Gino Jennings On Soul Sleep

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

See? Exactly what I said. When they see "the dead" in their own mind they change it to the "dead body". Thats the only way they can keep this doctrine going. We all agree the body dies. The problem is they have as they see it THE REAL PERSON still alive.

Paul writes of THEM that are asleep. To me that sounds personal. It is PERSONS that sleep unless one would make a persons body ANOTHER PERSON from their soul!

When Paul teaches the saints:

1 Thess 4:13

13But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

His purpose is to comfort them. Now IF Paul is simply talking about their DEAD BODIES and not the PERSONS as this doctrine asserts consider this. Are the bereaved sorrowing because they miss their loved ones DEAD BODIES that are asleep? Or are they sorrowing because they miss the PERSONS that are asleep?

Also note if his teaching here is to comfort them concerning their dead loved ones, why does he NOT EVEN MENTION.......the fact they are actually in Heaven with Jesus Christ right now? What would be sorrowful about that?

Isn't that the entire point of their doctrine? And YET Paul never mentions the thing that modern Christianity puts its hope in once!

Verse 14

14For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

Many readers miss Pauls first point here, that he is talking about the RESURRECTION. Our faith is that Jesus died and ROSE AGAIN. Now when he proceeds by saying EVEN SO....meaning in like manner those who are ASLEEP in Jesus will God bring with him.

So he is not talking at all about bringing live saints down from Heaven when he returns. No he is talking about the dead, sleeping saints raising up from the dead EVEN AS JESUS ROSE FROM THE DEAD. For his next thought is exactly that.

Verses 15-16

15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

He is not teaching them that living saints are going to come back down to the earth from Heaven but rather that the dead in Christ who are asleep are going to RISE.... FIRST.

After they rise, then they will meet the Lord Jesus first, before those who are alive and remain.

Verse 17.

17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

The resurrected saints after meeting with the "raptured saints" in the clouds will then all return to the earth together. So when Jesus returns to THE EARTH the saints who were asleep but are now alive again will be brought with him.

So amazing and consistent with the rest of Bible teaching about death and the afterlife, Paul says then, at the time this takes place we shall ever "be with" the Lord!

This absolutely contradicts the erroneous interpretation men try to force upon Pauls writing in 2 Cor 5:8 that as soon as we die THEN we are present with the Lord. Well if they are present with the Lord as soon as they die why does Paul say here at the resurrection of the dead we shall ever "be with the Lord"? Does not that mean they were NOT with the Lord before this event? Obviously.

Now let us examine perhaps the most striking blow to the doctrine of immortal soul possible.

Verse 18.

18Wherefore comfort one another with THESE words.

Pauls point was to comfort those who had loved ones that died. So he does this in verses 14-17.

The shocking thing is that NEVER ONCE does Paul give them comfort by saying its only their bodies that are dead! THEY THEMSELVES are actually alive right now with Jesus!

So when modern Preachers try to comfort saints by telling them their loved ones are now alive in Heaven "with the Lord" they are giving them a FALSE HOPE and comforting them with words that are DIFFERENT than the words Paul used to give them comfort.

So to be in agreement with the apostles doctrine given by Jesus Christ we only have authority to say the same thing Paul said in verses 14-17 when giving comfort to the bereaved.

You did not even read what James wrote.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Brother Blume said: Paul's confidence in, and desire to, be absent from the body to be present with the Lord was speaking in reference to the groaning he experienced in his body, and the better situation of not being in it and weighted down by the groanings it caused.

So Paul said he groaned to be in the "intermediate naked state"? Yet he specifically wrote:

2Co 5:2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
2Co 5:3 If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
2Co 5:4 For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.

He specifically stated we do not groan for the unclothed or naked intermediate state, but rather for the clothed resurrected state.

Please get the context of why I said that, which shows you did not read my whole posts. If we're not going to be thorough and responding to each other's post, then why even continue this? I distinctly made the disclaimer that compared to being in the body and groaning and being with Jesus, that was the issue. And I distinctly said the ultimate destination and desire was to be in a body. You completely glossed all over that distinction. This is what has always made this forum so frustrating.

[mfblume]

You misrepresent me, Esaias .. Look what you conveniently left out.... In bold type....

Paul's confidence in, and desire to, be absent from the body to be present with the Lord was speaking in reference to the groaning he experienced in his body, and the better situation of not being in it and weighted down by the groanings it caused. And if anybody groaned in his body it would be Paul. Compared to living in a mortal body that causes groanings, or living naked without a body , Paul would rather be naked and absent from the body in an unclothed state to be with the Lord. But since he already stated it's not a groaning to simply be OUT of the mortal body, but clothed upon with an immortal one , aside from merely comparing clothed in a mortal body but apart from the Lord, or being unclothed in nakedness of soul to be present with the Lord, not for the mere moment considering the ultimate goal of being clothed upon with immortal flesh, his ultimate goal was to be clothed upon in immortal flesh to rule this world with Jesus forevermore.'

.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Please get the context of why I said that, which shows you did not read my whole posts. If we're not going to be thorough and responding to each other's post, then why even continue this? I distinctly made the disclaimer that compared to being in the body and groaning and being with Jesus, that was the issue. And I distinctly said the ultimate destination and desire was to be in a body. You completely glossed all over that distinction. This is what has always made this forum so frustrating.

No, I read the posts. But the part I quoted and commented on is a crystal clear highlight of the disjunction between what you say and what the apostle said. You specifically said he was groaning and wanting to be with Jesus in the context of the intermediate state, 180 degrees opposite to what Paul said.

That's why I zeroed in on that particular point, even though all my other points still stand. THAT one point puts your belief in clear relief, compared to the apostle's. The contrast could not be more marked.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

You misrepresent me, Esaias .. Look what you conveniently left out.... In bold type....

Once again, you specifically said Paul is desiring to be unclothed! I mean you literally doubled down on it! lol

Sure Paul had other desires, goals, hopes, and aspirations. But when he says we groan, hope, wish etc NOT THAT WE WOULD BE IN AN UNCLOTHED CONDITION, and then you say "he wished to be in an unclothed condition", all your additional qualifications, addenda, etc are irrelevent. There is no way to make him say the opposite of his plain statement.

It is no different than when the baptist says "baptism does not save us", and you quote 1 Peter 3:21 to him, and he says "Well, yeah, but ABC XYZ PDQ and therefore we can say baptism does not save us." All the ABC XYZ PDQ is just so much theological white noise that need not even be bothered with.

When ANY doctrine or teaching makes a direct, 180 degree opposite statement to a plain statement of scripture, there is no need for further inquiry to see plainly the doctrine is WRONG. I am not glossing over and missing all the cool pieces of information that would convince any rational person that black is white, down is up, love is hate, or that Paul really truly did desire to enter a disembodied unclothed intermediate state (even just a wee bit, not his final goal, but still yes, even a teensy bit) in spite of his own protestation to the contrary.

As for blaming forums for people not agreeing with you, well, that's just lame. I mean, really? Disagreement must be because the offending party is either dumb or dishonest, intentionally ignoring all your great points just to avoid admitting you're right? Sorry you feel that way, but I'm reminded of the proverb about kitchens being uncomfortably hot?

[Esaias]

Paul told the Thessalonians the manner in which we would be with the Lord was the resurrection. Therefore, desiring to be free of the current mortal body and to be with the Lord means desiring to experience the resurrection, not some intermediate disembodied state.

Paul specifically said the desire is to be free of this mortal tabernacle to be clothed in the immortal one, the resurrection body. He explicitly said it does NOT involve any desire to be unclothed or disembodied, a definite blow against pagan Greek concepts of the afterlife.

Paul spent a whole chapter (ch 15) of his FIRST epistle to the Corinthians explaining why death is no big deal. Not ONCE did he mention any intermediate state of being disembodied and floating up to Jesus, but instead it was ALL about resurrection. Then he LATER writes 2 Corinthians, and once again specifies the expectation is resurrection, specifically DENIES any hope of a disembodied intermediate state, and somehow this is all taken to mean we have a wonderful expectation of a disembodied intermediate state of being with the Lord?

Sorry, but that's not how sound doctrine works.

[Esaias]

1 Corinthians 15:18 is an impossible statement if dead Christians live on and fly away to heaven to be with Jesus at death.

So is verse 32.

Paul said it is all POINTLESS apart from the resurrection. But if the immortal soul doctrine is true, then it is the resurrection which becomes essentially pointless! If Paul fought with wild beasts, what profit is it if all he gets is eternal happiness in heaven immediately upon death? Really?

THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT IS PREACHED BY IMMORTAL SOULISTS, "don't worry, it'll be worth it all, you'll step across Jordan and reach the other shore, see friends and relations who've gone before, you're just going over Jordan you're just going over home, going to see your mother, going to see your father, going to see Jesus, never more to roam" etc. Need I quote any more hymns?

Paul's belief, and the modern immortal soul belief, are completely different and at odds. So which belief is true? I'll place my bets on Paul's, others' mileage may vary.

[Michael The Disciple]

PREPARE FOR INCOMING TRUTH BOMB!

Esaias


Paul told the Thessalonians the manner in which we would be with the Lord was the resurrection. Therefore, desiring to be free of the current mortal body and to be with the lord means desiring to experience the resurrection, not some intermediate disembodied state.

Paul specifically said the desire is to be free of this mortal tabernacle to be clothed in the immortal one, the resurrection body. He explicitly said it does not involve any desire to be unclothed or disembodied, a definite blow against pagan Greek concepts of the afterlife.

Paul spent a whole chapter (ch 15) of his first epistle to the Corinthians explaining why death is no big deal. Not once did he mention any intermediate state of being disembodied and floating up to Jesus, but instead it was all about resurrection. Then he later writes 2 Corinthians, and once again specifies the expectation is resurrection, specifically denies any hope of a disembodied intermediate state, and somehow this is all taken to mean we have a wonderful expectation of a disembodied intermediate state of being with the Lord?

Sorry, but that's not how sound doctrine works.[/quote]

[Michael The Disciple]

Error in my post!

Originally Posted by TyronePalmer View Post
Was Solomon wiser or greater than Jesus?

I replied:

Absolutely! Jesus was the one who taught Solomon everything he knew!

I must have meant based on the next sentence to have said "Absolutely not"! Since Jesus not only inspired Solomon being the YAH of the Old Testament to write what he wrote, he was also his Creator.

So I was stunned when I looked at what I had written this morning. Wish there was an emotion for this post where I would be kicking myself!

[Michael The Disciple]

Lets watch how this error works again.

Jesus in John 6:40

40And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Reading this verse should be very plain to understand when the saint receives everlasting life. At the last day.

To make it into something else one has to mentally insert into the text something like this.

40And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise his DEAD BODY UP at the last day.

Now if anyone actually wrote the verse that way you would immediately catch the perversion of the verse. Or if someone quoted it as chapter and verse you would correct them.

Then why pray tell do we not catch the error when someone trys to explain the verse that very same way?

Jesus obviously is not just referring to raising up merely ones body in the verse but raising HIM....THE PERSON.

Again:

John 6:44

No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Clear isn't it?

Jesus will raise up the MAN.....PERSON who comes to him at the LAST DAY.

Note Jesus did NOT say "I will raise up the mans DEAD BODY at the last day. Rather he would raise up the man, HIM at the last day.

Is there not a difference between raising up HIM and raising up his dead body?

If Christ is raising HIM up that means thats when he gains eternal life. At the resurrection. When men teach Jesus just meant he would raise the mans DEAD BODY at the last day they are insinuating that the PERSON was never dead at all! It changes Christ's meaning and confuses the hearer.

It leads saints to falsely believe the man who Christ says he will RAISE UP and give eternal life was never dead and already HAD ETERNAL LIFE! They say ONLY his body was dead!

If a Preacher would be preaching a sermon and misquote verse 44 there would be an awkward silence as disciples would realize he had quoted the verse wrong.

And YET....when explaining the MEANING of the verse thats exactly what they teach! And no one says a thing!