Did Christ Die the Second Death

[Gustave]

Remember, the Jews did not believe in an immortal soul.

[Robert]

There is no life after death, until the resurrection. Any teaching outside this truth is the highest form of heresy.

[John317]

Truer words were never spoken, Robert.

[John317]

Remember, the Jews did not believe in an immortal soul.

Originally Posted By: Gustave

That is simply incorrect Robert - ALL Jews except the Sadducees believed in immediate life after death...

...As the following Scriptures clearly demonstrate.

I believe Robert is talking about the teachings in the Bible. Many of the Jews had all kinds of false beliefs. It's a well-known fact that the Jews of the second century BC were influenced by Greek ideas about the afterlife. The notion that the soul is immortal came from the Greeks, by way of the Egyptians and Babylonians.

That's why you don't find the teaching that the soul is immortal in the Bible. There's absolutely nothing in the Scriptures about God putting an immortal soul within man.

[John317]

Wisdom 2 in Catholic & Orthodox Bibles

For they have said, reasoning with themselves, but not right: The time of our life is short and tedious, and in the end of a man there is no remedy, and no man hath been known to have returned from hell: For we are born of nothing, and after this we shall be as if we had not been: for the breath in our nostrils is smoke: and speech a spark to move our heart, Which being put out, our body shall be ashes, and our spirit shall be poured abroad as soft air, and our life shall pass away as the trace of a cloud, and shall be dispersed as a mist, which is driven away by the beams of the sun, and overpowered with the heat thereof: And our name in time shall be forgotten, and no man shall have any remembrance of our works. For our time is as the passing of a shadow, and there is no going back of our end: for it is fast sealed, and no man returneth. Come therefore, and let us enjoy the good things that are present, and let us speedily use the creatures as in youth. Let us fill ourselves with costly wine, and ointments: and let not the flower of the time pass by us. Let us crown ourselves with roses, before they be withered: let no meadow escape our riot. Let none of us go without his part in luxury: let us everywhere leave tokens of joy: for this is our portion, and this our lot. Let us oppress the poor just man, and not spare the widow, nor honour the ancient grey hairs of the aged. But let our strength be the law of justice: for that which is feeble, is found to be nothing worth. Let us therefore lie in wait for the just, because he is not for our turn, and he is contrary to our doings, and upbraideth us with transgressions of the law, and divulgeth against us the sins of our way of life. He boasteth that he hath the knowledge of God, and calleth himself the son of God. He is become a censurer of our thoughts. He is grievous unto us, even to behold: for his life is not like other men's, and his ways are very different. We are esteemed by him as triflers, and he abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness, and he preferreth the latter end of the just, and glorieth that he hath God for his father. Let us see then if his words be true, and let us prove what shall happen to him, and we shall know what his end shall be. For if he be the true son of God, he will defend him, and will deliver him from the hands of his enemies. Let us examine him by outrages and tortures, that we may know his meekness and try his patience. Let us condemn him to a most shameful death: for there shall be respect had unto him by his words. These things they thought, and were deceived: for their own malice blinded them. And they knew not the secrets of God, nor hoped for the wages of justice, nor esteemed the honour of holy souls. For God created man incorruptible, and to the image of his own likeness he made him. But by the envy of the devil, death came into the world: And they follow him that are of his side

The book, Wisdom, has absolutely no authority, Gustave.

It's interesting to read for historical purposes but it isn't canonical.

[Gustave]

There is no life after death, until the resurrection. Any teaching outside this truth is the highest form of heresy.

Is that why we read the 1st Christian "believers" in full acceptance of it?

...From the actual Bible?

...Do you really believe this?

[John317]

...- ALL Jews except the Sadducees believed in immediate life after death...

...As the following Scriptures clearly demonstrate.

Acts 12,10

When they were past the first and the second ward, they came unto the iron gate that leadeth unto the city; which opened to them of his own accord: and they went out, and passed on through one street; and forthwith the angel departed from him. And when Peter was come to himself, he said, Now I know of a surety, that the LORD hath sent his angel, and hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews. And when he had considered the thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where MANY were gathered together praying. And as Peter knocked at the door of the gate, a damsel came to hearken, named Rhoda. And when she knew Peter's voice, she opened not the gate for gladness, but ran in, and told how Peter stood before the gate. And THEY said unto her, Thou art mad. But she constantly affirmed that it was even so. Then said THEY, "It" is his angel.

James, the brother of John had been captured and killed by the sword...

...Peter had also been taken & it was believed Peter was to share in the same fate.

...Thus, when Peter showed up at a house of "believers" they thought it was his ghost.

Jews ( with the exception of the Sadducees ) believed that at death....

...A holy Jew would become an 'ANGEL' or a Spirit.

...This specific belief the Sadducees rejected.

Do you think it's safe to base our beliefs on the mistaken ideas of the Jews during that period? The Bible nowhere supports the belief that when people die, they become an angel or spirit.

It says that it was Peter's angel. They didn't say it was Peter in the form of an angel. There's no suggestion that they believed Peter was dead. The text says that they believed the one knocking at the door was "THE angel [Gr angelos] of him."

Since Peter was locked up, they didn't see how it could possibly be Peter at the door. Yet the voice being that of Peter, they thought it must be Peter's guardian angel. The use of the definite article shows that they believed it was a particular angel, that is, Peter's guardian angel.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: Robert

There is no life after death, until the resurrection. Any teaching outside this truth is the highest form of heresy.

Is that why we read the 1st Christian "believers" in full acceptance of it?

...From the actual Bible?

...Do you really believe this?

Where does it say that the first Christian believers accepted the immortality of the soul?

The Bible's teaching on death is that the dead do not know anything. It says that the dead do not praise the Lord but that the living praise Him. Jesus said, "All who are in their graves will hear the voice of the Son of man." He doesn't say the dead will be in heaven or anywhere else but in the grave when they hear His voice. Lazarus was in the tomb when Christ called him back to life. Jesus said, "Come out," not "come down."

Check out what God told Adam would happen when he died. Gen. 3: 19.

Genesis 3:19

By the sweat of your face

you shall eat bread,

till you return to the ground,

for out of it you were taken;

for you are dust,

and to dust you shall return."

There's no suggestion that Adam would survive death and be conscious somewhere else. All of Adam returned to the ground and returned to dust. The breath of life returns to God who gave it, but the breath of life is not a conscious entity. The conscious entity is the living person who consists of a body and the breath of life. When these are together, there is a living soul, or a living person. When they are separated, there is a dead soul, or a dead person.

The Bible very clearly teaches that when we no longer have breath in us, we die. It is the same with the animals. The process of death happens to both animals and people in the same way. We have no natural immortality. The teaching on the immortality of the soul entered into Christianity through Greek philosophy.

The Bible shows it was Satan who inspired the idea. When Eve told him that God had said they would die if they ate of the forbidden fruit, what was Satan reply? He said, "You will not surely die." Satan flatly contradicted God, thus making God out to be a liar. That lie continues to this very day and has been adopted by almost the entire world.

Humans were made in God's image and therefore God will resurrect them from the grave.

Christ is our only hope of life. We have no life and no hope apart from Jesus Christ.

1 John 5:12

Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life.

What will happen to the wicked?

Isaiah 1:28

But rebels and sinners shall be broken together,

and those who forsake the Lord shall be consumed.

Obadiah 1:16

For as you have drunk on my holy mountain,

so all the nations shall drink continually;

they shall drink and swallow,

and shall be as though they had never been.

Malachi 4:1-3

"For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, and all the proud, yes, all who do wickedly will be stubble. And the day which is coming shall burn them up, says the Lord of hosts. That will leave them neither root nor branch. [2]...[3] You shall trample the wicked, for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet, on the day that I do this, says the Lord of hosts."

The Bible Says

After death a person returns to dust (Ps. 104: 29), knows nothing (Ecc. 9: 5), possesses no mental powers (Ps. 146: 4), has nothing to do with anything on earth (Ecc. 9: 6), does not live (2 Kings 20: 1), waits in the grave (Job 17: 13), and continues not (Job 14: 1, 2).

[Gustave]

Do you think it's safe to base our beliefs on the mistaken ideas of the Jews during that period?

[John317]

Get your Bible and confirm what I'm telling you Strong's says...

...Tell me where I've fudged things.

"IT IS HIS [ G846 / autos ] angel.

G846

1) himself, herself, themselves, itself

2) he, she, it

3) the same

You just demonstrated to me that you don't know NT Greek. If you did, you wouldn't have said what you did in the above.

Do you know how to parse? Please parse the following from Acts 12: 15:

ho angelos estin autou

NOTICE THAT THE GREEK PRONOUN IS NOT AUTOS BUT AUTOU. DO YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE? You will know the difference if you understand what you're talking about here.

Any text-book used to teach Greek grammar will contain this information in the first several chapters. If you have one, look up the Greek pronouns.

[John317]

...Previously it was boasted the Jews didn't even believe in life after death.

...I just demonstrated they most certainly did.

...According to the Bible.

I never denied that many of the Jews of Jesus' day believed in the immortality of the soul. 2 Maccabees shows the evidence of this.

What we're saying is that the Bible doesn't teach it.

But yes, you are right that the Jews of Christ's day commonly believed in ghosts and that humans had a spirit in them that went on living after the death of the body.

But you'll notice a big difference between the view of death in the canon and the view in the non-canonical books. The latter were written after the ideas of the Greeks about the soul's immortality began to influence the Jewish people. Remember that Aristotle, for instance, wrote at length on the Immortality of the soul. His view, of course, was not inspired by God, and in fact, it contradicted the revelations of God to His prophets. Unfortunately, many of the early Christian church Father's were heavily influenced by the Greek philosophers, and they covered those ideas with a Christian garb, yet the ideas remained pagan nonetheless.

[John317]

The Bible nowhere supports the belief that when people die, they become an angel or spirit.

Originally Posted By: Gustave

Not so John317

Matthew 10,28

And fear not them which kill the body, but are NOT able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell

A person who is alive is killed by a serial killer...

...The serial killer has indeed killed their victims body.

...However according to Christ the serial killer was not able to kill the victims soul.

That equates to the soul STILL BEING ALIVE John317...

...As horrific as that may sound to you that's exactly what the text is saying.

The same text teaches that the soul can be destroyed, or killed, by God.

Jesus is talking about the fact that while people can kill our bodies and thus end our present life, they can't keep us from being resurrected by God and given immortality.

The Bible teaches that God alone has the power to destroy the wicked and the power to bring people back from the grave to face either everlasting life with God or everlasting death.

[Gustave]

You just demonstrated to me that you don't know NT Greek. If you did, you wouldn't have said what you did in the above.

THE MESSENGER OF HIM....

...In English; IT is his angel.

Do you have any respect for the scholarship for Donald Arthur Carson John317?

...That's what he said about that text.

...And I'm telling you he agrees with me.

...Or it would be correct to say I agree with him there.

Furthermore, your suggesting that my parsing skills are lacking when you claim Hebrews 4:15 teaches Christ could have sinned and lost His salvation is laughable. I'm not sure what it is about JW's and SDA's that have them so boastful of their abilities but it's right there isn't it, lol.

So, you can use some logic here John to help narrow it down...

...You simply take what the Bible says the Sadducees DIDN'T believe.

...And interpret the text in such a way that doesn't violate what the Bible has already said.

Acts 23,6

But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question. And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided. For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess BOTH.

John317, do you believe that the Sadducees did not believe in Genesis 19,1?

...Sadducees accepted ONLY the 1st 5 Books of the Bible.

...And that means they accepted "ANGELS".

Look at the following verse.

Acts 23,15

And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees' part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit OR an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God

The text has already told you that the Sadducees rejected the Resurrection AND angels OR spirits....

...Since we absolutely know the Sadducees believed in angles such as mentioned in Genesis 19,1.

...What else do you seriously think it would mean John?

Do you agree that the Pharisees, AT THAT TIME, absolutely believed that the spirit of man continued on after death? Do you agree to that John317?

Next, do you agree that what the Sadducees rejected was that at death man would become a spirit OR an angel or would participate in a future Resurrection of the body? Do I have your agreement that's what the Bible states the Sadducees rejected?

Answer those questions and I'll be back to complete some parsing and logic follow through with you.

[Gustave]

I never denied that many of the Jews of Jesus' day believed in the immortality of the soul. 2 Maccabees shows the evidence of this.

What we're saying is that the Bible doesn't teach it.

[John317]

The latter were written after the ideas of the Greeks about the soul's immortality began to influence the Jewish people. Remember that Aristotle, for instance, wrote at length on the Immortality of the soul. His view, of course, was not inspired by God, and in fact, it contradicted the revelations of God to His prophets. Unfortunately, many of the early Christian church Father's were heavily influenced by the Greek philosophers, and they covered those ideas with a Christian garb, yet the ideas remained pagan nonetheless.

Originally Posted By: Gustave

Not following you here John - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written after the ideas of the Greeks...

...Are you suggesting that some of those "pagan ideas" got in there as well?

Of course not. God didn't allow any false teachings into the canon.

The canon is the Protestant Bible.

The false teachings clearly got into non-canonical books, because God had nothing to do with them. They are a mixture of truth and error. The canon, on the other hand, is pure truth.

[John317]

But you'll notice a big difference between the view of death in the canon and the view in the non-canonical books.

Originally Posted By: Gustave

Everything in my Bible is canonical....

...I'm not sure you even know what the Canon is / means.

...Who formulated your canon given that you've accepted both Rabbinic authority & people subsequent to Luther.

As I said earlier, the canon is the Protestant Bible: the Old Testament books accepted by the Hebrews and quoted in the NT; and the books of the New Testament from Matthew to Revelation.

[John317]

But yes, you are right that the Jews of Christ's day commonly believed in ghosts and that humans had a spirit in them that went on living after the death of the body.

Quote:

Ok, and if it was such a gross distorted false belief...

...Don't you think Jesus would have straightened it out.

...Instead of making "dualist" statements - over and over again?

Christ didn't straighten everyone out regarding all their mistaken beliefs. But if we study the the entire Bible-- which includes the teachings of Jesus while on the earth-- we will see the truth about death. Jesus was actually very clear about it. See, for instance, what Jesus said in John 11.

[John317]

I never denied that many of the Jews of Jesus' day believed in the immortality of the soul. 2 Maccabees shows the evidence of this.

What we're saying is that the Bible doesn't teach it.

Originally Posted By: Gustave

2 Maccabees IS in my Bible...

...As it was in the Scriptures Jesus and His Apostles used.

...It's not my fault you opted to follow Rabbinic authority.

...Approximately 1600 years after the death of Christ.

Those books were in the Septuagint, but they weren't considered a part of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Jesus never refers to them, and neither do any of the writers of the NT.

I have no problem reading 2 Maccabees. It can help us to understand the Intertestimental period, but it is not inspired or authoritative. We don't get doctrine from any of those books.

If you can show me that Jesus considered those books to be Scripture, I will gladly accept them. Otherwise, no.

Even the Catholic Bibles concede that 2 Maccabees is not reliable history.

The last three verses of the book is additional evidence to me that it wasn't inspired.

Do you actually believe the book, Tobit, is historically accurate? Or the Song of the Three Young Worthies? Or Bel and the Dragon?

I notice that some of the Apocrypha even say that there were no more prophets at the time of the writing of the book.

1 Macc. 9: 27 says, "It was a time of great trouble for Israel, worse than anything that had happened to them SINCE THE TIME PROPHETS CEASED TO APPEAR AMONG THEM."

Since the writer is writing after prophets have ceased to appear, then what must we conclude about the writer?

The writer is conceding that he is not a prophet, right?

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

You just demonstrated to me that you don't know NT Greek. If you did, you wouldn't have said what you did in the above.

THE MESSENGER OF HIM....

...In English; IT is his angel.

Do you have any respect for the scholarship for Donald Arthur Carson John317?

...That's what he said about that text.

...And I'm telling you he agrees with me.

...Or it would be correct to say I agree with him there.

Furthermore, your suggesting that my parsing skills are lacking ....

Yes, I know without question that you don't know koine Greek because if you did, you wouldn't say what you're saying about the pronoun autos and about the meaning of Acts 12: 15. You are claiming that Acts 12: 15 means that the people believed the angel was Peter himself. But that is completely false. You will never see a published translation that reads that way because it is simply wrong. Anyone who translated it that way would prove himself to be a fake.

Look at the Greek text and tell me how you believe it should be translated. What's the significance of the pronoun in the last clause of that verse?

I have never even heard of Donald Arthur Carson. Who is he and what did he say? Please quote what he says.

Are you telling me you know koine Greek and can parse the words I asked you to parse? If so, then please parse them.

Here it is again:

Quote:

Do you know how to parse? Please parse the following from Acts 12: 15:

ho angelos estin autou

NOTICE THAT THE GREEK PRONOUN IS NOT AUTOS BUT AUTOU. DO YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE? You will know the difference if you understand what you're talking about here.

Any text-book used to teach Greek grammar will contain this information in the first several chapters. If you have one, look up the Greek pronouns

.

I'd like to see your answers to my questions.

[Robert]

Originally Posted By: Robert

There is no life after death, until the resurrection. Any teaching outside this truth is the highest form of heresy.

...Do you really believe this?

Absolutely!

[John317]

...Everything in my Bible is canonical....

...I'm not sure you even know what the Canon is / means.

Not if your Bible is Catholic.

The Apocrypha, or Deuterocanonical books, are not canonical. Even Jerome understood this. He placed them at the end of the Old Testament with the superscription "Apocrypha."

I have Bibles that contain those books, and I have no problem with them, as long as it is understood that they are not canonical.

Actually, I really like the (Catholic) New American Bible and consider it one of the most accuratte translations of the Critical Text of the NT. I admire many things about Catholic scholarship. I sometimes watch the Catholic channel and have many Catholic relatives. My wife was Catholic for the first 5 years of our marriage and I used to take her to mass and sit in the church with her during the service.

So I am not opposed to all things Catholic, nor do I dislike Catholics. What I don't like and believe in, though, are certain Catholic institutions and doctrines because they are contrary to the Scriptures.

[John317]

THE MESSENGER OF HIM....

...In English; IT is his angel.

Do you have any respect for the scholarship for Donald Arthur Carson John317?

...That's what he said about that text.

...And I'm telling you he agrees with me.

Like I say, I don't know anything about Donald Carson, but if he knows an ounce of NT Greek, he didn't say what you think he said. He is not saying that the Greek pronoun autou in Acts 12: 15 should be understood to mean "himself."

autou never, ever means "himself."

Please quote what Donald Carson says about that text so we can see if he agrees with you.

The problem here is that you believe Strong is saying the word in Acts 12: 15 is "autos" but that is false. Strong isn't saying this. You are misreading and misunderstanding Strong. Strong is giving you the lexicon form of the pronoun. The lexicon form is always nominative singular.

However, the form of the word in Acts 12: 15 is genitive singular. Genitive is possessive. It is third person singular masculine.

Therefore "autou" in Acts 12: 15 can ONLY be correctly translated as referring to Peter's angel, NOT to Peter himself.

The literal translation of the clause is, "...they said, 'It is the angel of him.'"

[Gustave]

Well John317, since you appear to be the authority of what Jews believe....

...You should take issue with the following from the Jewish Encyclopedia.

QUOTE:

Like ALL ancient peoples, the early Hebrews believed that the dead go down into the underworld and live there a colorless existence (comp. Isa. xiv. 15-19; Ezek. xxxii. 21-30). Only an occasional person, and he an especially fortunate one, like Enoch or Elijah, could escape from Sheol, and these were taken to heaven to the abode of Yhwh, where they became angels (comp. Slavonic Enoch, xxii.). In the Book of Job first the longing for a resurrection is expressed (xiv. 13-15), and then, if the Masoretic text may be trusted, a passing conviction that such a resurrection will occur (xix. 25, 26). The older Hebrew conception of life regarded the nation so entirely as a unit that no individual mortality or immortality was considered. Jeremiah (xxxi. 29) and Ezekiel (xviii.) had contended that the individual was the moral unit, and Job's hopes are based on this idea.

Like I said John, your premise ONLY works on people who are not educated...

...For Pete's sake, Froom even formally admitted there were NO soul sleeping adovcates until the 12th century.

...Yet you claim parsing Koine Greek demonstrates a belief you yourself admit was alien in 1st century Judaism.

If you would have taken the time to call a few Synagogues and talked to some Rabbi's...

...You would have realized something was wrong with your scholarship.

As for D.A. Carson his works are included in the Logos Bible software...

...And he is considered a heavy-weight Greek scholar.

...Perhaps by all Prots EXCEPT SDA's, JW's, Christadelphians, ( Adventists ).

[Lysimachus]

Gustave,

Obviously you are completely unaware of the Hellenistic infiltrations in Jewish society. These Jewish encyclopedias were written AFTER the fact---after Alexander's divided empire had Hellenized Judea, and flocks of Jews migrated into Alexandria. After new generations were born during the Intertestamental period, this is not only when we find a plethora of psuedepigraphal mythology arise on the scene from scores and scores of Jewish scribes claiming to be "divine prophets", these men were infected with the perfidious Greek mythology of the immortality of the soul. Therefore, such Jews who wrote these Encyclopedias are clearly not going to admit or confess that the Old Testament Jews, that lived approximately 300-500 years prior to Christ, believed in a conditionalist faith.

IF you want accurate documentation on this issue, I suggest you read Dr. LeRoy Edwin Froom's "The Conditionalist Faith of Our Fathers" - (2 volume set, 2,476 pages) -- this documentation spells the death knell on all those who pretend to know about this subject and imagine that Adventism is limited in its resarch.

Quit bringing up JW's and Christadelphians in the picture. QUIT IT! We're not going to tolerate this foolish stupidity. Just because these people might happen to accept a Biblical doctrine does not throw Adventists into their camp.

Face the facts on their own merits.

[Lysimachus]

Quote:

...For Pete's sake, Froom even formally admitted there were NO soul sleeping adovcates until the 12th century

Give the exact source, and page. I want to read this.