Death

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ed Walsh said:
I am of base here? But doesn't Hebrews 9:27 have the answer?
And just as [you]it is appointed for man to die once[/you], and after that comes judgment,
Click to expand...

I don't think that is absolute 100% of the time. Lazarus died twice, as did Jairus's daughter.
 
earl40 said:
The soul of a person is the real person, be it with or without body, and that person is always located somewhere. Our Lord's human soul was located in heaven between the cross and the resurrection.
Click to expand...

I certainly understand the truth you are expressing. I am not identical to the material particles in my body. That is the false teaching of many in the Calvin College circle (which is also why some of them accept a form of theistic evolution).

And there is a form of consciousness that survives my death. I just don't want to say that the "I" = "the soul." If applied to Christology, that is Nestorianism.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
I don't think that is absolute 100% of the time. Lazarus died twice, as did Jairus's daughter.
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying up to a point. But those were supernatural miracles, and I think the exceptions that prove the rule. Can we not say truthfully that the Jordan River does not part to let people cross on dry land because it did so when those carrying the ark entered the water? Do you see my point?
 
Ed Walsh said:
I get what you are saying up to a point. But those were supernatural miracles, and I think the exceptions that prove the rule. Can we not say truthfully that the Jordan River does not part to let people cross on dry land because it did so when those carrying the ark entered the water? Do you see my point?
Click to expand...
Can you unpack that "the exceptions prove the rule" statement, Ed?

Given your earlier:
https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/death.96630/#post-1181552

Is the appointment to "die once" from Heb. 9:27 the rule to which you state is proven? I assume this to be the case.

I wonder, as an aside, where was Lazarus's soul when he was first dead? Did our Lord's miracle re-summon his soul from wherever his soul was at the time back to earth to reunite with his body? Or, given the ordaining of God, knowing Lazarus was to be resurrected, it was such that Lazarus's state was but one of psychopannychia? In other words, what is the right view of "die once" from Heb, 9:27?
 
Ed Walsh said:
I get what you are saying up to a point. But those were supernatural miracles, and I think the exceptions that prove the rule. Can we not say truthfully that the Jordan River does not part to let people cross on dry land because it did so when those carrying the ark entered the water? Do you see my point?
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong. The average person who dies, dies once. No takebacks. But there are exceptions to the verse in Hebrews.
 
Ask Mr. Religion said:
Can you unpack that "the exceptions prove the rule" statement, Ed?

Given your earlier:
https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/death.96630/#post-1181552
Is the appointment to "die once" from Heb. 9:27 the rule to which you state is proven? I assume this to be the case.
Click to expand...

I hope I am using the expression properely, even though many do not.

What I had in mind as a definition goes something like this:
That the presence of an exception, (especially a miraculous one), applying to a specific case establishes ("proves") that a general rule exists.
The rule being: When men die they stay dead.​
 
BayouHuguenot said:
And there is a form of consciousness that survives my death.I just don't want to say that the "I" = "the soul." If applied to Christology, that is Nestorianism.
Click to expand...

Jesus had no problem with using a form of I with "me", and as you say a "form" survives death which is you without a body. This is in no way a form of Nestorianism.

And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with "me" in paradise.
 
jwithnell said:
The difficulty here is the word "real," which cones out of the Greek worldview and fed Gnostic thought.

The physical body and the soul are equally real.
Click to expand...

A body is the real physical part of man. Though a body without a soul is simply material. If you lose a finger in a meat slicer no one says that finger is me.
 
Ask Mr. Religion said:
I wonder, as an aside, where was Lazarus's soul when he was first dead? Did our Lord's miracle re-summon his soul from wherever his soul was at the time back to earth to reunite with his body? Or, given the ordaining of God, knowing Lazarus was to be resurrected, it was such that Lazarus's state was but one of psychopannychia? In other words, what is the right view of "die once" from Heb, 9:27?
Click to expand...

To be absent from the body is to be present with The Lord. :)
 
earl40 said:
Jesus had no problem with using a form of I with "me", and as you say a "form" survives death which is you without a body. This is in no way a form of Nestorianism.
Click to expand...

If Person = soul/mind, then we have two persons in Jesus.


earl40 said:
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with "me" in paradise.
Click to expand...

None of which proves the Cartesian point that Person = Soul, full stop.

Yes, the soul survives death and is responsive. But it is not a full person. It is a diminished person. That is why we confess the resurrection of the body.

Here is the clincher: If soul = person, then who was the subject of the divine Logos after death: The Divine mind or the Human mind?
 
ZackF said:
Right. What if you donate or receive a kidney?
Click to expand...

That's a big problem in ethics courses that are taught by physicalists. If I am my material particles, and these molecules change over time, then am I the same person? If I commit a crime today, yet get half my arm shot off, then I can't be legally charged since it is a different person.

That idiocy is taken seriously and you will have guys define the person as a "phase sortal."
 
BayouHuguenot said:
If Person = soul/mind, then we have two persons in Jesus.
Click to expand...

So did Jesus have a human soul? I say yes, and it was what he took on in the incarnation, along with with a body.

PS. This is a good discussion because of the christological ramifications.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
Here is the clincher: If soul = person, then who was the subject of the divine Logos after death: The Divine mind or the Human mind?
Click to expand...

Do you want to take out all the mystery of the Trinity and the incarnation? Here I believe you may be treading on ground you may not want to, in that it appears you may be melding the human and divine natures of Jesus. I believe the word distinction would be appropriate here, in that it seems the charge of Jesus being two persons is what you seem to be charging me with.
 
earl40 said:
Do you want to take out all the mystery of the Trinity and the incarnation?
Click to expand...

Yes.
earl40 said:
Here I believe you may be treading on ground you may not want to, in that it appears you may be melding the human and divine natures of Jesus.
Click to expand...

Prove that I am doing so.
earl40 said:
I believe the word distinction would be appropriate here, in that it seems the charge of Jesus being two persons is what you seem to be charging me with.
Click to expand...

I am simply summarizing Cyril of Alexandria's teaching. If soul/mind = person, then when Jesus was in the tomb, or storming Hades, or whatever, which soul/mind was the acting subject?

As to the relation between the minds, it is an asymmetrical accessing relation.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
Yes..
Click to expand...

That is very very disturbing.

BayouHuguenot said:
Prove that I am doing so.
Click to expand...

"Here is the clincher: If soul = person, then who was the subject of the divine Logos after death: The Divine mind or the Human mind?"

You are indeed delving into the mystery of the incarnation to which none will get an answer...ever.

The answer to your clincher is Jesus, and to think how the divine mind and human mind work is a mystery.
 
earl40 said:
That is very very disturbing.
Click to expand...

I was speaking tongue-in-cheek. You asked a question that only a negative answer is a correct one.
earl40 said:
You are indeed delving into the mystery of the incarnation to which none will get an answer...ever.
Click to expand...

The answer to my question was already given at the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon. Since a divine Person assumed human nature, there is only one person. This means that mind =/= person on the pain of Christological heresy.
earl40 said:
The answer to your clincher is Jesus, and to think how the divine mind and human mind work is a mystery.
Click to expand...

Now you have shifted the argument. No one is saying we can have an accurate answer to the asymmetrical accessing relation between the divine and human mind. What I was getting at, per Cyril of Alexandria and the Council of Chalcedon, was that the subject of all actions is the Divine person of the Logos, which rules out the Cartesian mind = person formula.
 
earl40 said:
Do you want to take out all the mystery of the Trinity and the incarnation?
Click to expand...

BayouHuguenot said:
Yes.
Click to expand...

I read later where you qualified this one-word answer, but I couldn't resist my initial reflex to repond. Not to you, but to all of us, that think we know a lot about the threee-in-one God who is.
Just consider what I wrote below a tribute of sorts to the wonder and glory of God.
1 Corinthians 13:9,13
For we know in part,
For now we see through a glass, darkly(1 Cor 13:9,13)
Psalms 77:19
Thy way is in the sea, and thy path in the great waters, and thy footsteps are not known.​

I haven't been very involved in the overall discussion, but this partial quote by Earl and your one-word answer "Yes," made me laugh out loud. Sure your answer was too short to draw any valid conclusion, but taking it at face value it is one of the most nieve (I almost said ignorant, but I do not want to offend:) statements I have ever heard in any theological discussion from any Christian persuasion. I'm sure I missed your meaning. I really must have. I have been a Christian for 45 years, studying the Bible and meditating on the Persons of the Godhead, well over a 1,000 hours a year for the past years. Maybe I am nieve too when I say that we have real fellowship together in ways I never dreamed possible in my younger years. One of my most passionate prayers, as I am studying is that now, at long last, I would be granted a better understanding of who and what Jesus the God/Man truly is. I think I do not relate to Jesus as I should. It's like Paul's desire in Philippians 3:10, "That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;" I trust the Lord will grant me even some of this knowledge before I die. This has been a most earnest quest as I draw nearer and nearer to the sight of Him. Even then, after this vile body is transformed to be like his glorious body, and my mind enlarged to know him better who so perfectly knows me—even then, throughout all eternity I will know more and more of him without ever exhausting the depth of the God I now see so darkly.

Romans 11:33
O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!​

See what a one-word answer that I totally misunderstood can grow into.
 
Last edited:
Ed Walsh said:
I read later where you qualified this one-word answer, but I couldn't resist my initial reflex to repond. Not to you, but to all of us, that think we know a lot about the threee-in-one God who is.
Just consider what I wrote below a tribute of sorts to the wonder and glory of God.
1 Corinthians 13:9,13
For we know in part,
For now we see through a glass, darkly(1 Cor 13:9,13)
Psalms 77:19
Thy way is in the sea, and thy path in the great waters, and thy footsteps are not known.​

I haven't been very involved in the overall discussion, but this partial quote by Earl and your one-word answer "Yes," made me laugh out loud. Sure your answer was too short to draw any valid conclusion, but taking it at face value it is one of the most nieve (I almost said ignorant, but I do not want to offend:) statements I have ever heard in any theological discussion from any Christian persuasion. I'm sure I missed your meaning. I really must have. I have been a Christian for 45 years, studying the Bible and meditating on the Persons of the Godhead, well over a 1,000 hours a year for the past ears. Maybe I am nieve too when I say that we have real fellowship together in ways I never dreamed possible in my younger years. One of my most passionate prayers, as I am studying is that now, at long last, I would be granted a better understanding of who and what Jesus the God/Man truly is. I think I do not relate to Jesus as I should. It's like Paul's desire in Philippians 3:10, "That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;" I trust the Lord will grant me even some of this knowledge before I die. This has been a most earnest quest as I draw nearer and nearer to the sight of Him. Even then, after this vile body is transformed to be like his glorious body, and my mind enlarged to know him better who so perfectly knows me—even then, throughout all eternity I will know more and more of him without ever exhausting the depth of the God I now see so darkly.

Romans 11:33
O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!​

See what a one-word answer that I totally misunderstood can grow into.
Click to expand...

No offense taken. I didn't think the question was materially different from "Have you stopped beating your wife," so I gave a similar answer.
 
Last edited:
"If Person = soul/mind, then we have two persons in Jesus."

Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.

Above we have the one Person of Jesus saying what was on His "mind" which expressed a desire to have the cup pass, which was not The Fathers will. Now Jesus being God, and having the same will of The Father, in His divine essence, was still one person even though it has been suggested He is "two persons" if there appears to be a conflict in wills.
 
earl40 said:
"If Person = soul/mind, then we have two persons in Jesus."

Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.

Above we have the one Person of Jesus saying what was on His "mind" which expressed a desire to have the cup pass, which was not The Fathers will. Now Jesus being God, and having the same will of The Father, in His divine essence, was still one person even though it has been suggested He is "two persons" if there appears to be a conflict in wills.
Click to expand...

Will is a faculty of nature, not Person. Two natures, still one person. Therefore, two wills in Christ. Standard dyotheletism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top