The Kingdom of God
Comments
-
Jesus died on the cross. He flatlined for 3 days and 3 nights. But his body did not decompose which is normally the case of all born in Adam. Scripture cannot be more clear about his body not suffering decay.
-
@Dave_L said:
Jesus died on the cross. He flatlined for 3 days and 3 nights. But his body did not decompose which is normally the case of all born in Adam. Scripture cannot be more clear about his body not suffering decay.Bodies do not decay in three days Dave. Not sure why you keep dodging that point.
-
They just sort of coast under their own power? Even the decomposition of one single molecule is decay.
"human decomposition begins around four minutes after a person dies and follows four stages: autolysis, bloat, active decay, and skeletonization."
-
@Dave_L said:
They just sort of coast under their own power? Even the decomposition of one single molecule is decay."human decomposition begins around four minutes after a person dies and follows four stages: autolysis, bloat, active decay, and skeletonization."
No, the decomposition of one molecule is not decay. That is not an accurate statement. Are you saying Jesus never had one cell die in his life? Did he lose baby teeth? Did he ever get a cut and have skin cells die?
-
Why do I think this is so important? If Jesus' body decayed the least in the tomb, he was not sinless and we remain in our sins. It was because he was sinless that his body did not decay.
-
@Dave_L said:
Why do I think this is so important? If Jesus' body decayed the least in the tomb, he was not sinless and we remain in our sins. It was because he was sinless that his body did not decay.Did Jesus ever lose a skin cell while he was alive? Did he have fingernails and hair (which are dead cells by the way)? If he did, how does that reconcile with your understanding of Scripture?
-
If Jesus trimmed his fingernails and they decomposed over time, it was not because of sin. Death of the body and decomposition is. The fact that Peter says his body did not decompose proves he was sinless as does the resurrection.
-
@Dave_L said:
If Jesus trimmed his fingernails and they decomposed over time, it was not because of sin. Death of the body and decomposition is. The fact that Peter says his body did not decompose proves he was sinless as does the resurrection.You are reading a lot into it. Jesus had hair which is dead cells. So are fingernails. So there were parts of Jesus that were already dead. Death is part of the world after the fall. Jesus lived in the world as a human and was subject to the biology of a human. His body was no different than yours or mine during his time here on earth. Otherwise he would not have been human. You need to carefully think through things when you state things that are NOT stated in Scripture.
-
It also could not live. For any kind of ongoing biological processes to occur some of the processes for living are much the same for what happens after death.
-
Oh. And I found this. Augustine thought Peacock flesh did not rot.
-
@Dave_L said:
It says his body did not decay. The brain starts to go within 4 minutes of death I hear...
The timing for a body to decay has to do with factors like climate, prior diseases or opened cavities in the body. We know the condition of Jesus before he died. We also know that the woman began anointing his body and wrapping it on Friday evening before the tomb was sealed with a great stone. The tomb was dark and cool. A well-wrapped body or embarkment flesh can remain intact for a time, but it will deteriorate over time. The process may be slowed, but eventually, decay. Do you recall Egyptian graves, mummies, etc. excavated? Some cultures were more skilled than others in their quest for the preservation of a body. Some out of respect and others, out of superstition. Regardless of skills and practices, the dead are dead. In short, death is the cessation of life and decay is over time.
Who is saying his body needed to rot? And where in the world does it say He preached in Hell?
What in "Hell" is there to preach for and to? How do you define "Hell"? Where is it?
Who lives there? Does it exist today? Who's in charge of it?One would really need to probe into the bowels of this topic again, allowing the biblical canon to speak for itself. For example:
1. What is the state of the dead in the OT/NT?
2. Is there a consciousness of the dead?
3. Do the dead go straight to Heaven or "Hell"?
4. Is "Hell" and eternal torment or Annihilation?
5. Which of the three views of "hell" is biblical? Is it:Metaphorical View -- as a place where the torment is everlasting, but the suffering is more mental than physical.
The Universalist View -- "Hell" is a temporary condition of graded punishments which ultimately leads to heaven.
Annihilation View (a.k.a "Conditional Immortality")-- A place of the ultimate dissolution and annihilation of the unsaved.
These and other questions, we need to answer before ever suggesting Jesus was an evangelist in "Hell."
Believe it or not, this was one of the topics addressed during the Reformation. This topic developed into tension with the "established churches" of the time, which in turn resulted in the prohibition of the Anabaptist assemblies. It's serious business. Do we stand for truth; or do we remain confused/afraid and "go along, to get along"?
A separate thread is the recommendation of the day. CM
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
If Jesus trimmed his fingernails and they decomposed over time, it was not because of sin. Death of the body and decomposition is. The fact that Peter says his body did not decompose proves he was sinless as does the resurrection.You are reading a lot into it. Jesus had hair which is dead cells. So are fingernails. So there were parts of Jesus that were already dead. Death is part of the world after the fall. Jesus lived in the world as a human and was subject to the biology of a human. His body was no different than yours or mine during his time here on earth. Otherwise he would not have been human. You need to carefully think through things when you state things that are NOT stated in Scripture.
I'm not reading anything into Peter's words. He compared David's decaying body with Jesus' body that did not decay. He says nothing of "time" being the reason Jesus' body did not decay.
Abortionist use the same "time" argument you do. But we know that at the moment of death, just as at the moment of conception, a different state of being exists. Jesus' body was in a state of decay but Peter says it did not decay.
“Therefore he also says in another psalm, ‘You will not permit your Holy One to experience decay.’For David, after he had served God’s purpose in his own generation, died, was buried with his ancestors, and experienced decay, but the one whom God raised up did not experience decay.” (Acts 13:35–37)
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
If Jesus trimmed his fingernails and they decomposed over time, it was not because of sin. Death of the body and decomposition is. The fact that Peter says his body did not decompose proves he was sinless as does the resurrection.You are reading a lot into it. Jesus had hair which is dead cells. So are fingernails. So there were parts of Jesus that were already dead. Death is part of the world after the fall. Jesus lived in the world as a human and was subject to the biology of a human. His body was no different than yours or mine during his time here on earth. Otherwise he would not have been human. You need to carefully think through things when you state things that are NOT stated in Scripture.
I'm not reading anything into Peter's words. He compared David's decaying body with Jesus' body that did not decay. He says nothing of "time" being the reason Jesus' body did not decay.
Correct, we know how things function. The Bible also did NOT say that Jesus body was not capable of decay. So yes, you are very much reading into it and aren't using sound judgment.
Abortionist use the same "time" argument you do. But we know that at the moment of death, just as at the moment of conception, a different state of being exists. Jesus' body was in a state of decay but Peter says it did not decay.
You are disgusting. That is not the same argument at all and you should be ashamed of yourself.
“Therefore he also says in another psalm, ‘You will not permit your Holy One to experience decay.’For David, after he had served God’s purpose in his own generation, died, was buried with his ancestors, and experienced decay, but the one whom God raised up did not experience decay.” (Acts 13:35–37)
Exactly, you will not permit him to experience decay. Why? BECAUSE HE RAISED FROM THE DEAD AND WAS NOT DEAD LONG ENOUGH. This is not hard to understand Dave.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
If Jesus trimmed his fingernails and they decomposed over time, it was not because of sin. Death of the body and decomposition is. The fact that Peter says his body did not decompose proves he was sinless as does the resurrection.You are reading a lot into it. Jesus had hair which is dead cells. So are fingernails. So there were parts of Jesus that were already dead. Death is part of the world after the fall. Jesus lived in the world as a human and was subject to the biology of a human. His body was no different than yours or mine during his time here on earth. Otherwise he would not have been human. You need to carefully think through things when you state things that are NOT stated in Scripture.
I'm not reading anything into Peter's words. He compared David's decaying body with Jesus' body that did not decay. He says nothing of "time" being the reason Jesus' body did not decay.
Correct, we know how things function. The Bible also did NOT say that Jesus body was not capable of decay. So yes, you are very much reading into it and aren't using sound judgment.
Abortionist use the same "time" argument you do. But we know that at the moment of death, just as at the moment of conception, a different state of being exists. Jesus' body was in a state of decay but Peter says it did not decay.
You are disgusting. That is not the same argument at all and you should be ashamed of yourself.
“Therefore he also says in another psalm, ‘You will not permit your Holy One to experience decay.’For David, after he had served God’s purpose in his own generation, died, was buried with his ancestors, and experienced decay, but the one whom God raised up did not experience decay.” (Acts 13:35–37)
Exactly, you will not permit him to experience decay. Why? BECAUSE HE RAISED FROM THE DEAD AND WAS NOT DEAD LONG ENOUGH. This is not hard to understand Dave.
The problem between us is solved if we do not read into Peter's words something that is not there. He does not say Jesus' body did not decompose because of "time". But Paul links physical death and decay with sin. Jesus was sinless. So Paul explains Peter for us without reading into the text.
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
If Jesus trimmed his fingernails and they decomposed over time, it was not because of sin. Death of the body and decomposition is. The fact that Peter says his body did not decompose proves he was sinless as does the resurrection.You are reading a lot into it. Jesus had hair which is dead cells. So are fingernails. So there were parts of Jesus that were already dead. Death is part of the world after the fall. Jesus lived in the world as a human and was subject to the biology of a human. His body was no different than yours or mine during his time here on earth. Otherwise he would not have been human. You need to carefully think through things when you state things that are NOT stated in Scripture.
I'm not reading anything into Peter's words. He compared David's decaying body with Jesus' body that did not decay. He says nothing of "time" being the reason Jesus' body did not decay.
Correct, we know how things function. The Bible also did NOT say that Jesus body was not capable of decay. So yes, you are very much reading into it and aren't using sound judgment.
Abortionist use the same "time" argument you do. But we know that at the moment of death, just as at the moment of conception, a different state of being exists. Jesus' body was in a state of decay but Peter says it did not decay.
You are disgusting. That is not the same argument at all and you should be ashamed of yourself.
“Therefore he also says in another psalm, ‘You will not permit your Holy One to experience decay.’For David, after he had served God’s purpose in his own generation, died, was buried with his ancestors, and experienced decay, but the one whom God raised up did not experience decay.” (Acts 13:35–37)
Exactly, you will not permit him to experience decay. Why? BECAUSE HE RAISED FROM THE DEAD AND WAS NOT DEAD LONG ENOUGH. This is not hard to understand Dave.
The problem between us is solved if we do not read into Peter's words something that is not there. He does not say Jesus' body did not decompose because of "time". But Paul links physical death and decay with sin. Jesus was sinless. So Paul explains Peter for us without reading into the text.
references please...
-
I googled this for you. 32 Bible Verses about Decay. https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Decay
I believe most acknowledge sin as the cause.
-
@Dave_L said:
I googled this for you. 32 Bible Verses about Decay. https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/DecayI believe most acknowledge sin as the cause.
None of those verses indicate that Jesus had a body that was not capable of decay.
-
That is not what I'm saying. I'm merely quoting Peter who said Jesus' body did not decay in contrast to his saying David's body did. That was the point of his conversation. Death and all of its related bodily ailments come from sin. Jesus was sinless, proven by the fact that his body did not decay while in the tomb. Also proven by his resurrection.
-
@Dave_L said:
That is not what I'm saying. I'm merely quoting Peter who said Jesus' body did not decay in contrast to his saying David's body did. That was the point of his conversation. Death and all of its related bodily ailments come from sin. Jesus was sinless, proven by the fact that his body did not decay while in the tomb. Also proven by his resurrection.That has nothing to do with what Peter was talking about. Peter was talking about the difference between David and Christ is that Christ lives now. Where in the world do you get from what Peter said that Jesus body was not capable of decay? Peter was talking about the fact that Christ was raised. You are reading into the text things that are not there. Not only not there, not even hinted at.
-
It would seem that words, even original languages actually do matter.
-
Dave,
Consider this...
Contrast -- is the state of being strikingly different from something else, typically something in juxtaposition or close association.
Compare--estimate, measure, or note the similarity or dissimilarity between two things or people.
David
• In the grave on earth
• He awaits resurrection (later)
• Hope--Yet to be fulfilled
• Dead (no-consciousness)
• Decayed
• ----
• Occupied grave
• Dead supporter/soldiers
• Past King/WarriorJesus
• Jesus in Heaven
• Resurrected within "three days"
• Promised to come again (2nd comings)
• Active/ fully conscious
• No decay (He has the potential/condition)
• Right hand of the Father (honor/power/authority)
• Present King & Deliver
• Empty Tomb
• Living DisciplesIn addition, a reading of the passage in context will help move the conversation along.
Dave, your sanctified imagination can't become truth, however passionate. No such what you say has been revealed. Remember, Jesus said, "...because I lay down my life, that I might take it again" (John 10:17).
And, for David, and all of us on this side of the return of Jesus, John gives hope: "whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life" (John 3:15).
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
That is not what I'm saying. I'm merely quoting Peter who said Jesus' body did not decay in contrast to his saying David's body did. That was the point of his conversation. Death and all of its related bodily ailments come from sin. Jesus was sinless, proven by the fact that his body did not decay while in the tomb. Also proven by his resurrection.That has nothing to do with what Peter was talking about. Peter was talking about the difference between David and Christ is that Christ lives now. Where in the world do you get from what Peter said that Jesus body was not capable of decay? Peter was talking about the fact that Christ was raised. You are reading into the text things that are not there. Not only not there, not even hinted at.
You are ruling out the supernatural element of Christ's entombment and forcing a naturalistic understanding of "time" vs "decay" into the text. This is eisegesis, not exegesis.
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
That is not what I'm saying. I'm merely quoting Peter who said Jesus' body did not decay in contrast to his saying David's body did. That was the point of his conversation. Death and all of its related bodily ailments come from sin. Jesus was sinless, proven by the fact that his body did not decay while in the tomb. Also proven by his resurrection.That has nothing to do with what Peter was talking about. Peter was talking about the difference between David and Christ is that Christ lives now. Where in the world do you get from what Peter said that Jesus body was not capable of decay? Peter was talking about the fact that Christ was raised. You are reading into the text things that are not there. Not only not there, not even hinted at.
You are ruling out the supernatural element of Christ's entombment and forcing a naturalistic understanding of "time" vs "decay" into the text. This is eisegesis, not exegesis.
No Dave, what you are doing is eisegesis. You are reading into the text that Christ's earthly body was different than anyone else's once dead. It was not, there is nothing to suggest that it was. He was raised before the process of decay began. We know that. How do we know that? We know how long it takes for decay to start in certain conditions and we know that Christ, thanks to the record of Scripture, was not in the tomb that long.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
That is not what I'm saying. I'm merely quoting Peter who said Jesus' body did not decay in contrast to his saying David's body did. That was the point of his conversation. Death and all of its related bodily ailments come from sin. Jesus was sinless, proven by the fact that his body did not decay while in the tomb. Also proven by his resurrection.That has nothing to do with what Peter was talking about. Peter was talking about the difference between David and Christ is that Christ lives now. Where in the world do you get from what Peter said that Jesus body was not capable of decay? Peter was talking about the fact that Christ was raised. You are reading into the text things that are not there. Not only not there, not even hinted at.
You are ruling out the supernatural element of Christ's entombment and forcing a naturalistic understanding of "time" vs "decay" into the text. This is eisegesis, not exegesis.
No Dave, what you are doing is eisegesis. You are reading into the text that Christ's earthly body was different than anyone else's once dead. It was not, there is nothing to suggest that it was. He was raised before the process of decay began. We know that. How do we know that? We know how long it takes for decay to start in certain conditions and we know that Christ, thanks to the record of Scripture, was not in the tomb that long.
How can I be guilty of eisegesis when I only quote Peter. You are introducing "time" into the text which it says nothing about.
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
That is not what I'm saying. I'm merely quoting Peter who said Jesus' body did not decay in contrast to his saying David's body did. That was the point of his conversation. Death and all of its related bodily ailments come from sin. Jesus was sinless, proven by the fact that his body did not decay while in the tomb. Also proven by his resurrection.That has nothing to do with what Peter was talking about. Peter was talking about the difference between David and Christ is that Christ lives now. Where in the world do you get from what Peter said that Jesus body was not capable of decay? Peter was talking about the fact that Christ was raised. You are reading into the text things that are not there. Not only not there, not even hinted at.
You are ruling out the supernatural element of Christ's entombment and forcing a naturalistic understanding of "time" vs "decay" into the text. This is eisegesis, not exegesis.
No Dave, what you are doing is eisegesis. You are reading into the text that Christ's earthly body was different than anyone else's once dead. It was not, there is nothing to suggest that it was. He was raised before the process of decay began. We know that. How do we know that? We know how long it takes for decay to start in certain conditions and we know that Christ, thanks to the record of Scripture, was not in the tomb that long.
How can I be guilty of eisegesis when I only quote Peter. You are introducing "time" into the text which it says nothing about.
You are not merely quoting Peter. You add in that Christ's body was not capable of decay. Nowhere does it say that. However, Scripture does say his body was in the grave for 3 days. So no, I did not add anything into the text. Time IS there.
-
Paul says death (decay) stems from Adam's sin...... But you are saying Jesus' body did not decay because of the time element. I'm saying it did not decay because he was sinless. Huge difference.
-
I am curious where this is going. Does this have to do with the Jews and David are bad, cut off and they died and decayed, but Jesus was not really a Jew? Is this about Jesus not really having a human body? Is this about the body itself being exactly the same pre and post-resurrection? Something else? Which components (if any) of these listed are included?
I am sniffing the air and smelling something bad like speculative eschatology informing erroneous theology and wreaking havoc with logic and common sense.
Perhaps it is merely about a simple passage taken literally when it is clearly figurative by a person who usually takes literal things and makes then figurative.
Straighten me out, please.
-
I'm only saying people in Adam die and their body decays because of sin.
-
I'm only saying people in Adam die and their body decays because of sin.
OK. So the nuance is the theological stance that every person inherited Adams sin and therefore their bodies decay, whereas Jesus body was miraculously formed, therefore he did not inherit genes or whatever that made him inherit Adam's sin, and therefore his body could not decay--sort of like Adam and Eve's.
Again, I am guessing, sort of 20 questions, because I am curious about your rather obscure viewpoint.
[I still hold that you don't grasp biology--as without some form of decay even a digestive system, metabolism and cellular respiration could not occur---though I suppose we could presume that such functions happened miraculously outside the realm of biology as we know it.]
-
@GaoLu said:
I'm only saying people in Adam die and their body decays because of sin.
OK. So the nuance is the theological stance that every person inherited Adams sin and therefore their bodies decay, whereas Jesus body was miraculously formed, therefore he did not inherit genes or whatever that made him inherit Adam's sin, and therefore his body could not decay--sort of like Adam and Eve's.
Again, I am guessing, sort of 20 questions, because I am curious about your rather obscure viewpoint.
[I still hold that you don't grasp biology--as without some form of decay even a digestive system, metabolism and cellular respiration could not occur---though I suppose we could presume that such functions happened miraculously outside the realm of biology as we know it.]
Digestive decay is not because of sin. Bodily death and decay is.
