Did Jesus’ spirit die on the cross? (doctrines, study, KJV)

[Clear lens]

Clear said to : Michael Way and MissKate12 (post #606) : I think part of the problem is that you three (four?) have been talking about different religions.

You and Kate are describing the worldview and interpretation of ancient Christianity on this point, while RomulusXXV is describing the worldview and interpretation of a much, much later Christian movement.

This is the reason you Yours and Kates' interpretation can exist in the world of religious history while RomulusXXVs interpretation can only exist in the world of Dogmatic interpretation. It dies once it attempts to survive in the historical world of early Judeo-Christian literature. (post #606)

RomulusXXV responded in post #611:

Originally Posted by RomulusXXV

No dogma. I merely responded to a question asked of the OP. Miss Kate claims adherence to the Bible. And so does Michael. And 'the Bible' is what I gave. Is that okay?

Hi RomulusXXV

1) WHAT IS BEING SOLD IS NOT “THE BIBLE” BUT NEW DOCTRINES AND NEW INTERPRETATIONS.

You claim to be simply offering “bible texts”, but this is not actually correct is it?

What you are offering to individuals are new, non-historical doctrines and new, non-historical interpretations OF bible texts instead of the older, historical doctrines and early historical interpretations.

Surely you see that readers can see and understand the difference and therefore understand their frustration and your lack of credibility in their eyes?


2) THE PROBLEM WITH OFFERING A NEW AND NON HISTORICAL RELIGIOUS BELIEF THAT FURTHER SEPARATES ONE FROM AUTHENTIC AND EARLY CHRISTIAN BELIEFS

RomulusXXV, my observation was simply that you are offering Michael Way and MissKate12 and other readers a “new but not improved” set of religious beliefs and interpretations of biblical text that are further away from the more authentic and original and ancient beliefs than what they now have.

However, you fail to offer rational or intuitive reasons for them to abandon the more original beliefs with its ancient interpretation of scriptures in favor of your new set of beliefs with it new interpretations of scriptures.

If Michael Way and MissKate12 already have beliefs and interpretations that allow them to more correctly understand biblical text than the new interpretations you are offering, then this is, from a religio-historical point, counterproductive for them.


3) WHY SHOULD YOUR BELIEFS AND YOUR INTERPRETATIONS OF BIBLICAL TEXT TAKE PRIORITY OVER THE BELIEFS AND INTERPRETATIONS OF THE EARLIEST CHRISTIANS : AN EXAMPLE

Clement I is writing his own Christian Witness at the same time John is writing the book of revelations.

This roman, Clement was also convert of the apostle Peter and a co-worker of Paul, who, honors Clement in Phillipians 4:3 “…with Clement also, and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the Book of Life…”

Thus, Clement was taught the earliest Christian Gospel by the Apostle Peter himself and Clement taught this early gospel alongside the Apostle Paul.

Why should your new beliefs and interpretations take priority over the beliefs of Clement who taught the earliest beliefs and interpretations?

So far, in my own studies, I have not found any new Christian doctrine (with any new interpretation used to create and support it) that is better or more logical, more rational or more intuitive than the beliefs of the earliest Judeo-Christianity.

Why should anyone abandon early rational and intuitive interpretations and beliefs and adopt later, less rational and less intuitive interpretations and beliefs?


4) WHAT IS MEANT BY SURVIVING IN THE WORLD OF DOGMA BUT DYING IN THE WORLD OF HISTORY

I agree with you that Dogma is "a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true".
In this case, YOU are personally laying down a principle as "incontrovertibly true" and you are offering interpretations of the bible text to support dogma. Without your interpretations, the doctrine is not supported by the biblical text nor by historical tradition.

In your case individuals must accept your interpretations OF biblical text.
This is why I said your non-historical religion can survive in the world of Dogma where an adherent simply feels a thing is true and only can survive on the basis of your specific non-historical interpretations. It is the interpretations upon which your doctrine rests, not the biblical text per se.

The authority in this case is not the bible (despite the claims to the contrary), but instead, the center of dogmatic authority in this case is the person making the claim or an organization making the claim (which the individual then evangelizes).

Michael Way and MissKate12 can (if they so desire) use the bible AND any of the vast number of early Judeo-Christian documents to support their belief.
Your religion cannot use these historical texts to support this specific belief because this specific belief of yours was never historically held by early Judeo-Christians.

νεσιφυακω In any case RomulusXXV, I also hope your spiritual journey is insightful and wonderful

[Clear lens]

Originally Posted by MissKate12

Thank you Clear, but I simply don’t have the time to read through all of your post. It is overwhelming. My conclusions about the afterlife come from His God-breathed word. That is where my focus is and has been for forty-six years.

If you’re saying these historical figures believed that the spirit lives on, that’s great. If not, it makes no difference to me My faith and trust comes from the Lord and His holy Scriptures. I need nothing else.

I know I’m saved. I know where I will be when I die. I’ll be in Paradise. I hope to see you there.

God bless,

Kate

Yes MissKate12, I am saying that I certainly think your belief on this specific subject is the same as the early and most authentic belief. I am SUPPORTING your position.

You do not need to feel obligated to read my entire posts.

It is a historians curse to give too many examples inside the context of a debate and to be too long winded.

I think there may be people on forums that do have the interest and patience to read more historical data and so many of my posts are written for them.

Please do not feel obligated to read everything I write.

you have a great and wonderful journey MissKate12.

[ShanaBrown]

Acts. 2

22 “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 23 This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men,[d] put him to death by nailing him to the cross. 24 But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. 25 David said about him:

“‘I saw the Lord always before me.
Because he is at my right hand,
I will not be shaken.
26 Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices;
my body also will rest in hope,
27 because you will not abandon me to the realm of the dead,
you will not let your holy one see decay.
28 You have made known to me the paths of life;
you will fill me with joy in your presence.’[e]

29 “Fellow Israelites, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. 30 But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. 31 Seeing what was to come, he spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, that he was not abandoned to the realm of the dead, nor did his body see decay. 32 God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of it. 33 Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. 34 For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said,

“‘The Lord said to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand
35 until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet.”’

Here are a few things revealed in this passage of scripture:

1. It was God's deliberate plan and foreknowledge to hand Jesus over to be crucified.

2. God raised Jesus from the dead, freeing Him from the agony of death. Death is an enemy. It is not a transition to another life form. God freed Jesus from this agony of the enemy, death.

3. God did not abandon Jesus to the realm of the dead. Being in the realm of the dead is not a good place to be. It is not a place where we want to remain. It is not a place where we live. It is death, the cessation of life. The Father did not leave, abandon Jesus there. Jesus was not living with the Father as a spirit upon death, or David would not have prophesied concerning Jesus, " You will not abandon me to the realm of the dead."

4. The body of Jesus did not see decay. He was resurrected out of the last enemy, death.

5. Jesus was raised to life by the Father and ascended to the Father.

God bless.

[RomulusXXV]

Okay Clear, what I’m getting from this is that the early Judeo-Christians held a belief of the Bible and an understanding of death and the afterlife that was later corrupted and became what most contemporary Christians erroneously believe today. Though simplified, have I pretty much, if not entirely, got this right?

If so, how do we know that THEY got it right? I mean, Jesus would quote ‘the Torah’, as did others such as Peter in 1 and 2 Peter when he references Noah’s Ark. Paul, when referring to death and resurrection in his letters never said anything about the deceased becoming ‘spirits’ at death. Nor did Jesus. In the ‘Lazarus’ story Jesus didn’t say that Lazarus was now ‘a spirit’. He said that Lazarus was ‘sleeping’ as in ‘dead’.

Martha’s 'theological' understanding was that the dead would be raised ‘on the last day’. Why didn’t Jesus correct her on this belief and tell Martha that her brother was now ‘a living spirit’? Moreover, IF Lazarus was now ‘a living spirit’ (he'd been deceased for several days) then why did Jesus mess things up by calling Lazarus out as, once again, a mere mortal? Similarly, Paul comforts the grieving with the message that the dead are 'sleeping' and will be raised incorruptible when Jesus returns. Paul never mentioned that the deceased had become ‘spirits’ and are, in this form, alive and well.

Unless these events never actually occurred (and I don’t doubt that this is entirely possible), then they don’t seem to tally with the early Judeo-Christian belief/s that you speak of.

Both Mystic and you, and particularly Mystic since you’re a (returning?) newcomer, come across as being most ‘dogmatic’, perhaps more so than those who simply quote scripture assuming, but not actually knowing for a fact, that scriptures on this subject are accurate. It would seem that we’re all lacking in savvy because we haven’t yet had ‘The Mystic Experience’. However. if it’s important enough, I’m sure that we all will eventually.

[RomulusXXV]

Anyway, as I was saying:

We are told in scripture that the ‘spirit’ is nothing other than ‘the breath’. It is an element. It does not live or die.

We are told in scripture that ‘the breath’ returns to God at the point of death.

We are told in scripture that Jesus ‘gave up’ his spirit (his breath) when he died. He was now ‘officially’ dead.

Christianity HINGES on the belief that Jesus DID die and therefore could not have preached to millions of other dead people in their graves who are still alive (?) awaiting the Gospel message.

Christianity HINGES on the belief that Jesus rose from the dead. Dead = no longer alive.

The ‘spirit’ (the breath) of the thief on the cross also returned to God when he died. This would be consistent with scripture.

The thief went to the grave just the same as everyone else who dies. Again, consistent with scripture.

The thief WAS promised a place in Paradise (Heaven) by Jesus at a future time.

The thief did not attain Heaven that day. And so, one needs to rethink the 'today' part of Jesus' statement.

Jesus did not return to Heaven that day. In fact, Jesus did not ascend to Heaven until 40-days after the resurrection.

[Michael Way]

Originally Posted by MysticPhD

The Bible should not be ignored, but it should NOT be considered the infallible word of God either. Of course, I believe Jesus was crucified and "born again" as Spirit as He tried to explain to Nicodemus. ALL humans are "born again" as Spirits with "spiritual bodies," NOT physical, IMO. That is how He is the Comforter (Holy Spirit) at the right hand of God in Heaven establishing a place for ALL "born again" human Spirits. The physical body of Jesus returned to dust but our ancestors would never have accepted a "resurrection" as Spirit. They were terrified of Spirits. All they knew and could relate to was a physical existence. It seems most even today have similar views.

The tomb was empty. His body was not there. His body did not return to dust. As Peter said as recorded in Acts 2:27, quoting David's prophecy - ''Because You will not abandon my soul to Hades, nor allow your holy one to undergo decay.'' David wasn't speaking of himself. His body decayed. Jesus' body did not decay but was resurrected after three days according to Peter.

[RockyRoadg]

189:2.6 (2023.5) The Christian belief in the resurrection of Jesus has been based on the fact of the “empty tomb.” It was indeed a fact that the tomb was empty, but this is not the truth of the resurrection. The tomb was truly empty when the first believers arrived, and this fact, associated with that of the undoubted resurrection of the Master, led to the formulation of a belief which was not true: the teaching that the material and mortal body of Jesus was raised from the grave. Truth having to do with spiritual realities and eternal values cannot always be built up by a combination of apparent facts. Although individual facts may be materially true, it does not follow that the association of a group of facts must necessarily lead to truthful spiritual conclusions.

189:2.7 (2023.6) The tomb of Joseph was empty, not because the body of Jesus had been rehabilitated or resurrected, but because the celestial hosts had been granted their request to afford it a special and unique dissolution, a return of the “dust to dust,” without the intervention of the delays of time and without the operation of the ordinary and visible processes of mortal decay and material corruption.

189:2.8 (2024.1) The mortal remains of Jesus underwent the same natural process of elemental disintegration as characterizes all human bodies on earth except that, in point of time, this natural mode of dissolution was greatly accelerated, hastened to that point where it became well-nigh instantaneous.

189:2.9 (2024.2) The true evidences of the resurrection of Michael are spiritual in nature, albeit this teaching is corroborated by the testimony of many mortals of the realm who met, recognized, and communed with the resurrected morontia Master. He became a part of the personal experience of almost one thousand human beings before he finally took leave of Urantia.

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book...9-resurrection

[Michael Way]

People who believe in 'soul sleep' seem incapable of understanding that physical death does not mean that the inner essence of man - his soul and spirit - do not cease to exist or enter into a state of unconsciousness until the resurrection. They don't understand that physical death is simply the separation of the soul from the body. Physical death says nothing about the state of the soul after physical death. They also seem incapable of understanding that the human spirit is not merely 'breath' but is a part of man's inner essence. Soul sleep is not biblical but is a heretical teaching that was not a belief of the early church.

[ShanaBrown]

I am not a believer in soul sleep. Jesus referred to the dead as sleeping. It is temporary. The person will rise again. I believe that the soul, the person dies and remains dead until he or she is raised by the Lord. This corresponds to the teaching of the apostle Paul.


Corinthians 15

15 Now I make known to you, brothers and sisters, the gospel which I preached to you, which you also received, in which you also stand, 2 by which you also are saved, if you hold firmly to the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.

3 For I handed down to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 After that He appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; 7 then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; 8 and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, and not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me did not prove vain; but I labored even more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God with me. 11 Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

[i]12 Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised; 14 and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain, your faith also is in vain. 15 Moreover, we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified against God that He raised [h]Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then not even Christ has been raised; 17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. 18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If we have hoped in Christ only in this life, we are of all people most to be pitied.

Jesus, the person, died. It was not just His body that died. Jesus died. If we believe that He did not actually die, that He went straight to heaven to be with the Father, this is a contradiction to the foundation of the gospel. But Jesus did actually die and He was raised to life never to die again. He showed Himself to many who were witnesses. He was no longer dead and He ascended into heaven, after His resurrection. He did not ascend to heaven before the Father raised Him out of death. In the same way that Jesus died and was raised to life, the same thing will be true of us. We will die and we will be raised up out of death.

Satan is the father of lies and told Eve, that she would not die if she ate of the forbidden fruit. Eve chose to believe Satan over God who told her that if she ate of the fruit, she would die. Death was the penalty for eating the fruit. God did not say that if you eat of the fruit, only your body will die, and you will continue to live in heaven as a spirit. The truth is that she would die, return to the soil, with the breath of life removed from her, returning to the Father.

17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’
“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”

God was not just speaking to Adam's body when He spoke these words. He spoke to the man, Adam.


In 1 Cor. 15, we see that there were believers saying that there is no resurrection of the dead. And the apostle Paul says that if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Jesus has not been raised and that their faith is in vain. If Jesus was not raised from the dead, this means that those who are asleep (dead) in Christ, have perished. This tells us that when Jesus died, He was not alive until the Father raised Him from the dead. His spirit (breath of life, life force) did not die and returned to the Father. But Jesus, the person, died and was in that state until the Father raised Him to life, never to die again. Jesus is the firstborn from the dead. We must be raised out of death by the Lord in order to live again.

Hades is the state of the dead. It means the Unseen. It is in the death state awaiting the resurrection. The dead are said to be in the grave or tomb.

John 5

28 `Wonder not at this, because there doth come an hour in which all those in the tombs shall hear his voice,
29 and they shall come forth; those who did the good things to a rising again of life, and those who practised the evil things to a rising again of judgment.

Jesus says that those who are in the tombs will hear His voice. They will not hear His voice in heaven as spirit beings. They are in the tomb/grave and they shall hear His voice and come forth.




God bless.

[Michael Way]

Originally Posted by ShanaBrown

I am not a believer in soul sleep. Jesus referred to the dead as sleeping. It is temporary. The person will rise again. I believe that the soul, the person dies and remains dead until he or she is raised by the Lord.

Therefore you believe in Soul sleep. That designation includes the belief that the soul either 'sleeps' or ceases to exist (dies).

This corresponds to the teaching of the apostle Paul.

No, Shana, it does not. Paul believed in an intermediate state between physical death and resurrection in which the soul and spirit of the believer is with Jesus in heaven, and conscious (2 Corinthians 5:8 and Philippians 1:23-24), and this is understood by mainstream Christianity. Yours is a minority belief.

And of course the writer of Revelation also believed in an intermediate state between physical death and resurrection or he wouldn't have depicted the souls of Tribulational martyrs in heaven in a conscious state (Revelation 6:9-11; 7:9-17; 20:4). And you can't just explain these away as being allegorical just because Revelation has a lot of allegorical material. If you do try to explain these statements away as allegory then you must be prepared to explain what the writer of Revelation actually meant when he wrote that he saw the souls of people in heaven and that they were dressed in white and holding palm fronds, and communicating with angels.

You believe what you believe, but again, yours is a minority belief. It's not the belief of mainstream Christianity which has a different understanding of the biblical passages than you do in trying to argue for soul sleep.