The Three Biblical Interpretations About Afterlife

[William]

Lately some of us have been arguing from three differing positions is which the bible can be used to defend all three. All three appear to agree that each individual has a "Soul" although there may be disagreement on what the exact function of a "Soul" is.

[1] A "Person" is "Spirit" and temporarily exists as a human being until the body dies then that "Person" enters an afterlife and is judged by "God" and is condemned or saved. Those saved go to "heaven" and those condemned go to "Hell" - or in some variances on this, are "exterminated".

[2] A "Person" a "Human being" and when the human being dies, that is the end of that person unless "God" judges them as "saved" in which case that person is resurrected and given a new body which will last forever more.

[3] A "Person" is an eternal Spirit in human form and when the body dies, that Spirit immediately moves to the next phase and either knowingly or unknowingly creates for their self, their next experience, based upon a combination of mainly what they believe, what their overall attitude is and what they did in the previous phase.

Often any different position which opposes another might logically mean that they both cannot be correct, assuming one or the other is true.

Both [1]&[2] fall into this category as they cannot both be true. [1]&[2] also both agree that [3] is false.

However, [3] Can be true without making the other two false.

And [3] - just as with [1]&[2] can be backed by the bible, depending on what parts of the bible once uses to do so.

The bible is interpreted throughout, based upon which position [1][2] or [3] is being used to interpret it through [the filter].

If [1]&[2] oppose each other but can still be "proven" by using the bible, then this makes the bible something of a contradiction.

But if [3] - although different from [1]&[2] does not oppose either [1]&[2] and can still be "proven" by using the bible just like [1]&[2], then [3] takes away the contradictory aspect of the bible which [1]&[2] create by being in opposition.

Question: Would it be fair to say therefore, that [3] is the best position to assume on the overall biblical script to do with the subject of the next phase [afterlife]?

[myth-one.com]

• Which of the two types of bodies does Jesus presently have in heaven*?

When we speak of Jesus today, I believe we would be more correct to address Him and The Word as The Word.

Okay would that be in ...

Body type #1: A spiritual body
Body type #2: A physical body

...or a hitherto unmentioned

Body type #3: A combination of both of the above and/or something different entirely not mentioned explicitly in scripture



JW

The Word is a spiritual bodied being.

[The Tanager]

Do you have support for this which you claim happened 'quite a while ago'?

What I claimed was "brought up awhile ago" (not "quite a while ago") was that mistakes got brought into the argument. You asked me why I was bringing 'mistakes' into the argument in post #82 of this thread, posted on April 28th @ 4:03 pm. I first brought 'mistakes' into the argument in post #241 of the "Why does God have a gender?" thread, posted on April 23rd @ 4:17 pm.

Nor do I argue that. Human forms have been functioning as they were expected to. That is different than not being used as they were meant to. It 'does not follow' in your logic, because you are coming from a different position than [3]...so the filters employed simply give you a different logic to work with.

Logic is logic regardless of the truth of 1, 2, or 3. Here is the disagreement I am talking about. You claimed that "the bodies we Eternal Spirits are inside of, were meant to be as intended. The way they were created to be." I disagree with that claim. I think sin has corrupted the human being (spirit and body) from the way they were created to be.

I asked for support for your claim. You said "The Eternal Creator doesn't make mistakes and intended our current human forms to function as they do." That is not rational support for your view over my view.

Does the human form possess a 'will'? [1]&[2] Or has the Spirit surrendered its will to the human form, by identifying as the human form? [3] Because the human form was designed so that the Spirit within it animating it, has no recollection of being anything else...yet the truth is, It does have a history which goes back to before this universe was created.

Neither is this support. It's only you distinguishing the views and then claiming [3] is true without support for thinking it actually is true.

It is simply a natural occurrence with [3] - deep is unto deep. [1]&[2] are deeper than [0] but cannot be deeper that [3] because they cannot contain [3]. It is really just a form of math as [3] must be deeper than [1]&[2] as it contains both [1]&[2] as subsections of its overall reality membrane.

The third option does not contain the other two, it completely re-interprets 1 and 2 to something they are not to fit into 3. It sounds nicer to say 1 and 2 fit into your view, but you are still just rejecting them as true, just as they are rejecting your view and the other one.

Of course not. Nor do I argue that. Rather, their own actions confirm it to be the case.

Then point out the actions and draw the logical inferences for me to see because I don't see it.

[JehovahsWitness]

The Word is a spiritual bodied being.

And what about the "the word made flesh" ?


After The Word was "made flesh" did he continue to be a spiritual bodied being?

what happened to "the Word made flesh" after he was resurrected and disappeared from the view of his disciples.. is "the word made flesh " still flesh,... or is "the word made flesh" presently in a spiritual body?




JW

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to William in post #81]

Response to the actual question asked in the OP can be found here:
viewtopic.php?p=1037828#p1037828
viewtopic.php?p=1037885#p1037885


I thought I would examine the first two positions from the OP (because I agree with Tanager that they are confusing).

*green = changes in the text (so that it is accurate)
*pink = comment (things the text does not take into consideration, etc)

[1] A "Person" is "Spirit" and temporarily exists as a human being until the body dies then that "Person" enters an afterlife and is judged by "God" and is condemned or saved. Those saved go to "heaven" and those condemned go to "Hell" - or in some variances on this, are "exterminated".

Rewriting:


A "Person" is a "spirit" and temporarily exists in this current body (the long garment of skin with sin and death in it, that was given to Adam and Eve AFTER they ate from the TKGB) until the body dies (or until Christ returns and that person is caught up to meet Christ in the sky, changed in a twinkling, into the new body, the white robe, the glorified body that has no sin or death in it). Then that "Person" who died, sleeps until the resurrection (first or second), and if in Christ, is raised to life at His return... or if not in Christ... is resurrected at the second resurrection. At the second resurrection some are resurrected to life and some are resurrected to judgment and the second death (the lake of fire). If judged, that person is judged by God. Those saved live and those condemned die (eternal death).


(there is more: but I think that is enough for the moment)


Long garment of skin: Gen 3:21; Caught up to Christ and changed (still alive when Christ returns): 1Thes 4:16-17, 1 Corinth 15:51-53; First and second resurrections: Rev 20:4-6; Rev 20:11-15, John 5:29, Daniel 12:2, Acts 24:15

[2] A "Person" is a "Human being" and when the human being dies, that is the end of that person unless "God" judges them as "saved" in which case that person is resurrected and given a new body which will last forever more.

A "Person" is a "Human being" (though Christ is also a person, but no longer a "human being". Also, " a person is a human being " does not really contradict [1], because a person/human is still a spirit inside this vessel. Changing the body does not change the spirit. If you change your clothes, you are still you, regardless of what you wear. The body is likened to clothing in what is written: the long garment of skin that we currently possess; the white robe that is yet to come.) and when the human being dies, that person sleeps either in the world of the dead or under the altar, to await the first or second resurrection. (See above changes for previous position [1], for the rest).


Bodies/clothing: Gen 3:21, Rev 6:9-11, Rev 7:9


**

There is something else that I'm not sure has been taken into consideration: that being that not everyone will die. We (who are in Christ) who are alive when Christ returns will never die. We who are alive when Christ returns are caught up to meet Him in the sky, and are changed in a twinkling, into the new body, the white robe (the spirit body; the glorified body). If we are in Christ and we are yet alive when Christ returns, we will never die. (anyone who has died, who is in Christ, will be resurrected and return with Him <- the first resurrection).


There are also people alive on the earth when Christ returns, who He invites into the Kingdom, who also do not have to die.


**


Peace again to you all,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

(edited to add some biblical references)

[William]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #93]

Nor do I argue that. Human forms have been functioning as they were expected to. That is different than not being used as they were meant to. It 'does not follow' in your logic, because you are coming from a different position than [3]...so the filters employed simply give you a different logic to work with.

Here is the disagreement I am talking about. You claimed that "the bodies we Eternal Spirits are inside of, were meant to be as intended. The way they were created to be." I disagree with that claim. I think sin has corrupted the human being (spirit and body) from the way they were created to be.

But you misunderstood me. I was referring to the function of the forms to do with concealing from the knowledge of Spirit within, anything to do with memory of having a prior existence.
I was not arguing that the form was created to enable sinfulness. Rather the form enables whatever the Spirit animating it, wants to use it for.

Q: Does the human form possess a 'will'? [1]&[2] Or has the Spirit surrendered its will to the human form, by identifying as the human form? [3].

You have not provided support that "human wills" are not created by the Spirit surrendered its will to the human form, by identifying as the human form. You still hold the position that you are both "Spirit" and "Form" do you not?

Because the human form was designed so that the Spirit within it animating it, has no recollection of being anything else...yet the truth is, It does have a history which goes back to before this universe was created.

Neither is this support. It's only you distinguishing the views and then claiming [3] is true without support for thinking it actually is true.

That is the thing about beliefs [1]&[2]&[3] - they are not supported by anything other than those who believe them 'think they are true'.

Some understand that the Creators Breath is what Spirit is. The support for that, I gave in one of my first posts in this thread.

But anyway, you cannot complain that I 'give no support' when no ones else does either. Remember that this thread is about the different biblical interpretations which support all three positions. It is easy to understand that the bible is made up of writings from different people who believed these different positions. [3] is the only position which ties them all together.

The third option does not contain the other two, it completely re-interprets 1 and 2 to something they are not to fit into 3. It sounds nicer to say 1 and 2 fit into your view, but you are still just rejecting them as true, just as they are rejecting your view and the other one.

Well in that my friend, it is a matter of wait and see since [1]&[2] cannot both be right but [3] allows them both to be experienced as real, by those who believe in them.
You cannot support your position, so best not complain that I am not doing what you are not doing.

If you choose to continue believing whichever of the two you lean to the most, you will experience that in the next phase. You will have no knowledge of anything outside of your experience, unless someone enters into your experience and attempts to bring you into fuller knowledge of that which is outside your experience.

Just because you say they are ignoring the evidence doesn't mean they are.

Of course not. Nor do I argue that. Rather, their own actions confirm it to be the case.

Then point out the actions and draw the logical inferences for me to see because I don't see it.

I pointed it out in my last post. You can read the interactions in this thread for yourself. Once Christians holding the [1]or[2] positions see that [3] does not agree with them, they start casting spells of accusation that one is 'tripping' or 'heretical' etc... why you do not read those comments and see that for yourself, is not for me to explain to you...

[PinSeeker]

"Enjoy The Ride" I say.

Don't you mean "trip?"

Grace and peace to you.

Whatever it is - enjoy it. One cannot achieve joy while one is casting shadow spells and handwaving good argument away by dressing it up in devilskin and dismissing it. Good argument isn't perturbed by such tactic. One can resist by it does not flee...
That hocus-pocus [shadow spells] is simply avoiding the meat in favor of the milk - grown ups have perfected the embracing of the "trip" they are on without the need to embellish the story with scary monsters and superfreaks tearing at the defenses ....

It's you that's on the "trip," William. I'm glad you're enjoying it. Fair warning, though: It won't last. Grace and peace to you.

[William]

"Enjoy The Ride" I say.

Don't you mean "trip?"

Grace and peace to you.

Whatever it is - enjoy it. One cannot achieve joy while one is casting shadow spells and handwaving good argument away by dressing it up in devilskin and dismissing it. Good argument isn't perturbed by such tactic. One can resist but it does not flee...
That hocus-pocus [shadow spells] is simply avoiding the meat in favor of the milk - grown ups have perfected the embracing of the "trip" they are on without the need to embellish the story with scary monsters and superfreaks tearing at the defenses ....

It's you that's on the "trip," William. I'm glad you're enjoying it. Fair warning, though: It won't last. Grace and peace to you.

Not sure what you are arguing here pinseeker - you will have to give more details in order to get your argument across adequately enough for me to give a counter argument...what exactly are you warning 'won't last' and why?

[myth-one.com]

The Word is a spiritual bodied being.

And what about the "the word made flesh" ?

The word made flesh was the man Jesus Christ.

After The Word was "made flesh" did he continue to be a spiritual bodied being?

The Word did, the word made flesh was a man.

what happened to "the Word made flesh" after he was resurrected and disappeared from the view of his disciples..

Don't know.

So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. (Mark 16:19)

. . .
is "the word made flesh " still flesh,... or is "the word made flesh" presently in a spiritual body?

Probably neither.

John 1:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

The Word probably made Himself flesh.

If He did, it seems that setting Himself up to oversee the project and exit the project after it was successfully completed would be minor details.

Mankind knew the Word made flesh as Jesus Christ.

And still refer to the Word as such.

[JehovahsWitness]

After The Word was "made flesh" did he continue to be a spiritual bodied being?

The Word did, the word made flesh was a man.

So, correct me if I am wrong, you are saying "the Word was made flesh" and after the Word was made flesh he continued to not be be flesh. Is that right?





JW

[JehovahsWitness]

. . .
is "the word made flesh " still flesh,... or is "the word made flesh" presently in a spiritual body?

Probably neither.

So is there a third option other than non-existence? If so, what?