Life after death? [Archive]

Aaron

02-21-2006, 04:56 PM

Hi everyone,

I have just recently come to embrace the full preterism view, as well as "comprehensive grace," and have some questions regarding human existence post-mortem. Are there any verses/passages in the Bible that directly (or indirectly) support the view that life continues after death? Since I've begun reading scripture through a fulfilled, covenant eschatological lens, I've found myself questioning this. Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated, because I really would like to believe that our spiritual relationship with God continues even after physical death.

In Christ,
Aaron

PS. Thanks Davo for your quick response over on the other forum! :)
For everyone else, here's his response to my query:

G'day Aaron,

Nice to have you on board. This part of the forum has been a bit quiet for a while now, as has this whole forum area.

Speaking of the departed the bible says God is the God of the living and the dead. We know that the likes of Elijah and Moses "appeared" on the mount with Jesus etc. We know that in the Parousia God was to bring with those departed etc. Once you sit down and think about it you'll probably think of a heap more examples.

What the bible doesn't give is a formula for "getting to heaven" -- there's a good reason; it wasn't an issue. What evangelicalism [in whatever form] has done is say that "being saved" = "going to heaven when you die" -- now that's what you can't find in Scripture, because it isn't there.

Anyway, I was going to invite you over to "TALK-GRACE.COM" but I see you're there already. It would be good to continue our conversation over there

davo

Amie

02-21-2006, 05:37 PM

Aaron,

Welcome to the forums! My silence only means I am in thought, I will get back to ya as I am sure others will as well :)

Amie

Barry

02-21-2006, 06:03 PM

Nice to have you here Aaron,
If you haven't already you might think about telling us a little about yourself and how you got to where you are at. We got a fellowship area for that.

What comes to mind very quickly is Enoch. He was translated (whatever that means lol).
Then the statement to thief of the cross by Jesus, and also Paul's statement in Phil. 1:20-21. While some of Paul's statements are covenantal in nature it appears that he is still dealing with what we would term physical death or how else would he have departed?
The nature of love is to share. God is love. He is immortal and through the gospel brought immortality to light.
This is a very deep topic but should prove very interesting. Some here have slightly different approaches to the subject.

My view stresses an historical approach to "the worm never dies" and to the "reward" tying such things to this realm of existence. The reward stays here. That would however get you thread starter off track LOL.
IMHO Enoch did not stay in this realm when translated.
Just my thoughts and others will have many too LOL.
Blessings Barry

Dano

02-21-2006, 06:48 PM

Hello and welcome!

Sometimes the word “sleep” is used to refer to the physically dead, as in:

“Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep”
John 11:12The disciples then said to Him, "Lord, if he has fallen asleep, he will recover."
John 11:13 Now Jesus had spoken of his death, but they thought that He was speaking of literal sleep.

Also:

1 Cor 15:6 After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep...

True, they’re dead, but the terms dead/die/death also have very different meanings. Dead in sin, or sin-death, is commonly what was in mind. For example, Paul’s “I die daily.” or “...sin became alive and I died” are a couple examples. Or Jesus’ “Follow me and allow the dead to bury their own dead.” Or even, if you’ll accept it, “for if the dead (Israel) are not raised, not even Christ (Israel’s Messiah) has been raised.”

In short, the world – All in it – were “In Adam” in a sense that they were dead and “out of the garden,” or Presence of God because that Old Covenant World determined the standing/status/destiny of All in that world. In short, Christ reversed it completely by restoring humanity as a whole back to the presence of God; Face-to-face in the new world, the New heaven and earth. Christ reversed “death,” thereby giving Life. Before this, death reigned.

Death reigned until when?

The parousia of Christ. This was a time when Paul assured his audience that “we will not all sleep,” ...
Death was swallowed up in victory. Death died. But what about those who had “fallen asleep?”

1 Thessalonians 4:13 But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve as do the rest who have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. 15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep.

I really breezed though this quickly (maybe even sloppy! lol), but I hope it helps. Again, it’s good to have you here!

Aaron

02-22-2006, 05:37 AM

Thanks guys for the helpful responses so far! I'll be posting my own thoughts a little later today, as soon as I get a chance (about to head on to class now, and then work)! I'll also try and include a little info about myself as Barry suggested :) Take care everyone, and God bless.

In Christ,
Aaron

Amie

02-22-2006, 07:35 AM

Could the "different meanings" of death ("I die daily", etc) as mentioned by Dano, also have the same meanings? To see one's self 'as good as dead', is to also see one's self as the 'walking dead' - like sleepwalkers ;).

That's my thought, I feel that covenantal reality directly affected and reflected the reality of afterlife. Under the OC, the soul did not continue after death imo.

The word "aphthartos", translated "incorruptible" means "immortal" and is translated so in other verses of the bible.

2 Timothy 1
10 but now revealed through the appearance of our Savior, Jesus Christ, indeed making death of no effect, bringing life and incorruptibility to light through the gospel,

Look at how many times "incorruption" and related is used in 1 Cor 15. Verse 53 restates what would be the obvious for them "For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality."

I feel that the figurative language was meant to deliver a message; The message that humanity is delivered from the grave.

I feel that there is life after death. I do not know of any Scripture that says what happens next. I have faith in God to be just.

Amie

kevinbeck

02-22-2006, 01:45 PM

There is a great book by Alan Segal entitled "Life After Death: A History of the Afterlife in Western Religion (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385422997/sr=8-1/qid=1140641327/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-4359290-1641752?%5Fencoding=UTF8)." I have found this book very helpful. You might too.

Amie

02-22-2006, 02:09 PM

Kevin,

If you don't mind, what was it about the book that you found helpful? It sounds interesting :)

Amie

Barry

02-23-2006, 12:13 PM

Very interesting point being made.
Liked Amie's
"Could the "different meanings" of death ("I die daily", etc) as mentioned by Dano, also have the same meanings? To see one's self 'as good as dead', is to also see one's self as the 'walking dead' - like sleepwalkers . "

Please bear with me in my limited way of trying to express some thoughts or possibilities.
Here is a question that may or may not influence our thinking concerning the immortality as well as some other points.

To what extent is Old Covenant history the history of man in a complete identity crises? Not only is man in an identity crises that crises is validated.

To what extent does scripture treat the identity crises as the person the creature? HMM? The creature of that creation???? The "ego man" of lost true identity?
To whom was death imputed? Was it to the hidden person who lost all true identity or was to the ego man of validated false identity?
This is my question.

When the old covenant creature died in AD 70 and the person themselves came through into the new age (those who lived through), what was condemned and what was preserved? What lost validation and what gained validation?
Did everyone who had not believed cease to exist?
Were they annhilated?
Did they all get ruptured to eternal torment when all that was in the world and the works therein perished?

Are we claiming that the hidden person of lost true identity remained in the validation of ego man was held to this realm until AD 70? I can't see it that way. The thief on the cross, Enoch ETC.
What if it was the ego man of false identity that was historically raised up and awakened to judgment in the consummation of biblical history. In the recorded history of eschatology some had obtained a "good record, and good report and good testimony" (Hebrews 11) and many had not.
The queen of the south would be raise up with that generation and so influence historically the judgment of that generation in the consummation of biblical history which is eschatology.
Was it not "all their lifetime" that they were "subject to bondage" (Heb. 2:15)?

Some may rightfully say, "But then you make man inherently immortal and take if from God who alone is immortal by implying that there always was a hidden person of lost identity with the exterior of the validated ego man person".

Perhaps. But that is not quite how I see it. I see the hidden person of lost true identity excluded from the Paul's topic of immortality because Paul had little reason to expand on things beyond his covenantal thoughts. To be read overly literally would mean that no one could ever have immortality on any level period because he alone is immortal and is inapproachable. IE Paul is using "man" in its covenantally validated ego man sense.
The hidden person of lost identity has always belonged to God and always will.
It is that person that was validated covenantally in AD 70 and it is that person that we are now discovering exponentially.
In this view some of Solomon's thoughts are confined to the realm of the ego man. He could not exceed the limits of Adam's potential for wisdom.

OK dear loved ones, just trying here to express some thoughts. Please do tell me what ya think if you have any thoughts.
Barry

(Edited a few words)

Amie

02-23-2006, 12:56 PM

Barry,

I get your point (?) and good grief you might be the deepest man alive! First, I feel that the resurrection began when Christ "gave up the ghost", and maybe at his birth (since He "is" the resurrection), so it didn't wait til ad70, it finished ad70.

I suspect that Enoch was translated physically, BUT.. God could wake-up whomever he chose, if he felt that they would survive it. There was no duality of man in Hebrew thinking. "Self" was "soul". If the soul was validated in the flesh, then humanity was flesh, and vice-versa. This didn't mean that once humanity was validated in the spirit, that all biological bodies dropped to the ground and folks were floating around, this meant that though humanity was made out of flesh, that it had been immortalized in the spirit (the spirit of God). There is no immortality in flesh.

The single dimension view of "self" by Hebrews is also why those souls were seen as "lost". Imo, they ceased to exist post-grave, yet God could awaken them - He could/can do as He wishes. If they had been reconciled to God, and lost, they would have been both immortal and lost (talk about "Hell"). They slept so-as not to suffer while awaiting reconciliation.

So, we understand the break-down of self at least in a limited way, as the writers of the bible never did. We can look back and see that it was 'superego' that ruled the day. They could not. I wonder if that hindsight is part of the growth that came with liberty.

If I understand you correctly, you believe that there was always life post-mortem and that the NC only changed this lifetime? That's something to consider.

Amie

Barry

02-23-2006, 02:09 PM

Hi Amie,
I won't really try to "prove" anything but rather kinda bring up some stuff to look at in connection to what you wrote sis.

"and good grief you might be the deepest man alive!"
Let's not bring out the ego man he is ugly as sin LOL ROFL.

"I feel that the resurrection began when Christ "gave up the ghost", and maybe at his birth (since He "is" the resurrection), so it didn't wait til ad70, it finished ad70.'
My view is that Christ was in paradise in his true identity with the thief on the cross in his true identity but the Old covenant soul was still in the grave. The Christ of human history was raise back up into human history when the spirit returned to the body. He however could not remain here because here was still validated ego man territory. He was then ascended to heaven to finish (ad 70) from there.

"I suspect that Enoch was translated physically, BUT.. God could wake-up whomever he chose, if he felt that they would survive it."

I'm seeing something funny in Hebrews 11. These two scriptures:
"By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death....before his translation he had this testimony..."
"These all died in faith, not having received the promises [in their lifetime], but having seen them afar off [historically], and were persuaded of them..."

In what way did Enoch die but did not die? He died as a matter of placement of participation of human history but did not die physically which for-shadowed the coming covenantal "translation".

"These all died" is permitted to include Enoch (who did not see death) because the underlining thought of the writer is not death by physical means in this verse but the end of participation in human history.
A participation that would in the spirit be renewed when God's will would be done on earth as it is in heaven in the New Jerusalem (Heb. 12:22-23 IE the reward). The New Jerusalem actualizes an ongoing transformation in human history. [the ego man did not have this reward was not give as the ego man the crown of life where immortality is expressed in ongoing human history]

"If I understand you correctly, you believe that there was always life post-mortem and that the NC only changed this lifetime? That's something to consider."

Brought immortality to light. Didn't create it. The ego man never had it. He is simply false. Immortality is given now in that the status of validity is changed.
Paul's point is not that it always existed because that is not his approach. Rather that the old covenant creature could not have it. God however is unchanging. Everyone who has ever lived has had an identical value. That value is brought to light through the gospel.

Just some thoughts
Barry

Amie

02-23-2006, 04:16 PM

Barry,

I don't take your clarifications as an effort proving anything :), I appreciate them.

If the OC creature could not have immortality - How do you define "immortal"? Do you believe that there is life after death?

Amie

Barry

02-23-2006, 04:49 PM

I see the OC creature as the ego man. He had and has no immortality. The Christ the son of God, the son of man, opened to way to the true identity we always had.

I see eternal life given the first fruits who were taking on this true identity. Life was given to the mortal (even individual) bodies (Rom. 8:11), in that these bodies would in their lives contribute to ongoing human history in the New Jerusalem. Not that the individual bodies became immortal but that eternal life was given to the moral bodies. That quality dwelling in them even before the end of the age meant that their lives actualizes an ongoing transformation in human history. Their participation in human history became more than what would be destroyed when the status of the ego man was taken down. It would go on and on (their full reward). And it does still in the New Jerusalem which came down out of heaven (God's possibility).
IMHO Christ is calling for the transformation from the ego man to the true identity as manifested in the Christ (Matt. 16:24-28, Luke 9:23-27).
What soul would be lost if not transformed?
What soul would be found if the first denied?
What soul identity could pass through intact into the new age?
What soul identity could not pass through for failure of identity change?
What "himself" could be lost or "cast away" in Luke 9:25?
What would Christ be ashamed of in his coming?

If "soul" (the Greek is soul not life) is the person themselves how did one lose that person to find it?
Is there not something of that transformed person that survived the first-fruits transformation to enter into the new age? Is there not something of the untransformed to survived the destruction of the flesh in AD 70? Is it an entirely new soul or is it re-identified soul?

My view is that there is life after death for everyone but there is an agenda for all to come to know God and so find their true self. It won't be the ego man.
Phil. 2:10-11.
Just my thoughts,
Barry

Amie

02-25-2006, 02:38 PM

Aaron,

What are your thoughts on life after death?

Amie

christyG

02-26-2006, 01:17 PM

Wow. This is such a great discussion, that it has taken me reading and re-reading to absorb and digest it all. Still digesting, but here are some questions:

Barry said:

My view is that Christ was in paradise in his true identity with the thief on the cross in his true identity but the Old covenant soul was still in the grave.

Could you explain that a little further? It seems as though you are saying that there are "two selves" in a way? I've read some Ancient Hebrew stuff that teaches some of this thought, so I'm just curious.

Also,

In what way did Enoch die but did not die? He died as a matter of placement of participation of human history but did not die physically which for-shadowed the coming covenantal "translation".

Great thought, but I'm afraid I need it explained a little further. How did he not ccontinue to participate in human history?

Christy

Barry

02-26-2006, 01:43 PM

Hey Christy, how ya doing?
Hope everything is well with you :)

You asked about:
"Barry said:

My view is that Christ was in paradise in his true identity with the thief on the cross in his true identity but the Old covenant soul was still in the grave."

I have no idea what I wrote there, maybe someone else can help me out :rofl:
What I meant is that the lifetime of Christ in participation of human history was in the grave while his true identity whatever you want to call it, was in Paradise. The thief was in Paradise too but his participation in human history was in the grave (asleep) was raised up in the end of the age.
The old covenant life identity was like a walking dead so that even if they did not sleep before the resurrection they were sleep walking (stole what I wanted from Amie :biggrinbounce: ).
Where as while Christians were present in human history (in the interim period) they were not asleep unless they reverted back to the law. ("Awake to righteousness and sin not." "Do not sleep as others do").

Also:
"In what way did Enoch die but did not die? He died as a matter of placement of participation of human history but did not die physically which for-shadowed the coming covenantal "translation"."

According to Hebrews all those he had mentioned had died not having received the promises. However he had just said the Enoch had not seen death. IMO he is saying that Enoch would still be raised up in the last day historically because he had died historically to human history until AD 70.
Now he is alive in human ongoing presence because he is part of the NJ which enacts an ongoing potential in human affairs. NJ came down to earth. Enoch was perfected (his time in human history) through the first-fruits.

Sorry had to go fast for this one, got to pick someone up so forgive my hast. Get back to me OK if not clear.

Sorry Aaron, for hijacking your thread LOL. Really would like your thought bro.
Barry

Barry

02-26-2006, 08:25 PM

[Once again, apologies to Aaron and all for sort of hijacking this thread. Forgive me! I really do want to hear others thoughts of the afterlife.]

All the righteous blood that was shed on the earth came upon the terminal generation of the old covenant world.
This shows two things IMO.
1) the old covenant did not end until AD 70
2) the "coming upon" (of guilt) is a consummation of the Old Covenant on an historical level.

In Matt. 23:29-36 we are struck by several interesting points.
It is not really all the righteous blood but all the righteous blood as the scriptures had recorded. What the eschatological (end times) had recorded.
What the scriptures record (as opposed to other events it had not) had a life of its own.
This is seen in Heb. 7:3 where Melchizedek is said to be "without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of day nor end of life" by virtue of the fact that it was not recorded in the scriptures of the history of eschatology.
So then the record the testimony good report (Heb. 11) becomes very significant as eschatology comes to a close in AD 70.

In the consummation of the age all past history come back to bear.
Concerning the land of Sodom it would in the historical finality of eschatology fair better than Capernaum (Matt. 11:23-24).
The men of Nineveh would rise in judgment with this generation and would historically condemn them because of the record of their repenting at the word of Jonah because one greater than Jonah was before them. (Matt. 12:40-41)

The queen of the south would rise up in the judgment with this generation and would condemn them because of the record of her far travels to hear Solomon. Indeed one greater than any recorded person of eschatology was before them.

Indeed all the righteous blood that was recorded in the history of eschatology would come upon them as the sentence of permanent historical consummation came upon them for destruction of the flesh. As an historical record of consummation their "worm" would "never die". The old covenant man died permanently in the consummation of biblical history.

The very end itself is however life from the dead. Even the resurrection of condemnation brings life. For in it is the consummation of accountability. And in this their very history as old covenant creatures is re-written in life. For in the very end of this finality of the consummation their fall is the riches of the world and their fullness. (Rom. 11:12)
Is Israel still blind (Rom. 11:25)? No, for there is no veil any more and no functioning "god of this age" to do it (2 Cor. chapter 3 and 4:3-4) (as per Heb. 2:5, 14-15 ETC). [IE. we must redefine would we think is blind in this age. Once eschatology is finalized blind no longer means the same thing.]

Historically, the worm never dies and life is given. [Not the same reward however is the "faithful".]

How does this affect the afterlife?
Hmm?
I think what might be happening is that much of what we called the afterlife is no such thing. But rather is history in view of its consummation. The ongoing affect that the NJ has upon us is IMO a quality of immortality that is bestowed upon the first-fruits in particular (Rev. 3:12).
Is there an afterlife? Yes, but no info to explain its framework. But the tone of scripture continually demands it. In the tone of scripture (the new testament in particular) physical death cannot possibly mean cessation of being. Where IMO historical implications parallel surety of the greater possibility of life itself in God.
The perpetuity of the historical mirrors the perpetuity of immortality in God. Resurrection however I see not in terms of going to heaven for eternity but historical consummation of eschatology.

JMO, needs a lot more study and scrutiny for sure! Any thoughts?
Barry

kevinbeck

02-27-2006, 12:58 PM

I liked this book b/c it give a broad overview of how life-after-death issues have always been culturally framed. From the ancient Egyptians to modern day Islam. The section on the "gnostics" and the Gospel of Thomas is very interesting when you read it from the perspective of fulfilled eschatology. Segal explicates long and hard on the Enoch material too. Very good.

His stuff on Paul and the Gospels needs some work...it is basically the same old stuff. But good nonetheless, if for no other reason that to see a concise and cogent argument.

What if (just what if, no hidden agenda) personal individual consience self-recognition was not the point of any of the Biblical story? Would I still love God and others regardless?

Barry, I think you are right on. Currently, I'm working on something for Presence related to ego. It seems to me (an that's an egoic statement in itself) that ego is the biggest hindrance to seeing God and hunamity and all things for who and what they (we) really are.

Blessings,
Kevin

Barry

02-28-2006, 07:56 AM

Currently, I'm working on something for Presence related to ego. It seems to me (an that's an egoic statement in itself) that ego is the biggest hindrance to seeing God and hunamity and all things for who and what they (we) really are.

Blessings,
Kevin

Great can't wait for it! Let us know when it comes up. This IMHO this may be one of the most important topics of all time, that is what has been called the "ego man". Interested to here your way of putting things.
It is a blessing to be able to fellowship with you Kevin. I hope that you will freely post any relevant links to PM as they relate to any discussions and chatting.

About Enoch: It seems for some reason that this guy attracts a lot of attention. A unique character!
Any further thoughts from anyone?
Barry

PS, In Hebrews 11:4 it says about Able, "and being dead still speaks".
How was Able still speaking? Any thoughts? (Just to let you know, I'm thinking that he still was speaking through the biblical record of eschatology)

christyG

03-01-2006, 03:28 PM

Barry,

Please be patient with me, because I really want to follow what you are saying. But I also do not want to get this topic way off track, if you think it needs moved you may do so.

You said:
Enoch would still be raised up in the last day historically because he had died historically to human history until AD 70.
Now he is alive in human ongoing presence because he is part of the NJ which enacts an ongoing potential in human affairs. NJ came down to earth. Enoch was perfected (his time in human history) through the first-fruits.

Are you saying that our "afterlife" now, is the fact that after our physical life we are still "present" with an eternal affect on human affairs? This was something that was not the case pre AD 70? Our "true self" and "participation in human history" self arre now united?

Christy

Barry

03-01-2006, 04:58 PM

Barry,

I also do not want to get this topic way off track, if you think it needs moved you may do so.

Christy

No way sis. It's I that has taken this thread off track with my pet view. LOL

Barry,

You said:

Are you saying that our "afterlife" now, is the fact that after our physical life we are still "present" with an eternal affect on human affairs? This was something that was not the case pre AD 70? Our "true self" and "participation in human history" self arre now united?

Christy
:clap2:

That is not far off from what I'm concluding from my view.
The "ego man" could only produce offspring toward immortality. [Abraham was told this in a way but as going from the natural to the spiritual.] But nothing never really changed!
God's immortality was cut off from Human potential so man could not progress. Now God is working in the totality of humanity to produce an ongoing affect in human history (for the positive as time unfolds) which is the reward of the first-fruits and oc faithful in the New Jerusalem. The world belongs to Abraham in a spiritual way.

This however is not IMHO the afterlife for which the Bible gives little info on. It is rather what we have presumed to be the afterlife.
I view afterlife continuance as something that parallels the characteristic of immortality which is now bestowed upon humanity.

The christian who died in AD 63 had continuance in God in some unknown format but his "life" in participation in human history had immortality dwelling in it as the true self was being followed on earth. This life was awakened in AD 70 in the consumation of Biblical history. That life then made an immortal impact upon humanity in the New Jerusalem.
I'm struggling Christy.
This needs a lot of work yet!
Barry

Truthseeker

03-19-2006, 10:14 AM

Hi Barry and All,

This is a fascinating discussion! Its difficult to put spiritual language into literal words, isn't it? :)

I have a question: If I put it this way, that the scriptures describe where we (mankind in general both pre and post 70) are in the mind of God, is that way off track? For instance, when Jesus answered the Saduccees about the Resurrection with : He is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. He is not a God of the dead but of the living, and they are all living to Him."

So even though they weren't truly "alive" in the sense of their soul going up to heaven to await a bodily resurrection, but were alive in the mind of God--in that He remembered them, and would Resurrect them (and they then would literally be alive.) In other words, they were as good as alive because God would make it so?

Such as Abel's blood--as has been mentioned--in God's memory, "crying out" as it were, for justice--and as the writer of Hebrews brings out, Jesus' blood "speaks" in a better way, because it was the "justice" that Abel's blood cried out for.

Is this making any sense at all? :D

And another question: Can we surmise from the scriptures a literal afterlife based on these things? Do you see the OC/NC; Adam/Christ;Death/Life; Physical/Spiritual--as a real "we actually died (ceased to exist) and now live (have immortality) in a literal way? Thank you--rhonda

Barry

03-19-2006, 12:16 PM

Hi Rhonda,
Nice to chat with you once again sis!

I agree in general with your statements but inside of a different view of resurrection.

My view at present is that the resurrection is justification of this life only.
The life that Enoch lived was resurrected in AD 70. That life was given justification of life.
For a first-fruit still alive they would see justification of life in their lifetime.

Resurrection is to be given life. It is not as if Adam was not alive after eating of the forbidden fruit it is that he would return to the dust not having justification of life. His life then did not have the same "validation". To recuperate that validation, vindication of that life was necessary. Life is given an eternal purpose in history.

One of the key scriptures I use is Rom. 8:11.
Life dwelling in the mortal body of a first-fruit Christian of this time meant that immortal life was dwelling in a mortal body.
Never meaning that the mortal body would become immortal but that the characteristic of immortality was dwelling in that body. Meaning that vindication of life was dwelling in that body. For the first fruit Christian this was a progressive state being formed in them.
As Paul said, "not that I am already perfected but..."

In resurrection we have individuals, cities (including Sodom), communities, nations, being resurrected. Resurrection as a process, as an unfolding belonged to the nation of Israel. To them it was promised the resurrection of the dead. This applies to historical Israel. They are given life from the dead. They are given vindication historically.
In the end however resurrection can be seen as collective. It is that humankind now lives in justification of life.

In other word, I do not see resurrection as a given back of life to a disembodied spirit or soul but rather a question of that life that was lived in old covenant times.
They had lived all their lifetime in bondage and justification of that lifetime was given at a later date through Christ and the first-fruits. In this way the old faithful ones who had expressed faith in their lifetime were historically perfected when the fist-fruits were perfected (Heb. 11:39-40). They had received a good record a good testimony and had please God by having faith but hand not received the promises in their life(time). They had lived in bondage all their life(time) through fear of death (Heb. 2:15).

There are scriptures that are IMO clearly historical.
Is. 66:24 is a historical "worm". The picture of destruction in history never dies.
Jude 7 is an historical fire of vengeance.
Rev. 14:11 is a historical smoke. It pleases God that he had finished historically with this covenantal city (Jerusalem). It is permanent.
In Matt. 23:29-36 historically speaking they were filling up the measure of their fathers guilt. All biblically recorded murders of the righteous would be filled up and come historically against this terminal generation of vipers.
They would not escape the historical sentence of the undying worm.
In this way they who spoke against the transforming Spirit spoke against the "witness" of God. The historical consequences of this would not be reversed in the coming age (Matt. 12:32).
This would not be the final word of eschatolgical history. This we see in Paul's writing. While it is true in regards to permanent destruction of the corrupt utterly perishing in their corruption it is not the final word.
The final word is life. The final word is justification of life. Their historical rejection was led to their acceptance which is justification of life (Rom. 11:15,25,32 and IMO Rev. 20:5).

They are raised up in destruction in the consummation of biblical history and given life. The faithful were raise up having carried a token of justification of life and are given the fullness their of.

What was destroyed remains true in its own permanence.

There are many historical statements that relate to these matters.
Matt. 11:23 combined with Jude 7 is interesting.
The city of Sodom as a city of history would have remained unto the time of Christ had God permitted them to back in the time of Abraham to see the type of marvels that Christ was then doing (Capernaum). This fact would be raised up against them in Judgment in the last day (AD 70).

Both Nineveh and the queen of the south are historically raised up in Judgement against that terminal generation of vipers (Matt. 12:41-42). Every idol work against the Spirit the "witness" of God would have its historical accounting (Matt. 12:32-37).

I firmly believe in life after death. In all probability through (IMO) it has nothing to do with resurrection of life. And is so very different from what we expect that there is not much use trying to define it at this time.

As per you points, I see the life of Moses given justification of life because God is the God of the living. That life had to be brought to life.

The first century Christians the the example in Heb. 11:35 paint a picture that death is not of a permanent consequence to God. That IMO has to do with relationship and love. The believing new that they were fine no matter what. I see no reason to believe otherwise.

That's kind of my view at this time.
Barry

Amie

03-19-2006, 03:37 PM

Barry

03-19-2006, 04:06 PM

Barry,

Why do you believe in life after death?

Why do you believe Jesus rose from the grave? I don't ask as in "where do you get your facts", I ask as in "why do you think he did it"?

Thanks,

Amie

"Why do you believe in life after death?"
Because love is eternal and immortal. The question then is what formula of for mate, consciousness, or collective vs. individual structure is before us? This we may not know for a while.
What was I in my mother's womb. What will I be as a senile old man? Where is the Barry? The Barry is the whole of the person of history. But that is all we have to go off of at this time. Answers will come in time IMHO.
Something of the Barry of human history will extend in consciousness because God is in love with a "person". The greater and deeper answers are in relationship itself IMHO.
What resurrection meant however as pertains to this life is that that which God loved as expressed here in human history needed to be validated. Because he loves.

"Why do you believe Jesus rose from the grave? I don't ask as in "where do you get your facts", I ask as in "why do you think he did it"?"
Demonstration! The historical Christ reentered human history in justification of life having taken the sin of the world to grave condemning sin in the flesh (by taking it in his body of human history). This was the "faith of Christ Jesus". That God would raise him up the third day. It was this (or his) faith that saved. Then the first fruits become his historical body his bone his flesh and are saved by the faith of Christ Jesus.

Did I miss your question sis? I think I may have.
Barry

davo

03-19-2006, 09:58 PM

In resurrection we have individuals, cities (including Sodom), communities, nations, being resurrected. Resurrection as a process, as an unfolding belonged to the nation of Israel. To them it was promised the resurrection of the dead. This applies to historical Israel. They are given life from the dead. They are given vindication historically.
In the end however resurrection can be seen as collective. It is that humankind now lives in justification of life.
Yes Barry this is a good point, and yet even more than that -- it is God who is vindicated in that His promise/s to Israel is seen as honoured and fulfilled.

Sometimes anti-prets disparage the fulfilled view as looking ONLY to history -- reality is though, most prets are NOT consistent in the acknowledging of history and staying within its redemptive timeframe -- but still seek futurity past the fulness.

Amie

03-23-2006, 06:19 PM

Did I miss your question sis? I think I may have.

You didn't miss my question :)

Amie

kevinbeck

03-24-2006, 07:40 AM

Paige

03-24-2006, 09:26 AM

Kevin,

That has been my thought for quite a while now. My first thought about it is that it represents "life" that can't be physically taken. You could then say that it is about quality of life that is not affected by physical life???

Paige

Lauri

03-24-2006, 09:51 AM

Paige wrote: My first thought about it is that it represents "life" that can't be physically taken. You could then say that it is about quality of life that is not affected by physical life???

OOOOH I like that!!!!!:clap2:

Lauri

Amie

03-25-2006, 09:38 AM

Kevin,

That has been my thought for quite a while now. My first thought about it is that it represents "life" that can't be physically taken.

Sounds good to me too :)

You could then say that it is about quality of life that is not affected by physical life???

I'm not sure that I understand what you mean here. Do you think the way we live our life now, affects life post-mortem? I suspect it might.

Amie

Lauri

03-25-2006, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by Paige
You could then say that it is about quality of life that is not affected by physical life???

Posted by Amie
I'm not sure that I understand what you mean here. Do you think the way we live our life now, affects life post-mortem? I suspect it might.

That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to mean that if we are truly living in the spiritual and see life with the spiritual eyes our quality of life won't be affected with the physical, such as the physcial things we let make life suck for us like joblessness or pain or illness just to name a few. I guess Paige is the only one who can clear up for us what she meant. :confused:

Lauri

Amie

03-25-2006, 11:29 AM

Do you think that the resurrection of Jesus (while very real) pointed to something beyond itself? It was a sign of a greater/fuller resurrection? Not simply that people will be resurrected physically?

Just a few random thoughts on an early Friday morning.

You all have some awesome icons here.
:9_cool:

Random aye? Hmmm..

Ec 9
4 ¶ For one who is chosen to be among all the living, there is hope. For a living dog is better than a dead lion.
5 For the living know that they shall die; but the dead do not know anything; nor do they have any more a reward, for their memory is forgotten.
6 Also their love, their hatred, and their envy has now perished; nor do they any longer have a part forever in all that is done under the sun.
7 Go, eat your bread with joy, and drink your wine with a merry heart, for God now is pleased with your works.
8 Let your garments be white at every time; and let your head lack no ointment.
9 Look on life with the wife whom you love all the days of the life of your vanity, which He gave you under the sun, all the days of your vanity. For that is your share in this life, and in your labor which you as a laborer do under the sun.
10 All that your hand finds to do, do it with your strength. For there is no work, or planning, or knowledge, or wisdom, in Sheol, there where you go.

The beginning of verse 5 reminds me of the saying "Nothing is certain but death and taxes". Anyhow, the only thing that we can know for sure, is that we will die one day. That's easy enough to relate to.

It gets harder for me to understand when it reads that the dead (using the literal dead for an example) know nothing nor do they have a reward because their memory is forgotten. This suggests to me that to "know something" is to be conscious after biological death, and the "reward" is being remembered forever.

If I'm following correctly, then Jesus evidenced that the biological dead "knew something" so therefore the "reward" was being given. What is being remembered eternally gives us life (quality wise) in this lifetime.

This would mean that post-mortem immortality might be Scripturally synonymous (or at least paralleling) with "remembrance" immortality.

I would love to hear y'alls thoughts on that.

I mentioned the movie "What Dreams May Come" in another thread (one of my all time favs). I just realized that the title is from Shakespeare (Hamlet). The entire line: "For in that sleep of death, what dreams may come".. Kewell!

Amie

Paige

03-25-2006, 02:44 PM

That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to mean that if we are truly living in the spiritual and see life with the spiritual eyes our quality of life won't be affected with the physical, such as the physcial things we let make life suck for us like joblessness or pain or illness just to name a few. I guess Paige is the only one who can clear up for us what she meant.

I think you said it beautifully, Lauri. That was where my thoughts were when I wrote it :)

Paige

Amie

03-26-2006, 08:39 AM

Thanks for the clarification Paige and Lauri. I was asking a question as an aside rather than offering an interpretation - I didn't understand what she meant at all. Now I do :).

Thanks again,

Amie

Jotham

03-26-2006, 07:17 PM

...I understood it to mean that if we are truly living in the spiritual and see life with the spiritual eyes our quality of life won't be affected with the physical, such as the physcial things we let make life suck for us like joblessness or pain or illness just to name a few...

Silly me, i had no idea my "family" had moved...LOL.

Anywho, greetings to all and hope you are well in the Lord.

The topic at hand is often on my mind (such is life as a Christian in a Western culture ey?), but even more so as my mom passed away last month. The time spent during our last coversation was wonderful and i have no doubt that whatever "immortality" there is; she has it. Funny thing is that i think of her in pleasant/fun ways so often, maybe it's my way of dealing with her departure on a subconcious level?? a sort of denial that she is actually no longer here in physical form?

OR...
Maybe this is part of her "immortality" showing through??

The above quote by Lauri is very close to what i've held as possible for some time. Crazy but i didn't get it from Christianity per se, but rather from studying Mysticism (Christian and otherwise) and also from traditional Chinese teachings during my venture into martial arts and the study of "Chi" or energy.

This looks like a fun place for the deeper things, so i'll be reading! Great to see you all here.

Oh, and Barry, i have a sig file to add to your collection. But i get some of the proceeds of any future sales (grin). It's from one of my currency trading buddies at another forum:

Wednesday nite: Mexican. Thursday nite: Bubble Bath

http://www.accrete.com/emo/ROFLOL.gif

Cheers,
Thom

ozark

03-26-2006, 07:23 PM

Thom,

I can't tell you how good it is to see you here. Welcome! Yes, you can talk about anything you want here. We are more about dialogue than debate.

Paige

03-26-2006, 07:56 PM

Thom,

Its so nice that you're here that I gotta wear shades :9_cool:

Paige

Barry

03-26-2006, 08:44 PM

Thom,

I can't tell you how good it is to see you here. Welcome! Yes, you can talk about anything you want here. We are more about dialogue than debate.

Right on.
And, I stole it. http://www.accrete.com/emo/ROFLOL.gif

davo

03-26-2006, 08:58 PM

Hey G'day Thom!! great to see you around here :1asp099:

Jotham

03-28-2006, 12:19 AM

Thanks for the welcome! happy to be here.]

:-)

kevinbeck

03-28-2006, 10:24 AM

Thom, Anyone who quotes Timbuk 3 can't be all bad.:9_cool:

Everyone,
I wonder how the world and faith might be different if, over the millennia, we spent more time serving people that conjecturing about the afterlife. No accusations, just musing on the possibilities.

None of the Biblical characters who "came back from the dead"--not even Jesus--had anything to say about post-mortem existence. I find that a little curious.

Blessings,
Kevin

Jotham

03-28-2006, 12:28 PM

Thom, Anyone who quotes Timbuk 3 can't be all bad.:9_cool:...
Blessings,
Kevin

LOL. Yea it's my record-store-management-days showing through...I think i was operating the Santa Cruz California location when that LP hit the shelves.

Thom

kevinbeck

03-28-2006, 01:04 PM

Thom,
for me it was playing records (yes, records...remember those) and carts at WRHA, my college radio station. Leave it to the 80s to create a catchy tune about nuclear war. Nina did too with 99 Red Baloons. Good times.

Barry

03-28-2006, 03:42 PM

Records are sooo groovy.
I gave mine up for CD's a few years ago. I miss my half speed mastered "Kansas" LP's. Now there is the digitally remastered cd's. There may be a point here concerning life after death.
Maybe someone can tell me what it is LOL.
Barry

davo

03-28-2006, 04:41 PM

I wonder how the world and faith might be different if, over the millennia, we spent more time serving people that conjecturing about the afterlife.
Yeah Kevin, that's been my musings for awhile now too -- being saved to serve, as opposed to getting to Heaven. Surely following Christ is about doing what he did i.e., serving others -- it's not that hard. As soon as we drag in the "heaven factor" we drag in rules and regulation, rites, rituals and rote, i,e., RELGION, and the root meaning of that = to bind :mad:.

christyG

03-28-2006, 05:22 PM

well said everyone!

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinbeck
I wonder how the world and faith might be different if, over the millennia, we spent more time serving people that conjecturing about the afterlife.

Yeah Kevin, that's been my musings for awhile now too -- being saved to serve, as opposed to getting to Heaven. Surely following Christ is about doing what he did i.e., serving others -- it's not that hard. As soon as we drag in the "heaven factor" we drag in rules and regulation, rites, rituals and rote, i,e., RELGION, and the root meaning of that = to bind .

That's my biggest hang up with church right now.....not enough service...not enough reaching out.

Christy

kevinbeck

03-29-2006, 09:39 AM

The fear of death and dying is very real, yes?

People who live in fear should be released from that fear--after all that's what Jesus came to do. I'm not fond of overspeculation of what the afterlife might be all about when we just don't know. But, what if it is infinitely different than we have imagined? I suspect that love transcends bio-death.

Look at all of the art, books, and preaching that has gone into fostering fear about death and the nether regions. Let's say we began 2,000 years ago with "God loves ya'll and you don't have to worry about what happens to you when you die. God has you covered." What might the world look like today? Maybe it's impossible to imagine.

Since we've spent all this energy on telling people they're going to hell, it has become ingrained in us. Part of our collective evolution (so to speak). Now, we must address it to create new patterns of thinking and doing--healthy living. That's why this conversation is so important. Thanks for letting me be part of it.

Barry

03-29-2006, 10:23 AM

Those are some really good thoughts Kevin IMHO.
IMHO God has it covered. JMO always did.

JMO but I believe that there is an element of unity and diversity within what the scriptures refer to as "God".
This would then make "relationship" of key importance and focus and human evolution.
Next IMO would be creativity.
Both in a tight bond with "love".

IMHO then consciousness itself contains elements of all the above. An "us" an "I" a "you". JMO some of the "I" and "You" breaks down at post-mortem.
Just rambling,
Barry

Jotham

03-29-2006, 10:39 AM

The fear of death and dying is very real, yes?...Since we've spent all this energy on telling people they're going to hell, it has become ingrained in us. Part of our collective evolution (so to speak). Now, we must address it to create new patterns of thinking and doing--healthy living...

Hi Kevin, great stuff quoted above. I agree.

In my circle of influence, my Christian friends would nearly think it blasphemous(sp?) to not speak of "hell" to a seeker...now i've come full circle and really don't think of even mentioning it to someone searching for truth. I once read somewhere that even the thought of "Loving" people into heaven was from the devil, that omitting the threat of hell while discussing the afterlife is non-Christian. I'm now of the belief that statement is false.

P.S.Kevin, of course you might have guessed why i chose my sig-file-line...it has nothing to do with nuclear war, and everything to do with living in God's Kingdom :-)

kevinbeck

03-30-2006, 11:10 AM

Thom,

P.S.Kevin, of course you might have guessed why i chose my sig-file-line...it has nothing to do with nuclear war, and everything to do with living in God's Kingdom :-)

I figured as much. I didn't really think you were an advocate of the big mushroom.

It's funny how our pop culture expresses what is happening in our "collective sub (or not so sub) conscious. In the 80s is was songs about the bomb. In a post 9/11 word it is horror movies. Imagine what the world might look like in all of its artistic expression if we had a collective consciousness of God with us.

Jotham

03-30-2006, 04:07 PM

...Imagine what the world might look like in all of its artistic expression if we had a collective consciousness of God with us.

A ramble along those lines...

I'm not in agreement with some of what was said in the movie "What the bleep are we doing here?" OR all of what is said in a well written book "Biology of Belief" by Lipton Ph.D. but...

...there were quite a few whacks on the head to get one thinking about how connected we all might really be?? It is facinating to dwell and ponder just how many more deminsions there might be out there, and if any others are actually available (if even in a small way) to us here and now.? Af how any of that information, if applied, might change the world, or at least the world around any one individual?

~T

davo

07-20-2006, 11:10 AM

Lk 16:24-31 “Then he cried and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and you are tormented. And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.’ “Then he said, ‘I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father’s house, for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’ Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ And he said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.’”

Rev 14:9-11 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”
IF these are literal accounts of post-mortem existence then clearly it will be possible to communicate with those we know – just as Abraham and "Dives" [Vulgate] communicated across this gulf; and not only that, but the good news is [cough cough], we'll be able to do such in the very presence of the Lord, forever.

I suspect something is very wrong with that picture -- any thoughts anyone?

Amie

07-21-2006, 01:15 AM

Davo,

My thought is that the story of Lazarus and the Rich Man is allegory. The rich man's dress is Priestly.

Moses had carried Israel in his bosom for years, and allegorically for much longer.

Numbers 11
12 I, have I conceived all this people? I, have I begotten it, that You say to me, Carry it in your bosom as the foster father bears the suckling, to the land which You have sworn to its fathers?

Abraham represented a person that held fast in God's words. In Genesis 15:6 God counts Abraham's belief as righteousness. Couldn't a person displaying the same belief be counted as "in Abraham's bosom" positionally?

Amie

Barry

07-21-2006, 11:17 AM

How many parables have names?
Some have concluded that this should is not a parable. I would disagree. It makes it a different parable. Not because someone is named but because of who is named.
"Neither will they believe if one is raised from the dead" is not representative of a literal conversation in the afterlife but is more indicative of sarcasm. It is a plug!
If it was a literal conversation then no one would have been raised from the dead to bear witness! For that was the conclusion in the story. The conclusion in the story is that even raising one from the dead would not be enough to convince.
Was someone "named" Lazarus raised from the dead?
Did they believe?
All parables are allegorical and this one is no exception. Many parables have at least a touch of sarcasm and condemnation (for non-belief, unrepentant). This one goes so far as to name one raise from the dead to imply to the listeners that the story was about them in a less than positive light.
Often the pharisees did not understand a parable or would understand it from there flawed perception, but they did often perceive that the parable condemned them in some sense or was about them in some sense. Which takes us back to Luke 16:14 which is what set this parable in motion.

So then IMO the wording in 16:19 is indicative to me that this is not a literal story. One was raised from the dead and his name was Lazarus and they did not believe!
The parable does contain a warning of Judah's coming torment in the transitional period.
It is imo a parody of sorts taken from the Greek view of the afterlife because this view had greatly affected the thinking of that time and the thinking of the Pharisees.

JMO Barry