|
Post by genesda on Aug 8, 2003 5:24:59 GMT -5
Ok, Soul Sleepers, let me get this straight. Upon death the spirit leaves the body and returns to God. The body dies and turns to dust. The soul, which is produced by the combination of God's spirit and flesh basically ceases to exist until the resurrection. is that also then, personal identity and ego? Yes, as the bible explains. Ecc. 9:5" For the living know that they will die, but dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten." 6 Also their love, and their hatred and their envy is now perished; neither have they any morea portion for ever in anythinh that is done under the sun."[/color] At the resurrection God's spirit returns to the dust, reconstituting it with the same soul for a judgement. As a result of that judgement the body is either burned and dies again with an extingushment of the soul or the body is glorified in some way with the soul and goes to God with the spirit. You keep saying "the soul" as though it is separate from a body. Yes, at the resurrection, God will raise up the bodies of the saved from the grave glorify them and take them to heaven. The saved living will change from the carnal body to a glorified body and join the others. After 1000 years more, the wicked will be resurrected and will suffer the lake of fire.[/color] Is this what you believe?[/quote]
|
|
|
Post by RealistState on Aug 8, 2003 5:50:12 GMT -5
i have the writings of Josephus and have read the statement in context. The Greeks did not believe in the resurrection. they believed that once the body was gone it was gone forever. But they held that the soul was deathless and survived the body. Josephus believed in the pagan Greek idea of the immortality of the soul which he forcefully says comes not from the scriptures but from Plato, and combind it with the hebrew bible doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. Most churches teach this same nonsence saying that at the resurrection the soul will be reunited with the body. Notice the striking similarity between Joseohus discourse to the Greeks concerning Hades and the parable of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16. I'm intrigued by this. The Discourse is some 2058 words; he mentions Plato once; and yet you claim that this authoritatively proves that Josephus (a historian) believed that the theology of the "immortal soul" comes from the pagan Greeks. I'm afraid the correlation is weak at best.
|
|
|
Post by Protestant on Aug 8, 2003 6:02:01 GMT -5
Yes he metions Plato once. How many times would you have liked him to mention him? What difference does it make anyway how many times Plato is mentioned? As i mentioned earlier it was the Jewish Philo of Alexandria who was a devoted student of Plato who brought immortal-soulism into the Religion of the Jews.
it is a known fact that Plato believed in the "immortal soul" and that the Jews did not. this is why immortal-soulism is not found in the bible.
|
|
|
Post by RealistState on Aug 8, 2003 6:11:20 GMT -5
Philo of Alexandria. (20BC – 47AD) This famous Alexandrian scholar became the most conspicuous champion of the immortality of the soul concept that he derived chiefly from Plato. Flourishing at the beginning of the Christian era he contributed materially to the acceptance of the immortal soul concept among both Jews and Christians. He was the most distinguished of all Hellenic Jewish scholars. He was a native and life long resident of Alexandria. His life completely spanned the 33-year life of Jesus and he was contemporaneous with the early activities of the apostles as well. Philo came from a rich and influential priestly family and had a Pharisaic background. He received the highest Jewish and Greek education of the times and was intimately acquainted with Platonic philosophy, so much so that he was called the ‘Jewish Plato’. Philo taught that death was a separation of the immortal soul from the body. The unbodied soul does not die. It is inextinguishable and deathless. Philo did more than any other single individual of the Hebrew race to do away with the original teachings of the bible on the origin, nature, and destiny of man. That's an interesting and quite convincing bio of Philo of Alexandria. I found this bio at http://www.encyclopedia.com: (fi´lo) or Philo Judaeus [Lat.,=Philo the Jew], c.20 BC-c.AD 50, Alexandrian Jewish philosopher. His writings have had an enormous influence on both Jewish and Christian thought, and particularly upon the Alexandrian theologians Clement and Origen. All that is known of his life is that he was sent to Rome c.AD 40 to represent the Jews of Alexandria in seeking the restoration of privileges lost because they had refused to obey an imperial edict to worship Caligula. Philo was the first important thinker to attempt to reconcile biblical religion with Greek philosophy. In so doing he developed an allegorical interpretation of Scripture that enabled him to find many of the doctrines of Greek philosophy in the Torah (the Pentateuch). An eclectic and a mystic, Philo emphasized the total transcendence and perfection of God, and in order to account for creation and the relation between the infinite God and the finite world, he used the concept of the Logos . Logos is the intermediary through which God's will acts and is thus the creative power that orders the world. Along with the Logos, Philo posited a whole realm of beings or potencies that bridge the gap between the Creator and his creation. Only fragments of Philo's works remain, but numerous quotations from his writings are found in early Christian literature. and this from www.earlychurch.org.uk/philo.htmlThe writings of Philo are the most important surviving documents from the world of Hellenistic Judaism.[1] They furnish us with a great deal of first hand information concerning the religion of the Jews outside of Israel, New Testament background and the interaction of Judaism within a Gentile culture.[2] Philo was deeply influenced by Middle Platonism,[3] Aristotle, the Neo-Pythagoreans, the Cynics and the Stoics. He stood at the end of a long Jewish tradition whose thoughts he developed, as evidenced by his references to the works of his predecessors.[4] Like them he attempted to interpret the Old Testament Scriptures in such as way as to bridge the gap between Judaism and intellectual paganism[5] rather than attempting to produce his own philosophical system.[6] Philo made extensive use of allegory in his writings, but it would be a mistake to assume that he was the first of the Alexandrian Jews to allegorise Scripture. In fact, he stood almost at the end of a long tradition of men who wrote as Jews for Gentile ears.[7] Previous writers, however, had not thought of their interpretations as allegorical,[8] but rather as 'proper' or 'fitting' in that they corresponded with what the interpreter understood as the nature and character of God.[9] Philo recognised several levels of interpretation that he regarded as 'literal', ranging from the literalistic to sophisticated.[10] He claimed to find in the text itself indications that it was not intended literally. For example, the Trees of Life and of the Knowledge of Good and Evil are seen as being intended symbolically because no such plant have ever existed on earth.[11] For Philo a "literal or better, a literalistic interpretation is to be rejected when it is either blasphemous or ridiculous. The kind of literal interpretation that was rejected by Philo is the kind of interpretation that was rejected by Jewish interpreters as far back as Aristobulus."[12] Philo was, on the other hand, the first writer who attempted to maintain the validity of both the literal and allegorical interpretations of Scripture,[13] because he considered both to be divinely inspired.[14] This appears most clearly in the Questions and Answers on Genesis and Exodus. In both of these works, literal and allegorical interpretations lie side by side. Philo is obviously more interested in the allegorical interpretation, but, for the most part, the literal interpretations are also considered valid and valuable. The same is true in... [On the Creation and Allegorical Interpretation]. Of the twenty seven times that allegorical terms appear, only five involve the rejection of a non-allegorical interpretation."[15] Though they were not preserved by the Jews,[16] Philo's works were treasured by Christian writers[17] who seized upon his concept of the Logos, thinking that it was the same as the Logos of the prologue of John's Gospel.[18] To Philo the Logos was "the instrument by which God makes the world and the intermediary by which the human intelligence as it is purified ascends to God again"[19] .However, Philo's Logos is not Divine, nor is it a person and it has no existence apart from the role it performs.[20] Although it was once generally accepted among scholars that there was some dependence by John on Philo's concept of the Logos, it seems more likely that both were drawing on a common Jewish background, into which Philo imported Platonic concepts.[21] So important was Philo to the early church writers that some, such as Eusebius and Jerome even went so far as to claim that he was a Christian. Eusebius records a legendary meeting between Philo and Peter in Rome[22] and both writers argue that Philo's work concerning Jewish ascetics (On the Contemplative Life) is a first hand report of the church (and monasteries!) founded by Mark in Alexandria.[23] It is true to say that by the fourth century "Pious legend would allow no writer so influential on early Christian exegesis to remain unconverted."[24] And this from here : www.newadvent.org/cathen/12023a.htmBorn about 25 B.C.. His family, of a sacerdotal line, was one of the most powerful of the populous Jewish colony of Alexandria. His brother Alexander Lysimachus was steward to Anthony's second daughter, and married one of his sons to the daughter of Herod Agrippa, whom he had put under financial obligations. Alexander's son, Tiberius Alexander, apostatized and became procurator of Judea and Prefect of Egypt. Philo must have received a Jewish education, studying the laws and national traditions, but he followed also the Greek plan of studies (grammar with reading of the poets, geometry, rhetoric, dialectics) which he reagarded as a preparation for philosophy. Notwithstanding the lack of direct information about his philosophical training, his works show that he had a first hand knowledge of the stoical theories then prevailing, Plato's dialogues, the neo-Pythagorean works, and the moral popular literature, the outcome of Cynicism. He remained, however, profoundly attached to the Jewish religion with all the practices which it implied among the Jews of the dispersion and of which the basis was the unity of worship at the Temple in Jerusalem. Toward the Alexandrine community and the duties which it required of him, his attitude was perhaps changeable; he possessed in his youth a taste for an exclusively contemplative life and solitary retreats; and he complains of an official function which forced him to abandon his studies. Later he became engrossed with the material and moral interests of the community. His "Allegorical Commentary" often alludes to the vocations to which the Alexandrine Jews were subjected; a special treatise is devoted to the persecution of Flaccus, Prefect of Egypt. The best-known episode of his life is the voyage he made to Rome in 39; he had been chosen as head of the empkmtyolby which was to lay before Emperor Caius Caligula the complaints of the Jews regarding the introduction of statues of the emperor in the synagogues. This hardship, due to the Alexandrians, was all the more grievous to the Jews, as they had long been known for their loyalty, and their attachment to the empire was doubtless one of the chief causes of anti-Semitism at Alexandria. The drawing up of the account of the empkmtyolby shortly after the death of Caius (41) is the latest known fact in the life of Philo. It would appear that Philo studies was influenced by a great many of the Early Greek philosophers. Particularly I'm interested of his influence by the stoic writers.
|
|
|
Post by RealistState on Aug 8, 2003 6:14:11 GMT -5
Yes he metions Plato once. How many times would you have liked him to mention him? What difference does it make anyway how many times Plato is mentioned? As i mentioned earlier it was the Jewish Philo of Alexandria who was a devoted student of Plato who brought immortal-soulism into the Religion of the Jews. it is a known fact that Plato believed in the "immortal soul" and that the Jews did not. this is why immortal-soulism is not found in the bible. It's not the number of times he mentions it, but again, in the context of the Discourse I do not see how it supports your claim that Josephus believed the theology of Immortal Soul-ism came from the Greeks and not from how the Jews interprepted the Torah.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen on Aug 8, 2003 9:22:13 GMT -5
Like many Pharisees in his day he had abandoned the doctrine of soul-sleep as taught in the bible and have accepted platonic philosophy instead. This heresy was largely brought into the jewish nation by Philo of Alexandria Hi, Protestant ... I've been following your discussion with RealistState (and enjoying it!) I have a question about Philo's teachings ... were they in place before Jesus began his ministry? If so, do you see any pkmtyolpages where Jesus may be correcting Philo's understandings?
|
|
|
Post by Protestant on Aug 8, 2003 17:51:37 GMT -5
Philo taught a lot of things. You can even buy a large book on him and his beliefs. I have seen it but not read it.
Regarding the state of the dead there were two schools of thought around during Jesus' time. One was the traditional hebrew teaching of soul-sleep from the bible. The other was the immortal- soul doctrine from the Greeks.
Jesus never came right out and said that immortal-soulism was wrong. If fact his parable to the rich man and lazarus uses imagery based on it. If you read the "Discourse to the Greeks concerning Hades" by Josephus you will find a striking similarity between it and the parable.
After the close of the Old Testament canon about 425 BC a series of Apocryphal and pseudopigraphical Jewish writings began to appear. These ranged in time between 200 BC and 100 AD. In these writings are found two distinctly opposing views on the origin, nature, and destiny of man. These two views are:
(1) Conditionalism: Man is a candidate for immortality but does not possess it naturally. Mans body, mind, soul, and spirit are mortal and that death is an unconscious sleep. Immortality is a gift from God given to His followers on the day of the resurrection on the condition that man has accepted the God’s covenant of salvation. The wicked that reject this condition suffer the punishment of eternal death. Fire being the method of execution.
(2) Immortal-soulism: the idea that man has an immortal soul living inside a mortal body. That man is naturally immortal apart from God and therefore man is conscious in death. God’s true followers enter paradise at death while the immortal wicked suffer for eternity in an underground pit of fire.
Here are the titles of 8 Jewish books that teach Old Testament Conditionalism and 7 Jewish books that teach Pagan Greek Immortal-soulism. All written about the same time period (200 BC- 100 AD).
8 Conditionalist books: Book of Tobit Sirach Jewish Sibylline oracles Ethiopian Enoch (1st) Slavonic Enoch (2nd) Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch 2 Esdras Dead Sea scrolls
7 Immortal-soulist books: 2 Maccabees Book of Jubilees Wisdom of Solomon Book of Judith 4 Maccabees Philo’s writings Josephus’ writings
In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16)Christ mentions the fact that the Pharisees had rejected the bible
(28) for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’ (29) Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ (30) And he said ‘No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ (31) 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.’ ”
note how Jesus mentions to the pharisees that the bible (moses and the prophets) contains all the information necessary for a person to avoid being lost. The Pharisee says NO. Send someone from the dead instead. Christ upheld the scripture as more authoritative by saying that if they wont accept the bible they wont be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.
That is exactly what happened. Jesus raised his friend Lazarus from the dead who had been dead for 4 days. When the leaders saw Lazarus raised from the grave they wanted to kill Jesus and lazarus.
JOHN 11:11-14; 43-44. “...Our friend Lazarus sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up’ then His disciples said ‘Lord if he sleeps he will do well’ However, Jesus spoke of his death, but they thought that He was speaking about taking rest in sleep. Then Jesus said to them plainly, ‘Lazarus is dead’ ...Now when He had said all these things, He cried out with a loud voice, ‘Lazarus, come forth!’ And he who had died came out bound hand and foot with grave clothes, and his face was wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them ‘Loose him and let him go”.
Lazarus is sleeping Lazarus is dead. The bible constantly portrays death as being a state of unconscious sleep. Lazarus was asleep in his grave, he was not singing praises to God in paradise when Christ called him. There is no mention that any soul had left Lazarus’ body and had to be brought back. Jesus did not say “soul of Lazarus, come back down to earth and re-enter your body” Jesus said “Lazarus come forth”, indicating that the mind and character of Lazarus were dead in his grave along with his body. After Lazarus was raised from the dead there is no record of him mentioning that he had gone to paradise or that he was in a conscious state while his body was dead.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen on Aug 8, 2003 20:13:04 GMT -5
Here are the titles of 8 Jewish books that teach Old Testament Conditionalism and 7 Jewish books that teach Pagan Greek Immortal-soulism. All written about the same time period (200 BC- 100 AD). 8 Conditionalist books:Book of Tobit Sirach Jewish Sibylline oracles Ethiopian Enoch (1st) Slavonic Enoch (2nd) Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch 2 Esdras Dead Sea scrolls 7 Immortal-soulist books:2 Maccabees Book of Jubilees Wisdom of Solomon Book of Judith 4 Maccabees Philo’s writings Josephus’ writings Protestant, I decided to start with the books I have access to, and read them for myself. I started at the top, with Tobit, and have not finished it. However, I have come across some (admittedly) vague references that I'm not sure agree with your definition of Conditionalism. From your own studies, do you have a reference somewhere at your fingertips that would list specific pkmtyolpages? I DON'T expect you to read all the books for me ... LOL! But I thought you might have the pkmtyolpages already, so I can note them as I read through. Otherwise, I don't know ... should I take notes as I go, and come back and ask questions? I can give you some "for examples" out of Tobit ... Tobit 3:6 "So now, deal with me as you please, and command my life breath to be taken from me, that I may go from the face of the earth into dust. It is better for me to die than to live, because I have heard insulting calumnies, and I am overwhelmed with grief."Here, I agree, it sounds as if Tobit believes when he dies, he is forever gone. However, this is the rest of the exact same pkmtyolpage ... "Lord, command me to be delivered from such anguish; let me go to the everlasting abode; Lord, refuse me not. For it is better for me to die than to endure so much misery in life, and to hear these insults!" He speaks of the everlasting abode ... sheol? The netherworld? Some real place beyond life on earth, it seems to me. Going on in chapter three, we come to verse 10, where Sarah is mentioned: 10 "That day she was deeply grieved in spirit. She went in tears to an upstairs room in her father's house with the intention of hanging herself. But she reconsidered, saying to herself: "No! People would level this insult against my father: 'You had only one beloved daughter, but she hanged herself because of ill fortune!' And thus would I cause my father in his old age to go down to the nether world laden with sorrow. It is far better for me not to hang myself, but to beg the Lord to have me die, so that I need no longer live to hear such insults."Besides mentioning her father in the nether world, I think this verse implies a belief Sarah has that suicide is sinful, and it would be better to pray for God to take her life. Last verse (as far as I've read ) is Chapter 4, verse 19, where Tobit is giving counsel to his son Tobiah ... 19 "4 ... If the Lord chooses, he raises a man up; but if he should decide otherwise, he casts him down to the deepest recesses of the nether world. So now, my son, keep in mind my commandments, and never let them be erased from your heart."Again, a mention of a nether world, not a ceased exitence ... ?
|
|
muse
Full Member
Posts: 164
|
Post by muse on Aug 8, 2003 20:44:27 GMT -5
Hey citizen, how are you doing? I am sure someone has brought this up and I missed it, but if your soul goes to heaven immeaditatley with Jesus, than what is the point of the judgement? I don't really have a view, I think if anything your spirit goes back to God and your soul goes back to dust until the ressurection and you get a new body. I think it was gene who put it quite beautifully and here is my ragged statement. I really haven't prayed about it or studyed though so now I have a new topic! yay.
|
|
|
Post by Protestant on Aug 8, 2003 20:53:38 GMT -5
The nether world is the abode of the dead. There is nothing implied here that the nether world is a place of conscious thought.
Going down to the nether world laden with sorrow is the same as saying that he went to the grave laden with sorrow.
Exactly. Jesus taught that rewards and punishments are given at the resurrection after the judgement not at the time of a persons death. If people are in heaven or hell before the resurrection then there is no need for a judgement.
|
|
|
Post by Pietro on Aug 9, 2003 8:36:32 GMT -5
well at least you admit that Roman theology is not in the bible but is just pagan Greek mythology. That is an excellent example of your tendency to distort the truth for your own purpose. What I said was, "If one goes the Sola Scriptura route and accepts only the protestant canon then one seems forced to also adopt the OT understanding of death and soul sleep in a place (if only as metaphor) such as Sheol/hades/netherworld, an understanding of death shared with Mesopotamian pagan mythology.” Sheol/Hades/Netherworld are common to the Bible itself and mesopotamian pagan mythology. Sheol is in the Bible not “Roman theology". Roman theology, on the issue of soul, does benefit from the progress of Greek philosophy. Perhaps you might also benefit by learning the distinction between mythology and philosophy.
|
|
|
Post by Pietro on Aug 9, 2003 8:57:54 GMT -5
I'm glad you're happy with your Rcc. By the way, Greek paganism is not the only thing that's accepted in the Rcc. VooDoo is practiced in it in some countries and other pagan practices are also allowed depending on where that particular church is located. I love that Voodoo that you do so well.- Sorry. Inculturation has always been a challenging and fascinating as well as controversial aspect of evangelization. Simply because something is pagan does not necessarily mean it ought not be tolerated. Perhaps you are referring to some practices that had been given new Christian meaning. CCC854: By her very mission, the Church . . . travels the same journey as all humanity and shares the same earthly lot with the world: she is to be a leaven and, as it were, the soul of human society in its renewal by Christ and transformation into the family of God. Missionary endeavor requires patience. It begins with the proclamation of the Gospel to peoples and groups who do not yet believe in Christ, continues with the establishment of Christian communities that are a sign of God's presence in the world, and leads to the foundation of local churches. It must involve a process of inculturation if the Gospel is to take flesh in each people's culture. There will be times of defeat. With regard to individuals, groups, and peoples it is only by degrees that (the Church) touches and penetrates them and so receives them into a fullness which is Catholic.
|
|
|
Post by Heart4Him on Aug 9, 2003 13:22:29 GMT -5
i have the writings of Josephus and have read the statement in context. The Greeks did not believe in the resurrection. they believed that once the body was gone it was gone forever. But they held that the soul was deathless and survived the body. Josephus believed in the pagan Greek idea of the immortality of the soul which he forcefully says comes not from the scriptures but from Plato, and combind it with the hebrew bible doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. Most churches teach this same nonsence saying that at the resurrection the soul will be reunited with the body. Notice the striking similarity between Joseohus discourse to the Greeks concerning Hades and the parable of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16. It appears that you are saying the Jesus used what He thought was a falsehood, presenting it as real, to teach a truth. Sorry, but I don't buy that at all! Jesus did not have to stoop to presenting falsehoods as truths to make a point. He stuck with truth. He presented Abraham's bosum/Hades as existing with the spirits of the dead in it, and so it did. I also don't think you back up your statement that Josephus got his belief in the immortality of the soul from the Greeks rather than Scripture.
|
|
|
Post by Protestant on Aug 9, 2003 19:12:04 GMT -5
perhaps you might benefit from knowing that Satan is in control of greek philosophy and the immortal souls is an integral part of it.
The idea that hades (the abode of the dead) is a place of life is a pagan belief not a bible/Hebrew one. You cannot accept the imagery as true and accept the techings of Jesus at the same time they are mutually exclusive.
If that is the case then why did Josephus say that the immortality of the soul is the doctrine of Plato? The Pharisees got it from the Greeks.
Methodist-Congregationalist clergyman, Amos Phelps (1805-1874):
"This doctrine [of natural immortality] can be traced through the muddy channels of a corrupted Christianity, a perverted Judaism, and pagan philosophy, and a superstitious idolatry, to the great instigator of mischief in the garden of Eden. The Protestants borrowed it from the Catholics, the Catholics from the Pharisees, the Pharisees from the pagans, and the pagans from the old serpent who first preached the doctrine amid the lowly bowels of Paradise to an audience all too willing to hear and heed the new and fascinating theology: 'Ye shall not surely die."'
You're unbelievable! The bible does not teach that man has an immortal anything. Only God is immortal.
|
|
|
Post by Heart4Him on Aug 9, 2003 21:52:25 GMT -5
The idea that hades (the abode of the dead) is a place of life is a pagan belief not a bible/Hebrew one. You cannot accept the imagery as true and accept the techings of Jesus at the same time they are mutually exclusive. What I don't accept is the concept that Jesus Christ referred to fictional places which are the concept of Satan (per you) as real and used them to teach a truth -without ever dismissing their existence. Doesn't follow the method Jesus used in all the rest of His teaching, which was to stick with the truth at all times. You actually have not presented any proof of this. As pointed out, Josephus only mentions Plato once. What is more likely is that there was a belief in the immortality of the spirit since the fall of man, and it is one thing that was pkmtyolped down since. God created man in His likeness. Do you really think that was in regards to the physical body? He gave us our souls, our spirits. Ecclesiastes 12 taught that the body returns to dust but the spirit goes to God who gave it. Jesus told the the thief, "Today you will be with me in Paradise", not "after a period of unconsciousness, you will be with Me" . Paul wrote "We would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord" not "we would rather be physically dead and after a time of unconsciousness, be with the Lord." And Jesus did not teach soul sleep. So you can quote Jospehus and Plato and others, but I do not believe that Jesus presented a lie as truth. And I believe that as one who has been forgiven, I may physically die, but not spiritually die. Why the need for the ad hominen comment?
|
|