task of world evangelization.

4.) Greater consistency with the theme of each one’s judgment. Those who believe in the immortality of the soul turn the theme of the final judgment into a non-sense thing. Why and what for will a final judgment be set, since people at their death go directly to their final destination—saved ones to “the glory”, lost ones to a site of tortures or, at least, a place not agreeable at all, where they will be expecting a punishment already defined?

5.) No identification with pagan beliefs. The identification of all pagan peoples with dualistic concepts demonstrates the superiority of the holistic view. Nobody is capable of indicating at least one pagan people that have renounced to belief in souls and spirits of people (or even of animals and inanimate things) to believe in the final resurrection as the only means to return to existence after death, a point even highlighted in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, one of the foundations of the dualistic view (cf. Luke 16:31).

6.) Better defense against dangerous doctrines. The holistic view is the best protection and antidote against subtle errors that exist or has come to existence in these last times, such as spiritualism, Catholic doctrines as the purgatory and intercession of the saints, Mormonism, New Age, Eastern religions, etc., especially in the face of Christ’s and Paul’s warnings regarding the growing deceits of the final times (Matthew 24:24; 2 Timothy 3:1-5).

7.) Higher estimation of the divine love and justice. The vision of God’s justice and love is harmed by the belief in an eternally burning hell, with punishments totally out of proportion with the impenitent ones’ guilt. According to the holistic view, the pay will be proportional to the guilt and it will be liquidated, not made eternal (Matthew 5:26 and 18:30).

8.) Greater consistency with the meaning of basic Bible terms. Even though in the Bible language there are many mentions to “soul” and “spirit”, the Scriptures don’t authorize any concept of either an immortal “soul” or “spirit”. Besides informing us that only God is possessor of immortality, the Bible states that the soul can die (Ezekiel 18:4; James 5:20), not the opposite of it.

9.) Greater valuation of bodily health. It is well known that the Christians who maintain the dualistic understanding of human nature conceptualize the present life dualistically. They tend to consider the cultivation of the soul as more important than the care of the body. The physical well being of the body is often intentionally ignored, or even suppressed. That explains the holistic preoccupation of Seventh-day Adventists with health and the emphasis on the care of the body as “temple of the Holy Spirit”, to be wholly consecrated to the Lord (1 Corinthians 3: 16, 17).

10.) A more mature and real picture of the world to come. The popular notion of an eternal paradise, where glorified souls will spend eternity wearing white robes, playing harps, sailing on clouds and drinking the nectar of gods is alien to the Scriptures. The Bible speaks of the resurrected redeemed ones dwelling on this planet, that has been purified and transformed, turned into a perfect world at the second coming of the Lord (2 Peter 3:11-13; Romans 8:19-25; Revelation 21:1). The “new heavens and new Earth” (Isaiah 65:17) are not a remote and inconsequent spiritual retreat in some corner of the Universe. Rather, they are the present heavens and Earth renewed back to its original perfection. – By Prof. Azenilto G. Brito.


A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man #92547
11/02/07 08:04 PM
11/02/07 08:04 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

10 QUESTIONS FOR THOSE WHO BELIEVE IN THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL


1st. – Why does Jesus say to His followers that He would go to “prepare a place for you”, but the emphasis on the occupation of said abodes is not when they died and their souls went to heaven to occupy them, but the moment of their reunion with Him when He returns (John 14:1-3)?

Note: The popular opinion is that at death the deceased’s souls head to heaven, when they will meet Christ and all the others who went there before. However, it seems strange that Jesus says nothing regarding these abodes being available before the time of His return, implying that only then He will take His ones with Him to occupy said abodes.

2nd. – Why, when comforting the sisters of Lazarus, besides having used the sleep metaphor before—“Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep . . .”—He did not tell them that the deceased was in the heavenly glory, but pointed to them the resurrection hope (John 11:17-27)?


Note: Among the religious people it is so common to comfort the bereaved ones telling them how the deceased is well, happily enjoying the bliss of a better world far from the suffering and pain of this life. However, that is not the picture in the dialogue during Lazarus’ death, both on the part of Christ and that of his bereaved sisters. The theme of their conversation is not the supposed heavenly destination of the faithful follower of Christ, but the FUTURE resurrection of the dead ones.

3rd. – When Christ resurrected Lazarus, after His friend had been dead for four days, did He bring him from heaven, hell or purgatory? If it was from heaven, then He did a bad thing to him for He brought him back to this Earth’s suffering. If it was from hell (improbable, for he was a follower of the Master), He granted him a second salvation opportunity, which is unbiblical.


Note: The logic of this question is very clear: Lazarus rose from the tomb and brought no information about the afterlife. If he had something to tell, undoubtedly John evangelist would have the greatest interest and would be pleased to reproduce his words and testimony in his gospel.

4th. – Why both Christ and Paul stress that the dead ones will rise as they hear the voice of the archangel and the divine trumpet, being “awakened” from death’s sleep (Matthew 24:30; 1 Thessalonians 4:16), when their souls supposedly come from heaven, hell, purgatory, well awakened, in order to reincorporate?


Note: The sleep metaphor is constant both in the Old and New Testament, representing death. In the face of the clear texts that deal with the unconsciousness of the dead ones (who “don’t praise the Lord”—Psalm 115:17) it can be noticed why such metaphor is used, as in Psalm 13:3—“sleep in death”; in Daniel 12:2, many “who sleep in the dust of the earth”; John 11:11, “Lazarus has fallen asleep”; 1 Thes. 4:13, “those who fall asleep”; 1 Cor. 15:18, “those who have fallen asleep in Christ. . .” it’s because during death a condition of UNCONSCIOUSNESS prevails for those who died. Some more clear texts about that are: Psalm 146:4; Ecclesiastes 9:5,10; Isaiah 38:18,19; 1 Kings 2:10; 1 Kings 11:43; Job 14:10-12; Jeremiah 51:39.

5th. – Why does Paul, as he discusses specifically and in detail in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 and 1 Corinthians 15, how the final encounter of all saved ones with the Savior will be, nowhere describes souls coming from heaven, or from wherever, to reincorporate?


Note: As at the beginning of human’s history there is no “immortal soul” introduced in the original man, nothing is also said on souls coming from heaven, hell or purgatory to reincorporate when those who are gone appear during the resurrection.

6th. – Paul also says to the Thessalonians that they should not regret for their dear ones who are “asleep”, concluding with the recommendation: “Therefore, encourage one another with these words” (vs. 18). He never says that they already enjoyed the heavenly bliss, but that were “asleep” and would be awakened. Why does the encouragement stem from the promised resurrection, not from the souls of their dear ones being already in heaven?


Note: This question is also of indisputable clarity. The consolation would proceed from the resurrection hope, not from the fact that those who “slept” would be already enjoying the heavenly glories.

7th. – Paul says clearly that without the resurrection of the dead—confirmed and guaranteed by that of Christ Himself—“those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost” (1 Cor. 15:16-18). Why would they be lost, since they should rather be guaranteed with their souls in heaven?


Note: The dominant theme of the chapter is the resurrection of the dead—“For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either” (1 Cor. 15:16)—thus the logic of the question is inescapable. In 1 Thessalonians 4:14 it is said that Christ will bring with Him "those who have fallen asleep", but the entire tenor of the passage and the global Bible teaching is that He will bring them, not from heaven, but from their graves (see John 5:28, 29; Daniel 12:2).

8th. – Later on in the same chapter, Paul confirms what he had said in vs. 16 a 18, stressing that he risked to die fighting beasts in Ephesus, implying that if he died he would also having be lost (vs. 32). In his commentary, “let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die” isn’t he indicating clearly that without the resurrection there is no hope of eternal life?


Note: On the light of the previous question, this reveals an irrefutable evidence that Paul didn’t think of an “immortal soul” going to heaven when he died, for he didn’t harbor such a hope. His expectation is expressed in 2 Tim. 4:6-8 where he speaks that “on that day” he expected to receive his eternal reward. For Paul, were not for the resurrection, it wouldn’t even be worthwhile to live, since death would be the end of everything. It's interesting to see what vs. 30 and 31 say: “As for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour? I die every day. . .” The idea of death/resurrection without anything in-between is very clear.

9th. – Why does Job speak of his hope of seeing his Redeemer “in my flesh”, when He finally “will stand upon the Earth”, not that he would see Him when his soul went to heaven (Job 19:25)?


Note: In chapter 14 patriarch Job applies a mortal blow on the belief in the immortality of the soul, comparing death with water from the sea that disappears and a riverbed that dries up. Now he stressed that he expected to see his Redeemer only when He stood upon the Earth (the 2nd advent of Christ), and when he had his body back, covered with his skin, not when his soul went to heaven.

10th. – Why do the words “soul” and “spirit” appear so many times in the Bible, in different meanings and contexts, but are never accompanied by the adjectives “immortal”, “eternal”, “perpetual”, besides the fact that instead of declaring that the soul will never die, what we read is about death of the soul, both in the Old and New Testaments (Eze. 18:4 and James 5:20)?


Note: An embarrassing fact to the dualist Christians is that no pagan people, either of the present or the past, is known as having renounced to their belief in souls and spirits (even attributing these to such things as volcanoes, rivers, forests, and animals) to believe that “the hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come forth, those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment” (John 5:28, 29). The belief in the final resurrection of all dead ones is a characteristic of genuine Christianity, which doesn't accept notions of clear pagan origin. It is the result of the first lie uttered on this planet: “You will not die” (Gen. 3:4). --



A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man #92548
11/02/07 08:16 PM
11/02/07 08:16 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

10 SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ON THE FOUNDATION OF THE BIBLE TEACHING ON MAN’S NATURE


1 – Why didn’t Moses, in his detailed report of man’s creation, leave any hint of an “immortal soul” as an essential component of human’s life, exclusive of his existence at Creation?


Note.: That would be the right moment to deal with the subject, since Moses offers so many details of the divine acts in the Creation work in general, and of man’s formation, in particular.

2 – Why does Moses employ the same language (exact words) for “living soul”, both regarding man and the animals (compare Gen.2:7 with 1:20 and Lev. 11:46)?


Note.: Translators of some Bible versions translated the Hebrew words nephesh hayyah as “living creature” when referring to the animals, however, there isn’t the least difference. It is exactly the language Moses used to deal with “living soul” referring to man.

3 – Why doesn’t Moses make a difference between man’s breath of life and that of the animals, treating them on the same basis, even utilizing the same words (Gen. 2:7; 1:30, 6:17)?


Note.: The breath of life cannot represent something immaterial, immortal, that survives matter because that is not the Bible definition for “soul”, and such word never comes modified by the adjectives “immortal” or “eternal” throughout the Bible.

4 – How can one prove that the fact that God blew particularly the life breath into man turns it into an “immortal soul”, when there isn’t the least information about that by the author, which would be of very much importance to define human nature?


Note.: The detail of a “separate”, “private” creation of man, compared to that of the animals, is a very weak “evidence” in favor of the dualistic view because the detailing of man’s creation involves the main character of God’s work, besides that of the woman. The animals are mere co-stars in the scenery, which pictures the divine preoccupation with the being created at His image and likeness, something that doesn’t characterize the animals.

5 – How can one prove that the fact that God blew the breath of life particularly in man makes that an “immortal soul”, when there is clear information, both in the creation report and millennia later, in the words of wise man Solomon, that the same breath of life is attributed to the animals (see Ecl. 3:19-21)?


Note.: Solomon engages himself in a profound reflection on the human life and shows that “everything is vanity”, since not even in death man takes an advantage over the animals. If he believed in the immortality of the soul, he would not have employed such language to avoid ambiguity and to not convey materialistic notions. But even his description of man in death, with the removal of the breath of life, is similar to the way the psalmist refers to the death of the animals (compare Ecl. 13:7 with Psalm 104:25-29).

6 – Why would man need an immortal soul, since he was not planned to die, according to the original project of God’s creation, rather would live eternally as a physical being, in a physical paradise (as would also be the case of the animals, by the way. . .)?


Note.: Sin is an intruder in this planet, which brought physical and spiritual death to man. But the divine “contingency plan” is the final resurrection, a measure taken AFTER sin, as part of His restoring plan. Resurrection integrates the serpent’s head crush in view of the conflict between good and evil (Gen. 3:15). Victory on death occurs due to the resurrection of the dead, not to the fact that the individual overcomes it for possessing a spiritual element that prevails over death (see 1 Cor. 15:52-55).

7 – When exactly that “immortal soul” is introduced into the living being? Is it when the egg is fertilized? Is it when the baby leaves the mother’s womb and breathes by the first time, since the parallel “breath of life/immortal soul” is established?


Note.: The difficulty in establishing the beginning of the possession of that “immortal soul” is immense, especially when the dualists link directly “breath of life/immortal soul”. For the fetus DOESN’T BREATH in the uterus, being involved with fluids until the mother brings it out in birth.

8 – Since Moses is considered by many scholars and by the Jewish tradition as the author of the very ancient book of Job, doesn’t it seem strange that in such book he doesn’t leave the least clue of a dualistic notion, instead he pictures the patriarch expressing a holistic view, not a dualistic one (see following note)?


Note.: The book of Job offers a mortal blow on the dualistic notion. The patriarch likens death to a river that gets dry and a lake that has its waters drained, and when he refers directly to being with God, he speaks of the time when the Redeemer “He will stand upon the Earth”, without leaving the least idea of a soul going to encounter Him (see 14:7-14 and 19:25-27).

9 – Where exactly is that “immortal soul” located? Since the parallel “breath of life/immortal soul” is established, and Job declares at a certain point “as long as I have life within me, the breath of God in my nostrils” (Job 27:3), is each one’s nose the location of that “immortal soul”?


Note.: If the parallel “breath of life/immortal soul” is valid, this soul really leaves and gets back into the system, at least in large measure, all the time, leaving as “contaminated” (carbonic gas) and entering new breath of another substance (oxygen to “purify” the blood). That seems a very strange thing to be something fluidic that has conscience, thus remaining forever after death.

10 – Isn’t it a tremendous coincidence that all pagan peoples always had as their ideological characteristic the belief in the immortality of the soul, even attributing souls and spirits to animals or even inanimate things, such as forests, lakes, volcanoes?


Note.: There are no news of any pagan people, from this time or the past, that renounced to their belief in “souls” and “spirits”, to adopt the belief that “a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out--those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28, 29).




A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #92556
11/03/07 06:27 AM
11/03/07 06:27 AM
C
crater  Offline
Veteran Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 989
United States
Interesting studies Azenilto.

Thanks for sharing.

Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: crater] #103524
10/11/08 07:24 PM
10/11/08 07:24 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

IN THIS TABLE, HOW TO UNDERSTAND THE MEANING OF THE BIBLE TERMS “SOUL” AND “SPIRIT”

The word ‘spirit (in Hebrew, neshamah or ruach; in Greek pneuma) is utilized in the Bible in different meanings, such as:

* Moral faculties, disposition, character, thought, feelings, etc.: Psalm 51:10; Isaiah 19:14; Luke 1:17; 1 Corinthians 4:21; Philippians 1;27; James 3:16, etc.

* Energy, willingness, courage, mind: Genesis 45:27; Judges 15:19; Job 17:1; Psalm 143:7.

* Breath, current of air: Genesis 7:15, 22; Job 14:10; 27:3; Ecclesiastes 12:7; Lucas 8:55; Revelation 11:11.

* Life: Job 12:10; Revelation 13:15.

* Divine Power: Genesis 1:2; Isaiah 44:3; 61;1; 1 Corinthians 6:19.

* Angel: 2 Chronicles 18:18 a 20; Acts 8:26 e 29; Hebrews 1:13, 14 (compare with Psalm 8:5).

The word ‘soul’ (in Hebrew nephesh; in Greek psuchê) can be translated as:

* Life: Genesis 9:4; 1 Kings 19:14; Job 6:11; Mark 3:4; Acts 20:10.

* Person: Genesis 46:27; Leviticus 17:12; Acts 7:14; 27:37.

* Heart: Exodus 23:9; Proverbs 23:7; Ephesians 6:6.

* Body: Numbers 6:6; 9:6.

* As a reflexive pronoun (like in “self” in “enjoy yourself”): Ecclesiastes 4:8; Luke 12:19 (cf. vs. 17).

IMPORTANT: Although there are all these different forms in which ‘soul’ and ‘spirit’ are used, in no instance it is said that they mean “an abstract and immortal entity which survives the matter”. The word immortal is only once found in the Bible, and that in reference to the Divinity, in 1 Timothy 1:17 y 6:16: “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honor and glory forever and ever”.

No text in the entire Bible is found that speaks of either an immortal soul or immortal spirit.



A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
7 - The Nature Of Man #103526
10/11/08 07:36 PM
10/11/08 07:36 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

“Regular” Christians Harboring “Irregular” Ideas


Proclamation! magazine, in its July/August issue, decided to discuss in detail the nature of man issue. Editor Colleen Tinker illustrates the “comfort” she got in renouncing to SDA “soul sleep” doctrine in the face of her father’s death, thinking how good that he is in heaven now, as any “regular” Christian (in her own words), would teach. Nothing to do with waiting for the resurrection in the tomb, as this strange and unique SDA doctrine has it.

First, it is amazing how those who leave us so soon acquire the questionable labeling and distorted description of our teachings, adopting the same language of those who oppose us, but which DON’T CORRESPOND TO THE REAL FACTS. Seventh-day Adventists DON’T teach any “soul sleep” doctrine, and she should know better. So, this distortion of our teachings is just the beginning of so many other similar ones along the magazine.

It is interesting to read about “regular” Christian, with the quote marks by her. Why did she put the “x” referring to ‘regular’? Probably it is because she doesn’t feel very secure in determining what a “regular” Christian is, after all, as she contacts so many different branches and currents, and interpretations, and worldviews, and internal divisions in the Evangelical field. Is a Pentecostal, who defends fiercely the speaking in tongues, a “regular” Christian in her view? And how about those who teach the election of just a few for salvation, as God decreed they were the chosen ones, while all the others end up in the bottomless pit of brimstone and fire, with their bodies and souls suffering there for evermore, unlucky as they were for not deserving God’s selection? And what to say regarding the ones who baptize babies, which is frowned upon by others who don’t agree with infant baptism? And, speaking of baptism, there are those who do it just by immersion, criticizing churches that adopt aspersion, or sprinkling. Are they both “regular” Christians? And those who teach the secret rapture, disputed by others who have a different eschatological perspective? Finally, how about those who adopt homosexuals in the regular Church life as a valid option for their lives, allowing them even to reach the ministry? Would that qualify as “regular” Christians?

Anyway, she then quotes two texts totally out of their due context, but later on we will discuss in greater detail the implications of this false doctrine of immortality of the soul. By the way, these folks seems to ignore totally that it has been more and more discarded by important Bible scholars in the Protestant (even Catholic) fields.

Let’s see how Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi, who is the author of Immortality or Resurrection?, a book highly considered by scholars of different persuasions, mentions this fact:

Dualistic View of Human Nature is Under Massive Attacks

The Biblical view of human nature and destiny has attracted considerable scholarly attention in recent years. Leading scholars of different religious persuasions have addressed this question in articles and books. A survey of the studies produced during the last fifty years or so, reveals that the traditional dualistic view of human nature has come under massive attack.

Scholars seem to outdo one another in challenging traditional dualism and in affirming Biblical wholism. Reading the scholarly literature in this field, one almost gets the impression that Christianity is coming out of a stupor and is suddenly discovering that for too long it has held to a view of human nature derived from Platonic dualism rather than from Biblical wholism.

. . . our fundamental Adventist belief in the unconscious state of the dead, is finally being accepted as a biblical teaching by numerous Bible scholars of different persuasions. Somebody counted over 400 scholars cited in my book. They include such well known scholars as George Eldon Ladd, Oscar Culmann, John R, Stott, and Clark Pinnock. (. . .)

The belief in conscious life after death is propagated today in sophisticated ways through mediums, psychics, “scientific” research into near-death experiences, and New Age channeling with the spirits of the past. The outcome of all of this is that the body-soul question is attracting unprecedented attention even in the scholarly community. A survey of the scholarly literature produced in recent years clearly shows that this question is being hotly debated by leading scholars of different religious persuasions.

The central issue is whether the soul can survive and function apart from the body. In other words, is human nature so constituted that at death the soul, that is, the conscious part, leaves the body and continues to exist while its “container” disintegrates? Traditionally, the vast majority of Christians have answered this question in the affirmative. They have believed that between death and the final resurrection of the body, God preserves the existence of their human disembodied souls. At the resurrection, their material bodies are reunited with their spiritual souls, thus intensifying the pleasure of paradise or the pain of hell.

This traditional and popular view has come under massive attack in recent years. An increasing number of leading evangelical scholars are abandoning the classical, dualistic view of human nature which sees the body as mortal, belonging to the lower world of nature, and the soul as immortal, belonging to the spiritual realm and surviving the death of the body. Instead, they are accepting the Biblical wholistic view of human nature in which the whole person, body and soul, experiences death and resurrection.

Several factors have contributed to the abandonment of the classical dualism on the part of many scholars. One of them is a renewed study of the Biblical view of human nature. A close examination of the basic Biblical terms used for man (body, soul, spirit, flesh, mind, and heart) has led many scholars to recognize that these do not indicate independent components, but the whole person seen from different view points. “Recent scholarship has recognized,” writes Eldon Ladd, “that such terms as body, soul, and spirit are not different, separable faculties of man but different ways of viewing the whole man.”

Virtually any part of the body can be used in the Bible to represent the whole human being. There is no dichotomy between a mortal body and an immortal soul that survives and functions apart from the body. Both body and soul, flesh and spirit in the Bible are part of the same person and do not “come apart” at death.


Dualism under Attack

Numerous Biblical scholars in recent times have argued that Old and New Testament writers do not operate with a dualistic view of human nature, but with a monistic or wholistic one. The outcome of these studies is that many today are questioning or even rejecting the notion that Scripture teaches the existence of souls apart from bodies after death.

Church historians support these conclusions by claiming that a dualistic view of human nature and the belief in the survival of disembodied souls were brought into the Christianity by Church Fathers who were influenced by Plato’s dualistic philosophy. This explains why these beliefs became widely accepted in the Christian church even though they are foreign to the teachings of the Bible.

Philosophers and scientists also have contributed to the massive assault against the traditional dualistic view of human nature. Philosophers have attacked traditional arguments that the soul is an immortal substance that survives the death of the body. They have proposed alternative theories according to which the soul is an aspect of the human body and not a separate component.

[To be continued in the next frames]


A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #103527
10/11/08 07:40 PM
10/11/08 07:40 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

[Continued from previous frame]

Scientists, too, have challenged the belief in the independent existence of the soul by showing that human consciousness is dependent on and influenced by the brain. At death, the brain ceases to function and all forms of consciousness stop. To scientists the cessation of all mental functions at death suggests it is highly unlikely that the mental functions ascribed to the soul can be carried out after death.

These concerted attacks on dualism by Biblical scholars, church historians, philosophers, and scientists have led liberal and even some conservative Christians to reject the traditional dualistic view of human nature. In his book Body, Soul, and Life Everlasting, John W. Cooper summarizes the outcome of this development, saying: “Liberals rejected it [dualism] as old-fashioned and no longer intellectually tenable. And some conservatives Protestants argued that since we ought to follow the Scripture alone and not human traditions, if anthropological dualism is a human tradition not based on Scripture, we ought to reform our confessions and purge them of such accretions of the Greek mind. The soul-body distinction has come under attack from many directions.”

Dualists Are Concerned

These developments have raised serious concerns on the part of those who find their traditional dualistic understanding of human nature severely challenged and undermined. Cooper’s book represents one of many attempts to reaffirm the traditional dualistic view by responding to the attacks on dualism. The reason for this response is well expressed by Cooper: “If what they [scholars] are saying is true, then two disturbing conclusions immediately follow. First, a doctrine affirmed by most of the Christian church since its beginning is false. A second consequence is more personal and existential–what millions of Christians believe will happen when they die is also a delusion.”

There is no question that modern Biblical scholarship is causing great “existential anxiety” to millions of sincere Christians who believe in their disembodied souls going to heaven at death. Any challenge to traditionally cherished beliefs can be devastating. Yet, Christians who are committed to the normative authority of Scripture must be willing to reexamine traditional beliefs, and change them if proven to be unbiblical.

Strong emotional reactions are to be expected from those whose beliefs are challenged by Biblical scholarship. Oscar Cullmann, for example, found himself bitterly attacked by many who strongly objected to his book Immortality of the Soul or Resurrection of the Dead? Incidentally, the book is largely drawn from the Ingersoll Lecture on the Immortality of Man delivered in 1955 at Harvard University’s Andover Chapel. He wrote: “No other publication of mine has provoked such enthusiasm or such violent hostility.” In fact, the criticism became so intense and so many took offense at his statements that he deliberately decided to keep silent for a time. I should add that Cullmann was not impressed by the attacks against his book because he claims they were based not on exegetical arguments, but on emotional, psychological, and sentimental considerations.

Tactics of Harassment

In some cases, the reaction has taken the form of harassment. Respected Canadian theologian Clark Pinnock (he wrote the Foreword to my book) mentions some of the “tactics of harassment” used to discredit those evangelical scholars who have abandoned the traditional dualistic view of human nature and its related doctrine of eternal torment in a fiery hell. One of the tactics has been to associate such scholars with liberals or sectarians like the Adventists. Pinnock writes: “It seems that a new criterion for truth has been discovered which says that if Adventists or liberals hold any view, that view must be wrong. Apparently a truth claim can be decided by its association and does not need to be tested by public criteria in open debate. Such an argument, though useless in intelligent discussion, can be effective with the ignorant who are fooled by such rhetoric.”

Despite the tactics of harassment, the Biblical wholistic view of human nature which negates the natural immortality of the soul and, consequently, the eternal torment of the unsaved in hell, is gaining ground among evangelicals. Its public endorsement by John R. W. Stott, a highly respected British theologian and popular preacher, is certainly encouraging the trend. “In a delicious piece of irony,” writes Pinnock, “this is creating a measure of accreditation by association, countering the same tactics used against it. It has become all but impossible to claim that only heretics and near-heretics [like Seventh-day Adventists are considered] hold the position, though I am sure some will dismiss Stott’s orthodoxy precisely on this ground.”

Stott himself expresses anxiety over the divisive consequences of his new views in the evangelical community where he is a renowned leader. He writes: “I am hesitant to have written these things, partly because I have great respect for longstanding tradition which claims to be a true interpretation of Scripture, and do not lightly set it aside, and partly because the unity of the worldwide evangelical community has always meant much to me. But the issue is too important to be suppressed, and I am grateful to you (David Edwards) for challenging me to declare my present mind. I do not dogmatize about the position to which I have come. I hold it tentatively. But I do plead for frank dialogue among evangelicals on the basis of Scripture.”

Stott’s plea for a “frank dialogue among evangelicals on the basis of Scripture” may be very difficult if not impossible, to realize. The reason is simple. Evangelicals are conditioned by their denominational traditional teachings, just as much as the Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox. In theory, they appeal to Sola Scriptura, but in practice, Evangelicals often interpret Scripture in accordance with their traditional denominational teachings.

[To be continued]



A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #103528
10/11/08 07:44 PM
10/11/08 07:44 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

[Continued from previous frame]

If new Biblical research challenges traditional doctrines, in most cases, Evangelical churches will choose to stand for tradition rather than for Sola Scriptura. The real difference between Evangelicals and Roman Catholics is that the latter are at least honest about the normative authority of their ecclesiastical tradition.

To be an “Evangelical” means to uphold certain fundamental traditional doctrines without questioning. Anyone who dares to question the Biblical validity of a traditional doctrine can become suspect as a “heretic.” In a major conference held in 1989 to discuss what it means to be an evangelical, serious questions were raised as to whether such persons like John Stott or Philip Hughes should be considered evangelical, since they had adopted the view of conditional immortality and the annihilation of the unsaved. The vote to exclude such theologians failed only narrowly.

Why are evangelicals so adamant in refusing to reconsider the Biblical teachings on human nature and destiny? After all, they have taken the liberty of changing other old traditional teachings. Perhaps one reason for their insistence on holding to the dualistic view is that it impacts on so many other doctrines.

We noted earlier that what Christians believe about the make-up of human nature largely determines what they believe about human destiny. To abandon dualism also entails abandoning a whole cluster of doctrines resulting from it. This may be called “the domino effect.” If one doctrine falls, several others fall as well. To clarify this point, we briefly consider some of the doctrinal and practical implications of classical dualism. This should alert the reader to its complex ramifications.
_______

Source: http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/et_171.htm

Note: I would recommend enthusiastically Dr. Bacchiocchi’s book. It is sufficient by itself alone to destroy all the sophistry of those who come up with the proclamation of such a false doctrine as that of immortality of the soul, which doesn’t put anybody closer to Jesus Christ (and we prove that), rather just brings terrible notions of pagan origin to whoever accepts that first devil's lie.



What Happens When We Die? Christopher Lee Thinks He Knows, But Does He?

First, again, as I said in the beginning, it’s amazing how these former SDA’s forget so fast what they have learned as members of the SDA Church as to the REAL meaning of our doctrines. They adopt so easily the distorted views of our opponents, with whom they gladly allied themselves. We DON’T teach soul sleep, and we DON’T teach that “spirit” means BREATH and that is all. “Insisting that pneuma/ruach means ‘breath’ in the Bible violates the Christian concept of God’s being”, pontificates Mr. Christopher Lee, self proclaimed “theology junkie” (as his biographical data brings at the end of his article) violating, on his part, the ethics of not distorting the teaching of others.

To refresh Mr. Lee’s memory, how about this table which shows the different meanings for the terms “soul” and “spirits” in the Bible?

[To avoid repetition, see the table to understand the meaning of the terms “soul” and “spirit” exactly before the beginning of this discussion]

[To be continued]



A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #103529
10/11/08 07:51 PM
10/11/08 07:51 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

[Continued from previous frame]

Nothing Also by the Middle of Human History

We’ve seen how at the beginning of the history and formation of man no “immortal soul” appears as an constitutive element of the nature of the being created “in God’s image and likeness”. What God’s Word reveals to us is that God formed man from the dust, breathed in his nostrils the “breath of life”, and man BECAME a “living soul”. It doesn’t say that he RECEIVED a soul of any type.

Reinforcing the truth that the breath of life of man and animals is the same, we also have this important text in Gen. 1:30:

“And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.”

The expression “wherein there is life” is not very accurate according to the original. It should read, “where there is living soul [nephesh hayyah], which is confirmed by the LXX, that has it as psychen zoes and the Latin Vulgata, which brings anima vivens, exactly the same language found in Gen. 2:7.

We will also see how in the description of one of the last acts of the human history drama—the resurrection of the dead—nothing is said regarding immortal souls coming from wherever to return to a body. It’s strange that in the detailed description of Apostle Paul, both in 1 Thessalonians 4:13ff and 1 Corinthians 15, as well as in Christ’s own teaching regarding it (as in John 5:25-30) there never appears this element and no hint of an “immortal soul” is perceived.

However, what does the Bible present between the beginning and the end, regarding the theme of the resurrection? Let’s us see a very significant passage of the prophet Ezekiel who, under inspiration, describes an event of resurrection—the famous vision of the valley of dried bones. Even though having a symbolic meaning, it reports something very concrete regarding man’s formation:

“The hand of the LORD was upon me, and carried me out in the spirit of the LORD, and set me down in the midst of the valley which was full of bones, and caused me to pass by them round about:, and, behold, there were very many in the open valley; and, lo, they were very dry. And he said unto me, Son of man, can these bones live? And I answered, O Lord GOD, thou knowest. Again he said unto me, Prophesy upon these bones, and say unto them, O ye dry bones, hear the word of the LORD. Thus saith the Lord GOD unto these bones; Behold, I will cause breath to enter into you, and ye shall live: And I will lay sinews upon you, and will bring up flesh upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and ye shall live; and ye shall know that I am the LORD. So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone. And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came up upon them, and the skin covered, them above: but there was no breath in them. Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Come from the four, winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live. So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding, great army. Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts. Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves. -- Eze. 37:1-12”.

It’s important to compare different translations of the text to remove any doubt of meaning of terms. The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text, by the Jewish Publication Society of America, as well as the New International Version speak of “breath”, instead of “spirit”, regarding the return of the last component to transmit life to the set of “very dry” bones, which are attached to nerves, muscles, skin. Finally, the receiving of that “breath” is the final touch to transform that miraculous reconstitution in human beings, living and active.

The Brazilian version of the Today’s English Version, by the Bible Society of Brazil also speaks of breath and even, “mortal man, prophesize to the wind . . . to blow on these dead bodies so that they come back to life”. A footnote explains: “Wind: the same Hebrew word can have the meaning of spirit, or breath, or respiration or wind”. This Hebrew word is ruach, the same found in Eccl. 12:7—“Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.”

To reinforce even more that conception of the restoration of the dead ones to life, we have these words in the text transcribed from prophet Ezekiel:

“I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. And ye shall know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves.”

Thus, the basic elements that form this army under the command of the Lord proceed from the sepulchers, with no mention to souls coming from wherever in the Universe. The breath is added to the reconstituted components of flesh and bones, and life is restored. Once more we can realize—no mention to any immortal soul being reintegrated to the beings so that they live.

[To be continued]



A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #103530
10/11/08 07:55 PM
10/11/08 07:55 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

[Continued from previous frame]

Why, if we asked someone who believe in the immortality of the soul to describe how a resurrection would occur, no doubt the component “immortal soul” would be even the most important of all to transmit life to who was dead. However, nowhere in the Scriptures, be it the beginning, the middle or the end of the Bible report, there is such a thing.

That is why when Jesus talked to the sisters of Lazarus, sympathizing with them for the loss of their brother, He didn’t give them consolation commenting about his being in the glory, as is the popular belief. The emphasis of their conversation was the FUTURE resurrection of the dead throughout chapter 11 of John. Thus, Jesus said to leave no doubt:

“I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in Me, though he were dead, yet shall he live.”

Once more we see the emphasis—not on life eternal depending on any immaterial element in man, but in believing in Christ to resurrect, for only so “though he were dead, yet shall he live”.

[We have another questionnaire—“10 Questions to Those Who Believe in the Immortality of the Soul”—that can be found above (page 1)].

Nothing at the End of Human History

If nothing appears in the Scriptures indicating the inclusion of an “immortal soul” in the creation of man, what to say of the end? The Bible presents the final encounter of Christ with His redeemed ones, and Paul gives details as how the resurrection of the dead will be. Neither in the words of Christ, nor in the detailed explanations of Paul on this final encounter of Christ and the saved ones there appears the least hint of immortal souls coming from wherever in the immense universe to regain a body and return to life. Let’s see some key-texts regarding this:

“Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”— John 5:25, 28 e 29.

“Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told, you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.”—John 14:1-3.

One can see clearly by these words that the saved ones “shall hear his voice” and then will live. They were in their graves, not in heaven or any other location in the universe. To say that only the bodies were in the graves makes no sense within the general tenor of what is said. Jesus speaks of INDIVIDUALS, not of body of individuals. And He promised that the place He would prepare for them would be available to these resurrected in the resurrection of life. He doesn’t say they would occupy their abodes when they died and their souls went to heaven, but when He returned so that His words were fulfilled: “I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.”

All indicates that this being together with Christ occur, not when the souls go to heaven at death, but when Christ comes with the angels to gather His chosen ones, as another Bible text puts very clear:

“And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other”. — Matthew 24:30, 31.

The apostle Paul confirms that stressing his hope to obtain the eternal reward “at that day” of Christ’s return, not when his soul supposedly went to heaven at his death:

“For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.” — Philippians 3:20, 21.

He confirms this great expectation of his in 2 Timothy 4:6-8, as he mentions that the time of his departure was near:

“For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love, his appearing”.

In the detailed description of the real last happenings of human history, with the resurrection of the dead and the encounter with the Lord, the perspective is confirmed that only then the resurrected individuals (not merely their bodies) will meet their Savior, jointly with the entire community of the other redeemed ones.

“But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep, in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we, which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord, shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet, the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words.”.—1 Thessalonians. 4:13-18.

And in 1 Corinthians 15, practically the entire chapter is dedicated to that theme. Let’s see some of its significant verses:

“Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?” — 1 Corinthians 15:51-55.

It becomes very clear by these words that there is no notion of souls coming from heaven or wherever it might be to regain a body. Besides, the language of a sounding trumpet, voice of the Lord to wake up “those who sleep” leaves no room to imagine souls coming, which would supposedly be fully awake, gathering their bodies from the dust to, then come out of this condition through these solemn convocations. And the resurrection is what means the defeat of death, not the fact that souls, like a “friendly ghost”, leaves the cadaver, prevailing in eternal existence. In this case, the immortality of the soul doctrine contradicts the Pauline statement that “death was swallowed in victory”. And this victory is guaranteed by the resurrection of the dead, not the “immortality” factor contained within the “soul” of an individual.

Verses 12-19 of 1 Corinthians 15 apply a mortal blow on this dualistic thesis:

“Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and [/u]your faith is also vain[/u]. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that, the dead rise not. For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep, in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.”

And reinforcing what is thus said, we have vs. 32:

“If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we die.”

Let’s observe well the implications of what is stated:

a) There will be resurrection of the dead because Christ Himself was risen, as evidence of such possibility.

b) Had not been for the resurrection of Christ, the preaching of the gospel and the faith of the believers would be in vain.

c) And were not for the fact of the resurrection, confirmed and guaranteed by that of Christ Himself, “they also which are fallen asleep, in Christ are perished”.

d) If they “perished”, that is because the resurrection would not have happened, and the preaching of the gospel was in “vain”, since those who died believing in Christ would not be enjoying life, but dead in the dust. Also, according to vs. 32, the best option would be profit hedonistically from this life: “let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we die.”

These texts clearly are a refutation of the theory that those who are “asleep in Christ” are found somewhere, already guaranteed for eternity. Not at all, were not for the fact of the resurrection, highlighted by the context, they would have perished. The emphasis of the entire context undoubtedly in on the dominant theme of the chapter—the resurrection of the dead on the day of Jesus’ return.

Paul indicates his desire “to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better” (Phil. 1:23) would materialize, not when his soul headed toward heaven at his death, but at the occasion of the resurrection of the dead. It’s strange that his expectation expressed at the beginning of Philippians involved the possession of an “immortal soul”, this doesn’t deserve further elaboration in the same epistle, for in Chap. 3, vs. 20, and in the detailed description of the final encounter of the redeemed ones with the Savior en 1 Thessalonians 4, vs. 13ff, and throughout the entire Chap. 15 of 1 Corinthians.


Last edited by Daryl Fawcett; 10/22/08 08:00 PM. Reason: Requested grammatical correction only.

A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #103608
10/14/08 02:52 PM
10/14/08 02:52 PM
Mountain Man  Offline
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019

20000+ Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
Azenilto, would you please do me a favor and summarize the points you are posting. Are you posting something to be discussed, or are you just posting reference material? Thank you.

Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #103901
10/22/08 11:17 AM
10/22/08 11:17 AM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

Jesus Did Not Teach Immortality of the Soul


In Christ’s words in John 14:1-3 and 5:28, 29 there is no hint of any “immortal soul” in either of these texts, as he said:

“Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”

“Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told, you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.”

Christ’s words “I go to prepare a place for you”, followed by the promise of His return—“I will come again and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also”—are very significant, indeed. Now, if Christ taught immortality of the soul he would have said that the promised abodes would be available to the redeemed ones as they died and their souls got to heaven to occupy them. The fact that He relates His return to the encounter with the redeemed ones at His return so that, then, they occupy their mansions cannot be taken lightly. They show that in Christ’s speech there is simply no room for the notion of souls or spirits going to heaven when one dies.

On the other hand, the text on the resurrection in John 5:28, 29 is preceded by some very noteworthy comments by the Master:

“Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.” (vs. 25).

Notice that He speaks of “the dead” hearing the voice of God's Son to LIVE. According to the context, in this specific verse He certainly refers to the saved ones. That would make no sense in terms of the belief in the immortality of the soul, for those who hear His voice ARE ALREADY ALIVE, in the form of “immortal souls”. However, those who “shall live” are found in their tombs, not in some location in the universe waiting to “hear the voice” in order to have life.

If the souls come from different places, first they have no need to hear any voice to be awakened—since they are well awake. And if so, it’s because they are alive, and the “SHALL LIVE” couldn’t apply to them!

And there is one more point to ponder: Jesus says “the DEAD shall hear the voice. . .” Now, if Jesus taught immortality of the soul He would have said—“the souls of those who died will reincorporate and hear the voice. . .” His preoccupation is not with those who are supposedly in some part of the space, but the DEAD ones. And these dead are those “that are in the graves”. The theme in the context is the judgment to which all should submit—the resurrection of life and that of JUDGMENT.


What to Say About Lazarus’ Resurrection?

When one reads what is considered the greatest of Christ’s miracles—the resurrection of His friend Lazarus, dead for four days (John chap. 11)—the Savior’s words don’t leave the least clue of belief in the immortality of the soul. Let’s check that:

a) Christ tells His disciples that the friend Lazarus was “sleeping”, utilizing the sleep metaphor to refer to death, something very common in the Scriptures, both in the Old and New Testaments. Death is pictured in the Bible as an unconscious sleep (Psalm 146:4; Eccl. 9: 5, 6 10; 1 Tes. 4:13-18).

b) In the brief conversation He had with the distressed sisters, Christ never says something on Lazarus being enjoying the heavenly bliss, rather points to the resurrection “in the last day” as the source of consolation. Martha reacts to His words on the same basis—confirming her hope in the resurrection (John 11: 23, 24).

c) Christ makes the wonderful and comforting statement: “I am the resurrection and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live” (vs. 25). The emphasis is not on souls going to heaven, but, again, on the resurrection at the final day. For that reason, whoever accepts the Gospel will live, not for being in possession of an immortal soul, but thanks to the resurrection that results in immortality, granted as a gift to those who believe (2 Tim. 1:10).

d) When Lazarus is brought back to life he has nothing to relate of his time in the “intermediate state”. If he had something to narrate of the period he was dead, John would be glad to record his report without hesitation. That would be a tremendously important theme, of the greatest interest to the community of believers. However, Lazarus brought no information about his possible stay in heaven because he had nothing to tell about.

e) If Christ had brought Lazarus from heaven to come back to the hardships of life on Earth He would have done a bad thing to His friend. If He brought him from hell (improbable, for he was a follower of the Master) He would have granted him a new opportunity of salvation, which is antibiblical (see Heb. 9:27).

Christ’s words and actions are consistent with what He had said in John 6:39: “And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again, at the last day.” Such words are repeated in vs. 40, 44 and 54. This last verse is very special:

“Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up, at the last day.”

And in 58 He stresses once more:

“This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live forever.”

It is very clear that He relates the possession of life eternal with the resurrection in the last day!

If Christ taught immortality of the soul undoubtedly His words would reflect such notion in these statements, for it is incredible that He missed to mention such a relevant fact regarding the destination of the saved ones--the theme He is exposing in these passage.



A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #103902
10/22/08 11:22 AM
10/22/08 11:22 AM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

The Parable Paradoxes


What is the real intention of the rich man and Lazarus parable? Dualists often challenge those who harbor a holistic view with that text and we have considered it, but in retribution, we raised 10 difficulties for the advocates of the dualistic view (belief in the immortality of the soul) based on this parable (in truth they are 11). Let’s first see our analyzes of the parable itself, then the 10 difficulties that the objectors seem unable to overcome:


01 DIFFICULTY SOLVED VERSUS 10 WITHOUT SOLUTION (AS YET)

Christ does not have the intention to teach the immortality of the soul theory in that parable, because, to start with, He NEVER taught that in any other part of gospels, nor is it taught in any other part of the Bible.

On the contrary, Christ always emphasized the resurrection of dead as the only possibility to reach life eternal, which will be granted at His glorious return (see John 5:25, 28, 29 and 14:1-3). What He does is to present an illustration in a scenario of divine justice—whoever in this world lives indifferent to the principles on justice and mercy can think that he takes advantage in everything, but things, in the divine consideration, will be inverted in the due time.

Jewish tradition had certain notions regarding the “bosom of Abraham”, which Jesus took advantage of to stress His point. The use of an illustration through something just partially grounded on popular beliefs is normal and common among preachers. Histories of extraterrestrial visiting the planet are examples of resources of that type.

The Bible presents two illustrations of trees that chat in Isaiah 14:8 and Judges 9:8 (“Yea, the fir trees rejoice at thee, and the cedars of Lebanon, saying, Since thou art laid down, no feller is come up against us”; “The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over them; and they said unto the olive tree, reign thou over us. But the olive tree said . . .”).

Would it be the case to ask: if the Bible is a book that only had to present the truth, how come it can use something so much absurd as the notion of trees that speak? Then the “difficulty” that the advocates of the literalness of the parable present to us is solved.

How about, now we also presenting 10 difficulties to them as to the notion that the parable of the rich man and Lazarus “proves” the belief in the immortality of the soul? Let’s see:

1 – How do you explain that in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus the words “soul” and “spirit” never appear, but the characters in it are normal people interacting to each other, in case its objective was to teach the immortality of the soul?

2 – How do you explain disembodied souls having eyes, fingers, tongue that could be even wet?

3 – Since the condemned one appeals to Abraham, could not the Roman-Catholics justify their teaching of “intercession of the saints” by means of such hypothetical story?

4 – How do you explain that in the parable itself, at the end a possibility is raised that some among the dead return to preach to the brothers of the rich man, but Abraham says that “though one ROSE FROM THE DEAD. . .” (vss. 30 and 31), confirming that only through the resurrection is the return into existence of those who died guaranteed?

5 – How do you explain the story of conversation between trees in Scriptures, being that entirely nonsense in normal terms?

6 – How do you explain the necessity of special attention to understand the parable that comes exactly before this--that of the smart butler--because literally an impression is left that Christ is teaching people to act unethically in the field of businesses?

7 – How do you explain the language of the same Christ in Marks 9:43-45 that cannot be understood literally, since nobody must remove parts of his/her body to obtain salvation, and in heavens there will be no people with such physical defects?

8 – Could you present an example of any basic doctrine of the Christian faith that has as its foundation a parable?

9 – If Christ wanted to teach the dualistic nature of man through this parable, why such idea is not found in any other part of His many spiritual lessons?

10 – Since the promise is that memories of bad things of the past will not exist, how could a father or mother forget the sufferings of a son or daughter who is eternally in tortures, since, according to the parable, both heaven and hell are is such proximity that it is possible for those in one side to witness what happens in the other?

Note: And one more difficulty could be highlighted: The GLOBAL TENOR of Biblical teaching on the final punishment of the reprobates is that it will occur on that “great and terrible day of the Lord”—at the end of history and when Christ comes (see Psa. 37:9, 10; 68:2; 92:7; Eze. 28:14-19; Ose. 1:14-19; Mal. 4:1-3; Mat. 10:28b; 2a Tess 1:7-10; Rev. 20:14, 15 and 21:8). Thus, how could hell be presented like being already in operation in the present time, when Christ has not come yet bringing His “flaming fires, taking vengeance”?



A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Mountain Man] #103903
10/22/08 11:54 AM
10/22/08 11:54 AM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA
 Originally Posted By: Mountain Man
Azenilto, would you please do me a favor and summarize the points you are posting. Are you posting something to be discussed, or are you just posting reference material? Thank you.


Hi, man of the mountain.

Greetings

I think I am doing both. Anyone can discuss the material that I put as a serial (that reminds me I didn't have my cereal today yet) because it is a rebuttal to a series of articles in the Proclamation! Magazine.

I have just one more to go in this new round, than it would be open for discussion.

Now, I don't know how that could be summarized, for I deal with different aspects of the matter.


A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #103904
10/22/08 11:59 AM
10/22/08 11:59 AM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

Not To Be Found Naked


Both Mr. Lee and Mr. Ratzlaff, in their discussions of man’s nature, mention the importance of the context of the Bible verses they quote. Unhappily, they don’t follow their own advice, for they neglect to consider the ampler context of the general tenor of what the Bible authors say, especially Paul, whose writings are the main source of their discussions.

Mrs. Colleen, for example, writes in the editorial page how certain she was that her deceased father went straight to heaven at his death, quoting Fil. 1:23:

“. . . for I am in a straight betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better”.

However, she forgot to proceed reading what else the Apostle has to say on the matter, further down in the same epistle:

“For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body, according to the working whereby He is able even to subdue all things unto Himself” (chap. 3, vs. 20, 21).

And how about the same Paul speaking of the world’s suffering in the face of the future glory?:

“For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also . . . even we ourselves groan within ourselves waiting for the adoption , to wit, the redemption of our body” (Rom. 8:22, 23).

So, where is the focus? Clearly, not in dying and going immediately to heaven. Paul himself expresses again his hope of life eternal in 2 Timothy 4:6-8, stressing THAT DAY, not of his death, but of the resurrection, when all those who have the same hope as Paul’s will be reunited to the Redeemer:

“For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing”.

In 2 Cor. 5:1ff Paul utilized the illustration of the tent to compare to the human body, which would disappear in death, to be replaced with another tent, of heavenly making. Now, Mr. Ratzlaff clearly misunderstood the Pauline illustration and engages in a theological reasoning according to the popular view of immortality of the soul based on Paul’s language there.

But his exposition just show the superficiality of his exegesis, for a careful reading of the text, especially in the context of other Pauline expressions of his hope of eternal life, as we have just seen, indicates a different conclusion than his.

Paul clearly welcomes death yearning for being with the Lord (vs. 2), but in vss. 3 and 4 he refers to death as being NAKED, which is very significant within the language of clothed/unclothed he resorts to.

In other of his texts, as in 1 Cor. 15:35-55, 1 Tess. 4: 15-17; 2 Tim, 4: 6-8; etc. he affirms that all will be simultaneously “clothed” with the heavenly body at the resurrection of the righteous ones, not when dying and having their souls going to heaven.

In vs. 4 he declared that “life”—evidently eternal life—is reached when one is “clothed” with his heavenly “tabernacle”, and the condition of being “naked” is exactly what he doesn’t want for himself, which means—without being clothed with the heavenly body after leaving the earthly one.

In the context of that passage, amplified with the wider context of his other discussions on the death/resurrection subject, it is clear that to be “absent from the body to be with the Lord” doesn’t mean to be in a disembodied condition, but, rather, to either participate of the final resurrection or to be transformed in a twinkle of an eye at Jesus’ coming (when this which is mortal is “swallowed up” in incorruptibility). That is the hope he also expressed in different occasions.

I don’t think we have even to spend much time discussing the exegesis of such texts, so badly dealt with in this edition of the magazine we have been analyzing. The questionnaires that accompany these discussions bring enough material for serious reflection on these subjects, but besides the discussion on how Jesus didn’t teach immortality of the soul and 10 topics by which we can see how the holistic view is much more logical and clearly superior to the dualistic conception of man’s nature.

We address all those contributors to that Proclamation! Magazine edition to have them trying to present to us at least ONE point by which they could prove that the dualistic understanding of man’s nature is superior over the holistic one, according to the ten points that we listed [See the study “[b]10 TOPICS THAT DEMONSTRATE THE SUPERIORITY OF THE HOLISTIC VIEW OF HUMAN NATURE OVER THE DUALISTIC VIEW”, below].

Before concluding this, let’s see one more text where we find a clear additional proof that the Apostle’s emphasis was not on the immortality of the soul, but on the coming of Christ to take home the redeemed ones, ALL TOGETHER, not some preceding others, all bound to the place He promised to prepare for His elect ones, which would could be occupied when He returns:

“And all these [Israel’s heroes of faith, listed in the chapter], having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect” (Heb. 11:39, 40).

“The context is all”, indeed, as the writers of this publication’s material stress. But if they read carefully the entire chapter they will see where its focus is—not on the idea that those heroes receive their inheritance as soon as they die, rather, they looked forward to the “city, which hath foundations, whose builder and marker is God” (vs. 10, compare with Fil. 3:20, 21).


Last edited by Azenilto; 10/22/08 12:09 PM.

A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #103917
10/22/08 06:39 PM
10/22/08 06:39 PM
Mountain Man  Offline
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019

20000+ Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
Wow! It's too bad this issue cannot be succinctly summarized. I get lost in all the verbiage. Oh well, it's a good thing there are people like you who can handle it well. Thank you. But I still have no idea what is being discussed.

Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Mountain Man] #104054
10/27/08 09:31 PM
10/27/08 09:31 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA
Oh, my friend, I am sorry for having to go deep into all these different aspects of the discussion.

My suggestion is that you print everything and read it little by little as you commute in some train going/coming from work.

There will be more material coming, not condensed either. . .


A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #104055
10/27/08 09:39 PM
10/27/08 09:39 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

Distortions in the Bible and Beyond


Going back some former discussions we’ve seen how Proclamation! magazine’s editor, Mr. Coleen Tinker tinkered with Ellen White writings distorted the meaning of her teachings regarding the Divinity. This can be checked in our article “Ellen White’s Discussion on the Trinity--Not According to Mrs. Tinker’s False Allegations”, when analyzing the May/June edition of that publication. We then said, regarding that point:

As I pointed out in my last analysis of Mrs. Tinker study on Ellen White’s discussion of the Godhead, if Ellen White were to start a new view on the subject, like the tritheism that our opponent suggested as being Ellen White’s stand, that would have been adopted by the Church as a whole, which never was the case.

To discuss things pertaining to God is not easy and our poor human language will always be inadequate to express exactly how the Godhead “operates”. So, one can easily stumble on words in exploring EGW’s attempt to make sense of the “heavenly trio” (an expression of hers), which is exactly Mrs. Tinker’s problem in her tritheism interpretation of the SDA author’s language.

Proclamation! magazine’s editor makes certain statements that are purely speculative and have absolutely no basis. She says, at a certain point in her article:


While Ellen White grew up believing in the Trinity, she changed her views in adulthood. No doubt James influenced this change, but she claimed that her visions established her unorthodox beliefs. Early in her career she was overtly Arian, and although her later views endorsed “a heavenly trio”, she never taught an orthodox Trinity.

The evidence for that statement is simply absent. What she presents as “proof” is no proof at all. It’s the text when Ellen White simply discusses the attitude of the rebel angel in Heaven, envious of Jesus’ privileges and proximity to God, as is well known to SDA’s [Spiritual Gifts, Vol., 3, p. 37]. But Mrs. White never gives the least impression that because of that she is considering Jesus inferior to the Father. What Mrs. Tinker does is no more than engaging herself in an exercise in intellectual dishonesty, quoting the Adventist pioneer out of due context, jumping to biased conclusions of what could be going on in Ellen White’s mind, which is simply speculation of the worst type.

In a past issue we caught Mrs. Tinker again tinkering with SDA practices and customs, distorting the facts. It’s the March/April of 2008, where in her editorial Mrs. Tinker, now tinkering with a Bible text that she doesn’t understand, alleges:

I was blind to the impact of certain recorded facts. For example, the plain reading of Luke 23:43 and 56 tells us that when Jesus died, His spirit went to His Father. Further, one thief who died with him could be confident that he would be with Jesus in paradise that very day. Yet for years I believed Jesus’ breath went to God while He honored the Sabbath by lying lifeless in the tomb, His personality non-existent, inaccessible to His Father until Sunday. Jesus might die, I believed, but Sabbath was eternal.

We will see the distortion in Bible understanding at that point later on, but first there is one more distortion of hers, this time about SDA’s attitude regarding those who celebrate Easter. She seems happy to have adopted the larger society’s ways regarding that festival:

Now I can celebrate! On this day I honor the Lord Jesus and praise Father, Son, and Holy Spirit for accomplishing within the Trinity all that is necessary for my eternal security. I go to church and worship; I smell the Easter lilies and eat Easter brunch with a house full of brothers and sisters in Christ--and we rejoice because we no longer scoff at Easter. Instead, we praise Jesus for His death and life, and we stand before God and call Him our Father.

I wonder if she also follows the popular tradition of Halloween so enthusiastically. . . Anyway, the fact is that in over 40 years as a member of the SDA community I never heard anyone in our midst “scoffing” Easter. Why should we? On the contrary, what I see, checking Bro. Bacchiocchi’s website, is something very different. In his Newsletter # 169 he mentions several activities by SDA congregations across the States taking advantage of this special festival to celebrate the Resurrection, not as an admission of the validity of the date, set by Catholic Tradition (and highly reputed Ecclesiastical Church historian, Sam Bacchiocchi, also discusses the historical roots of Easter in the sequence), but as an evangelistic tool.

Let’s see what we find there as a sample of these special Easter programs:

. . . the Department of Religious Affairs and Religious Liberty of the North Pacific Union of SDA, has invited Pastor Richard Elofer, President of our Adventist Mission in Israel to Los Angeles “to help us celebrate the Passover, a sacred memorial for Jews and Christians alike, a Festival of Freedom. He will be joined by Alan J. Reinach, Esq., Director of Public Affairs & Religious Liberty for the Pacific Union Conference.”

The announcement that has been forwarded to me reads: “Come Celebrate a Passover Weekend from a Seventh-day Adventists Perspective, April 6 & 7, in Los Angeles, California. . . . A special service will be conducted at the Burbank Seventh-day Adventist Church on Friday evening, April 6th at 7:30 p. m.


Also:

While some Adventist congregations will be celebrating Passover, other Adventist Churches in the USA and overseas will hold Easter Sunday services for their congregations and community people. Some of these Adventist churches are listed in GOOGLE. This is the announcement I received from the Pacific Union College SDA Church.

There will be Good Friday and Easter Sunday services this year. Nathaniel Gamble, a PUC theology student, will coordinate the programs.

The Good Friday service will begin with foot washing from 7:15-7:45 p.m. The main service will start at 8 p.m. and share The Lord‚s Supper at the end.

Sabbath morning Pastor Mitchell will preach at both services, “Trading Places: The Story of a Father’s Two Sons.”

The Easter Sunday service will take place at 9:30 a.m. All who are planning on coming to these two events should arrive at least 15-30 minutes before the start of the service for seating.”


That all could be checked through this link:

http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/et_169.htm

So, we can see how Mrs. Tinker’s tinkering with SDA affairs simply denotes a dishonest assessment of our beliefs and practices.

But, again her regrettable distortions of Ellen White’s statements can be seen in the last edition of her magazine. She again comes up with another farfetched allegation against Ellen White. She says in an article she contributed to the last issue, “Are Humans More than Living Bodies?” that “Both Ellen and James White taught that both Jesus and God had literal physical bodies”. Then she reproduces certain selections by Ellen White in the her Early Writings, p. 77, also indicating pages 55 and 92 that I checked. Even worse is the false statement that SDA’s have the same conception of a “physical body” of God like Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons!

I asked my wife, who happens to be a SDA for longer than me, whether she had learned these ideas in the many years she attends church and she was simply startled with such a fabrication! Never in her life, attending church regularly, that was ever mentioned by any pastor or Bible instructor, Sabbath School teacher, that she can have any recollection of.

What Ellen White says is no different from what we read in Isa. 6:1-10 (God sitting on His throne) or Daniel 7:9, where he describes the “Ancient of days”. Or how about Moses’ narrating his own experience of seeing God’s “back parts”?:

“And he said, I beseech thee, show me thy glory. And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before, thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live. And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock: And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a cleft of the rock, and will cover, thee with my hand while I pass by: And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen”. Exo. 33:18-23.

The Bible presents these glimpses of the Divinity, but never elaborates on these things. The psalmist speaks about being under God’s “wings”. Does that mean that God has a body similar to that of an angel, or a bird?! And how about John’s strange descriptions of the Divinity in heaven, as he records his visions in the Revelation?

Ellen White’s very brief description of what she saw in vision, with no elaboration, NEVER prompted any SDA doctrine or understanding regarding an attribution of a physical body to God. The Seventh-day Adventist Commentary, by the way, thus discusses John 4:24, “God is Spirit. . .”: “As an infinite spiritual being, God is not subject to the same limitations of the finite material beings”. So, no hint of any SDA doctrine of God having a physical body can be found there. In the SDA Bible Dictionary, entry “God”, nothing also gives the least impression of any physical body related to God.

I just wonder what is the real size of Mrs. Pinocchia’s nose, which doesn’t show in her smiling picture on the magazine’s internal cover. . .


Did Jesus receive an immortal human spirit?

The Incarnation is as beyond man’s finite understanding as God’s nature itself. However, since Jesus was made flesh and lived among men, there are some serious problems to understand the real link between the Divine Word who was made flesh (John 1:14) and his “Son of man” feature. For example, the prophecy regarding Him says:

“Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me”. Heb. 10:5.

Nothing is said about Jesus receiving a human immortal soul or spirit at His Incarnation. He died as any man, and before dying He simply expressed the same idea that Solomon had expressed in Eccl. 12:7, submitting His human life to the Father, delivering His spirit, or breath of life, not His soul or spirit. Now, even by the mere logic of it, why would He (or Stephen, in Acts 7:59) say something of “receive my [immortal] spirit” when they would immediately be personally there? It makes no sense. The language itself denotes a bidding farewell to life, in the sense that even though their human life span came to and end, that spirit that left then would be returned through resurrection. Christ got His back on the third day. Stephen will have his on that final day.

Now, that poses a big problem for dualists, and I never had any clear answer on the part of them to this question: did Jesus receive a human immortal soul (or spirit) when He took over man’s nature? If so, will He be tied to that forever? How could God Himself be limited by a human “soul” or “spirit” when He is already a spiritual being, a Spirit much superior to any created being?

While the advocates of these notions of immortality of the soul think over this matter, let’s discuss the text of Luke 23:43, which Mrs. Tinker tinkers about but shows no “greater light” in understanding the matter, through this study that we composed and have been publicizing in different Internet site in four languages, Portuguese, Spanish, English and German:



A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #104056
10/27/08 09:42 PM
10/27/08 09:42 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

Luke 23:43—Today I Tell You, or You Will Be With Me Today?


The problem of punctuation (or lack thereof) in the original

Introduction: Some people who believe in the immortality of the soul doctrine quote the text of Luke 23:43 as one of their best arguments to defend their ideas. They think that the wording in the text makes clear that the condemned man on the cross by that where Christ died, who expressed repentance and faith in Him, was offered by the Savior being with Him on that same day on Paradise.

However, there are important grammatical and other considerations to be weighed and that show that things shouldn’t be interpreted that way. Let’s see:

1. Good Bible translations in different languages have the repenting condemned man asking Jesus to remember him “when you come in your kingdom”. (vs. 42) That is how it appears in the Italian version of G. Deodatti, the Portuguese of Mattos Soares, the French published by the Alliance Biblique Universelle, as well as the highly reputed version of Louis Segond that reads--”Et il dit à Jesus: Souviens-toi de mois, quand tu VIENDRAS dans ton règne” [when you will COME. . .].

The King James version says “Remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom”, not, “when you enter into thy kingdom”. Since Jesus spoke often of the coming kingdom, and that clearly shows a rather distant future at that time (“When the Son of man shall come in his glory . . . then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory. . .” Matt. 25:31), he is asking to have secured a place in the kingdom at that occasion. Jesus assures him that “today”, on that last of their lives, he would be in Paradise with Him. So, he didn’t have to think of being remembered only on that far away time of His coming.

2. Certainly the repenting condemned man couldn’t be with Jesus in Paradise on that day, because Jesus said He hadn’t been there Himself on the third day after his death. He told Mary Madgalene at His appearance to her when he rose from the dead: “Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father” (John 20:17).

3. Also, a careful analysis of the text shows that the repenting condemned man didn’t die on that same day because in John 19:31-33 it is said: “The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs.”

Why break the legs of the condemned? Because a crucified man wouldn’t die on the same day. Christ was an exceptional case and we know that He didn’t die due to his wounds or hemorrhage, but from a broken heart. He died due to the moral pain of bearing the sins of the entire world. The others, however, didn’t die immediately. There are some reports about a crucified man languishing for days.

J. B. Howell, for example, says:

“The crucified one remained hanging on the cross until, exhausted by pain, by weakening, by hunger and thirst, faced death. The suffering generally lasted three, sometimes even seven days”.
In this case, the Jews wouldn’t permit that a criminal remained on the cross on the Sabbath day, for it was considered disrespectful of the sanctity of the rest day. “According to the costume, they broke the criminals’ legs after having them removed from the cross, leaving them laying on the ground, until the Sabbath was over so that they won’t escape. After the Sabbath was over, the two bodies were undoubtedly put back on their crosses until they died.

If it was necessary to break the legs of the two malefactors before sunset, it’s because they hadn’t died yet. They could even last in their struggle with life for one or two more days than the Master. So, it would be impossible that one of them be with Jesus in Paradise on the same day of the Savior’s death.

4. There are authoritative Bible translations that has the Luke 23:43 reading harmonizing with the tenor of the Bible teaching regarding the reward of the saved ones, when Jesus comes. Let’s see:

a) Trinitária, in Portuguese, published in 1883 by the “Trinitarian Bible Society” of London, says: “Truly I tell you today, that you will be with Me in Paradise”.

b) Emphasized New Testament, by Joseph B. Rotherham, printed in London in 1903, says: “Jesus! Remember me at the occasion that thou comest into thy kingdom. And He said unto him: Truly I tell unto thee this day: Thou shalt be with me in Paradise”.

c) The New Testament, by George M. Lamsa, according to the Eastern Text, translated from original Aramaic sources, has it this way: “Jesus told him: Truly I am telling you today, that you will be with Me in Paradise”

d) The Concordant Version, thus translates the text: “And Jesus said to him: ‘I am truly telling you today, you will be with me in Paradise”.

e) An important manuscript, the famous Curetonian Manuscript of the Syriac Version, that exists in the British Museum, thus translates the text: “Jesus said to him: Verily I tell you today, that you will be with Me in the Garden of Eden.”

And in a commentary of the Oxford Companion Bible, one finds this statement: “‘Today’ agrees with ‘I tell you’ to give emphasis to the solemnity of the occasion; it doesn’t agree with ‘you will be’.”

In the Appendix nb. 173 of the Oxford Companion Bible, it is clarified:

“The interpretation of this verse depends entirely on the punctuation, which is wholly based on human’s authority, for the Greek manuscripts had no punctuation up to the ninth century, and even at that time only a dot amidst the lines, separating each word. . . . The condemned man’s prayer referred also to that coming and that Kingdom, not to something happened on the day the words were uttered.”

And the commentary concludes, at the end of the same Appendix: “And Jesus said unto him: ‘Truly I tell you today’, or on that day when, soon to die, this man manifested such a great faith in the Messiah’s coming Kingdom, in which He will only be King when the resurrection occurs—now, under such solemn circumstances, I tell you: you will be with Me in Paradise.”

The expression “today”, related to the verb, is not redundant, but emphatic. It is found in other parts of the Bible. One can read, for example, Deut. 20:18; Zac. 9:12; Acts 20:26, and other texts. The fatal conclusion is that Luc. 23:43 is one more false pillar of dualism, a text taken out of its due context, which many take to defend a false doctrine, which stems from both Greek Platonist philosophy and heathenism in general.

Note: The different Bible version and other related commentaries above were not taken from their English original, but as quoted by Arnaldo B. Christianini’s book in Portuguese, Subtilezas do Erro [Subtleties of Error], and put back into English by me, which might not correspond exactly to the original wordings. The important feature certainly is their basic meaning.



A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #104889
11/19/08 06:24 PM
11/19/08 06:24 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA
In the edition of Proclamation! Magazine under consideration, dedicated to the subject of man’s nature, there is no emphasis on man’s destiny, which is regrettable, for it’s so much important. If man’s nature is immortal due to his possession of an immortal soul, that is a fact impossible to be detached from a study of man’s destiny. And the Bible points to just TWO destinies—either living forever in the presence of God and all the holy ones, or being separated forever from God.

Since the Bible presents two conditions at the end of man’s journey—eternal salvation or eternal perdition—how the understanding of man’s nature related to the possession of an immortal soul is affected by the fact that many will not be granted salvation, but will face perdition? What happens to his immortal soul or whole being under the circumstances of not being saved?

The popular notion is that they will be thrown into an eternally burning hell, an idea based on a few Bible texts that the Proclamation! folks decided not to deal with. But we will, since that is a very important subject, referred to in so many ways and so often in both Old and New Testaments.

Let’s begin analyzing a text that I consider the real key to understand this subject of the eternal punishment of evildoers:

[center][size=14pt][font=Times New Roman]* Mark 9:48: “. . . where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched”.[/center]

[size=12pt][font=Times New Roman] This is a text that people mistake as to its meaning, thinking that it says that the soul never dies, and the hell fire is never extinguished.

But Christ is simply using a metaphor that had been employed by Isaiah long ago (cap. 66:24). The Prophet there speaks of the troops of the enemies of God, whose CADAVERS are left unburied, with worms consuming them. He uses that gory language to highlight the horror of the scene, but as “cadavers” is clearly mentioned, that is an indication of death, not of continuous existence of some immortal soul. Jesus speaks of “worm” that never dies, and not “soul”. Why, soul is soul, worm is worm.

In Isaiah 34:9, 10 we find another example of hyperbolic language employed by John in the Revelation, as well as in Jeremiah 17:27 which speaks of a fire that burns the doors of Jerusalem being an “unquenchable fire”, however there is no fire burning the doors of Jerusalem these days.

Hyperbolic language is the use of words that “exaggerate” something they refer to in order to highlight its character. It’s like in the Brazilian national anthem that, at a certain point, says, “Beloved and IDOLIZED motherland . . .”. Actually, nobody idolizes literally the motherland. . .

In the New Testament the “eternal judgment” of Hebrew 6:2 doesn't refer to a process that has a beginning but not an end, rather is everlasting in its effects and consequences. And what to say about the “eternal fire” that burnt Sodom and Gomorrah, but is not burning these days any longer (see Jude 7)? After all, “the wages of sin is death” (Rom 6:23). In the Psalm 68:20 we read: “Our God is a God who saves; from the Sovereign LORD comes escape from death”.

Conclusion: Clearly, the language that should PREVAIL in this paradox is that of the eternal death of these sinners, contrasted by Christ with life eternal of the redeemed: “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life” (Mat. 25:46). Thus, the hyperbolical language utilized by Christ in Mark 9:48, about the “worm” that “does not die”, when used to prove the immortality of the soul ends up revealing an excellent explanation of the eternal condition of the sinners’ death, being, thus, another interpretative “shot” that backfires.
_______

Note: We have posted a series of articles that deal with the burning hell and final disposition of sin and sinners in another topic, for which we direct those who want to proceed examining this subject through didactic Bible studies, like “10 Reasons Why Revelation 20:10 Doesn’t Prove the Theory of an Everlasting Burning Hell”.

That is the link that leads directly to this series of studies:

http://www.maritime-sda-online.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=104887#Post104887


A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #104892
11/19/08 06:28 PM
11/19/08 06:28 PM
A
Azenilto  Offline
Active Member 2010
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 231
Bessemer, Ala., USA

Just for a start, let's see one study regarding the subject that will be discussed in greater detail in the topic indicated:


10 REASONS WHY THERE WILL BE NO ETERNALLY BURNING HELLFIRE


1 -- Because everlasting life is a gift from God (Rom. 6:23) that the unsaved don’t possess; on the contrary they “shall not see life” (John 3:36); “no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him” (1 John 3:15).

Note: Paul says in Romans 2:7 that those who will obtain life eternal are the ones who look for immortality. We don’t go after something that we already possess.

2 -- Because the eternal torment would perpetuate and immortalize sin, suffering, pain, and that contradicts the divine revelation that those things will no more exist under the new conditions after Jesus’ return (Rev. 2:14).

3 -- Because the universe would always keep a dark site, with billions of creatures living eternally in unending torments, with their existences thus preserved by God Himself, in Whom “we live, and move, and have our being” (Acts 17:28).

Note: The Bible informs that after God persecutes His enemies with “darkness”, causing an “utter end” to those who are not His, “affliction shall not rise the second time” (Nahum 1:9).

4 -- Because the notion of an unquenchable fire, that burns eternally, is incompatible with the attribute of love and justice seen as characteristics of the divine character, and postulates the concept of an ire that is never consumed.

5 -- Because the Scriptures teach that the atoning work of Christ is to “put away sin” (Heb. 9:26), first of the individual, then, finally, of the entire universe. The plain result of Christ’s sacrifice will be seen, not only in a redeemed people, but in this Earth totally renewed (Eph. 1:14).

6 -- Because the Bible indicates that only the saved ones will have incorruptible bodies (Fil. 3:20, 21 and 1 Cor. 15:35-55).

Note: The true believers in the thesis of an eternally burning hell face an immense difficulty to explain how the resurrected ungodly could be thrown into a fire that never consumes their non-incorruptible bodies.

7 -- Because Paul clearly speaks of eternal “destruction” of the sinners, who will be banished from God’s presence, and it is inconceivable an act of destruction that never completes itself, as if it were an eternal process (2 Thes. 1:7-10).

Note: Paul indicates that the “fires of vengeance” are still in the future and will be manifested at Christ’s Second Advent, by which the notions of a hell already in operation become totally nonsense.

8 -- Because the same fire that causes the “perdition of ungodly men” operates the transformation of the planet, thus setting the stage for “new heavens and a New Earth, in which justice dwells” (2 Pet. 3:6-13).

9 -- Because the description of the punishment of the ungodly in Rev. 20:14, where the lake of fire is called “second death”, confirms the many statements throughout the Scriptures, both in the Old and New Testaments, dealing with the final extinction of the sinners.

Note: Some of the texts that clearly describe that are: Psalm 37:9, 10, 20; 68:2; 92:7; Ezekiel 28:14-28; Zephaniah 1:14-18; Malachi 4:1-3; Matthew 10:28b; 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10; 2 Peter 3:6-10; Revelation 21:8.

10 -- Because nothing else follows the description of the operation of the lake of fire, but for the detailing of the throwing into it of all the condemned beings, then occurring the description of “new heavens and a New Earth . . . and there was no more sea [nor lake of fire]” -- Rev. 21:1.

Note: Be it remembered that in the original Bible text there is no division of chapters and verses, thus in the description of the “destruction of the ungodly” there is a natural sequence, lacking the least information that the “lake of fire” jumps from the surface of the Earth, where it clearly occurs (see Rev. 20:7-10) to keep on burning in another location of the universe.




A. G. Brito
Sola Scriptura Ministry
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Azenilto] #105045
11/23/08 03:48 PM
11/23/08 03:48 PM
Mountain Man  Offline
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019

20000+ Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
Originally Posted By: Azenilto
Oh, my friend, I am sorry for having to go deep into all these different aspects of the discussion.

My suggestion is that you print everything and read it little by little as you commute in some train going/coming from work.

There will be more material coming, not condensed either. . .

I would like to be able to give this to the pre-teens at church and trust that they can readily grasp the truth. What do you think?

Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Mountain Man] #105050
11/23/08 04:30 PM
11/23/08 04:30 PM
Daryl  Offline
OP
Site Administrator
23000+ Member
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 25,118
Nova Scotia, Canada
As almost all these posts seem to be on topics other than this one, I will be separating these posts and making separate topics out of them. Depending on the topical nature of each post, these separate topics will be placed in more appropriate forums.

On second thought, as all these posts have something to do with the nature of man in various ways, that could still also be discussed as separate topics, as they were posted here as a part of this topic, I am leaving them here.


In His Love, Mercy & Grace,

Daryl smile

John 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

http://www.christians-discuss.com/forum/index.php
Re: 7 - The Nature Of Man [Re: Daryl] #155118
08/16/13 09:34 PM
08/16/13 09:34 PM
J
James Peterson  Offline
NON-SDA
Active Member 2019

Dedicated Member
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,195
Canada
Originally Posted By: Daryl
As almost all these posts seem to be on topics other than this one, I will be separating these posts and making separate topics out of them. Depending on the topical nature of each post, these separate topics will be placed in more appropriate forums.

On second thought, as all these posts have something to do with the nature of man in various ways, that could still also be discussed as separate topics, as they were posted here as a part of this topic, I am leaving them here.


It's interesting that after more than a decade, the differences of opinions that fuelled this discussion have still not resolved themselves. Are people REALLY looking for the truth, or an opportunity to express themselves?

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Sabbath School Lesson Study Material Link
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
Most Recent Posts From Selected Public Forums
Seven Trumpets reconsidered
by Karen Y. 03/27/24 09:35 AM
Are the words in the Bible "imperfect"?
by Kevin H. 03/24/24 09:02 PM
The Story of David and Goliath
by ProdigalOne. 03/23/24 08:06 PM
Global Warming Farce
by kland. 03/22/24 10:17 AM
Carbon Dioxide What's so Bad about It?
by kland. 03/21/24 12:34 PM
The Value of Bible Types
by TruthinTypes. 03/17/24 06:22 PM
Orion Which Every One on the Globe Can See
by Rick H. 03/16/24 06:26 PM
'Prophet' Summons UFOs
by ProdigalOne. 03/16/24 02:19 AM
Will You Take The Wuhan Virus Vaccine?
by dedication. 03/11/24 06:31 PM
Get That Razor Wire Up!
by kland. 03/05/24 12:49 PM
Messages for This Time
by ProdigalOne. 03/04/24 05:54 AM
The Lake of Fire is Hell
by Rick H. 03/02/24 05:01 PM
Adventist Agriculture
by kland. 02/29/24 12:33 PM
Most Recent Posts From Selected Private Forums of MSDAOL
The Wound Is Healed! The Mark Is Forming!
by Rick H. 03/27/24 10:36 PM
Are we seeing a outpouring of the Holy Spirit?
by Rick H. 03/24/24 06:50 PM
Time Is Short!
by Rick H. 03/24/24 06:45 PM
Climate Change and the Sunday Law
by Rick H. 03/24/24 06:42 PM
WHAT IS THE VERY END-TIME PROPHECY?
by Rick H. 03/23/24 06:03 PM
Digital Identity Control
by Rick H. 03/23/24 02:08 PM
A.I. - The New God?
by Rick H. 03/23/24 01:59 PM
Christian Nationalism/Sunday/C
limate Change

by ProdigalOne. 03/16/24 08:38 PM
Perils of the Emerging Church Movement
by Rick H. 03/16/24 06:30 PM
Is There A Connection Between WO & LGBTQ?
by Kevin H. 03/12/24 09:20 PM
A Second American Civil War?
by Daryl. 03/04/24 06:14 PM
Forum Announcements
Visitors by Country Since February 11, 2013
Flag Counter
Google Maritime SDA OnLine Public Forums Site Search & Google Translation Service
Google
 
Web www.maritime-sda-online.com

Copyright 2000-Present
Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine (formerly Maritime SDA OnLine).

LEGAL NOTICE:
The views expressed in this forum are those of individuals
and do not necessarily represent those of Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine,
as well as the Seventh-day Adventist Church
from the local church level to the General Conference level.

Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine (formerly Maritime SDA OnLine) is also a self-supporting ministry
and is not part of, or affiliated with, or endorsed by
The General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists headquartered in Silver Spring, Maryland
or any of its subsidiaries.

"And He saith unto them, follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men." Matt. 4:19
MARITIME 2ND ADVENT BELIEVERS ONLINE (FORMERLY MARITIME SDA ONLINE) CONSISTING MAINLY OF BOTH MEMBERS & FRIENDS
OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH,
INVITES OTHER MEMBERS & FRIENDS OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD WHO WISHES TO JOIN US!
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1