Hebrews 9:27 vs Lazarus: Die only once?

[InvestigateTruth]

Jesus healed a demoniac or two and never used dead in referring to them. To most if not all Jesus said: "Go and sin no more." By your definition were these not "spiritually dead"?

Yes, they were. But not in every instant the same term"dead" is used.
In some verses, being sick should be interpreted as "spiritually sick". In a sense that for example, one was blind, meaning he was not able to see the Truth. Spiritually blind. same goes with other examples.

 

[Avoice]

Yes, they were. But not in every instant the same term"dead" is used.
In some verses, being sick should be interpreted as "spiritually sick". In a sense that for example, one was blind, meaning he was not able to see the Truth. Spiritually blind. same goes with other examples.

The spiritually blind would not be treated as the crowds treated the blind in the NT. Neither would people like a Roman Centurion go looking for a healer for the spiritually sick.

Jesus' followers would have considered most of Israel and Judea "spiritually sick" as the population did not recognize Jesus as so much as a prophet of God.

 

[Pegg]

is yaddoe saying the soul does not die ?

yes, thats correct.

 

[Shermana]

The way I read end time prophesies, all that will be left are those who wish, of their own free will, to live sinless lives.

Is this before or after the arrival of the New Jerusalem where the legions of sinners are left outside of the gates?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Neither would people like a Roman Centurion go looking for a healer for the spiritually sick.

Depends how you look at it.
Consider a society where there is crime and injustice everywhere. In such a society, people would be oppressed, and looking for a Savior who can heal the sickness of envy, jealousy, injustice and oppression. This is symbolically represented as people were looking for a healer to cure the sick in NT.

 

[cataway]

yes, thats correct.

heavy sigh..............it would seam the young don't always use good logic in there thinking.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

heavy sigh..............it would seam the young don't always use good logic in there thinking.

How about you go read my 3 BIG questions concerning Issues in translating and Understanding the Bible and then come talk to me.

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...394-can-bible-interpret-itself-bible-all.html

 

[Avoice]

Is this before or after the arrival of the New Jerusalem where the legions of sinners are left outside of the gates?

(Revelation 21:8) . . .But as for the cowards and those without faith and those who are disgusting in their filth and murderers and fornicators and those practicing spiritism and idolaters and all the liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur. This means the second death.. . .

(Revelation 21:27) . . .But anything not sacred and anyone that carries on a disgusting thing and a lie will in no way enter into it; only those written in the Lamb’s scroll of life [will].

Per Revelation, they will be in the pit. The fate of the life is in another thread.
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/general-religious-debates/123419-what-happens-when-you-die.html

 

[Ken Brown]

Except for the fact that they were practicing baptisims for the dead, on behalf of the dead.
It is interesting to note all of the many different translations of 1st Corinthians 15:29.

New International Version (©1984)
Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?

New Living Translation (©2007)
If the dead will not be raised, what point is there in people being baptized for those who are dead? Why do it unless the dead will someday rise again?

English Standard Version (©2001)
Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

International Standard Version (©2008)
Otherwise, what will those people do who are being baptized because of those who have died? If the dead are not raised at all, why are they being baptized because of them?

Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
Otherwise, what shall those do who are baptized for the sake of the dead, if the dead do not live again? Why are they baptized for the sake of the dead?

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
However, people are baptized because the dead [will come back to life]. What will they do? If the dead can't come back to life, why do people get baptized as if they can [come back to life]?

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
Else what shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

American King James Version
Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

American Standard Version
Else what shall they do that are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?

Douay-Rheims Bible
Otherwise what shall they do that are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not again at all? why are they then baptized for them?

Darby Bible Translation
Since what shall the baptised for the dead do if those that are dead rise not at all? why also are they baptised for them?

English Revised Version
Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?

Webster's Bible Translation
Else what will they do, who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

Weymouth New Testament
Otherwise what will become of those who got themselves baptized for the dead? If the dead do not rise at all, why are these baptized for them?

World English Bible
Or else what will they do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead aren't raised at all, why then are they baptized for the dead?

Young's Literal Translation
Seeing what shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead do not rise at all? why also are they baptized for the dead?

-Notice how it never says that they were baptized for themselves for when they die, instead it says, “for them”, or “for the dead,” meaning for those who are dead, or on behalf of those who are dead.

Hi yaddoe, few if any know that the process of baptizing for the dead was commanded in the Law of Moses. When Paul was speaking about baptizing for the dead he was referring to this command, and his reasoning was that why would Elohim give a command to cleanse someone from coming into contact with the dead, if there is no ultimate cleansing from death...the resurrection. KB

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

Hi yaddoe, few if any know that the process of baptizing for the dead was commanded in the Law of Moses. When Paul was speaking about baptizing for the dead he was referring to this command, and his reasoning was that why would Elohim give a command to cleanse someone from coming into contact with the dead, if there is no ultimate cleansing from death...the resurrection. KB

Wait... your stance on it is the commandment in the law of Moses that a person must cleanse themselves after coming in contact with a corpse?

Umm... that is not at all my stance. Nor would that be baptizing for the benefit of people who are dead. That would be cleansing oneself for the benefit of oneself, not at all for the dead's sake as the scripture says.

 

[cataway]

How about you go read my 3 BIG questions concerning Issues in translating and Understanding the Bible and then come talk to me.

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...394-can-bible-interpret-itself-bible-all.html

i have no problem reading and understanding the bible. i do how ever find alot of people try to make the words say some thing thats not there. if i can help, I'd say stop ranting , keep it simple, to many ''words'' is an act of intimidation.

 

[Ken Brown]

Wait... your stance on it is the commandment in the law of Moses that a person must cleanse themselves after coming in contact with a corpse?

Umm... that is not at all my stance. Nor would that be baptizing for the benefit of people who are dead. That would be cleansing oneself for the benefit of oneself, not at all for the dead's sake as the scripture says.

Hi yaddoe, the verse does not say it is for the "deads sake," it is for or on account of coming into contact with the dead. The washing or baptism was for the person who became defiled regarding or concerning coming into contact with the dead. The Greek word "huper" does not necessarily mean in one's place or stead, it can mean "regarding," or "concerning."

G5228 ὑπέρ (huper)

- a primary preposition;
- "over", i.e. (with the genitive case) of place, above, beyond, across, or causal, for the sake of, instead, regarding;- with the accusative case superior to, more than;
KJV: (+ exceeding, abundantly) above, in (on) behalf of, beyond, by, + very chiefest, concerning, exceeding (above, -ly), for, + very highly, more (than), of, over, on the part of, for sake of, in stead, than, to(-ward), very. In the comparative, it retains many of the above applications.

When Paul spoke of what shall "they" do, he was referencing the Jewish people who go through this ritual of washing or baptizing for or regarding contact with the dead. His reasoning is WHY would they even have to do something like this (cleansing from contact with the dead), if there is no Spiritual or ultimate cleansing from death, the resurrection. Hope this helps. KB

 

[Shermana]

Hi yaddoe, the verse does not say it is for the "deads sake," it is for or on account of coming into contact with the dead. The washing or baptism was for the person who became defiled regarding or concerning coming into contact with the dead. The Greek word "huper" does not necessarily mean in one's place or stead, it can mean "regarding," or "concerning."

G5228 ὑπέρ (huper)

- a primary preposition;
- "over", i.e. (with the genitive case) of place, above, beyond, across, or causal, for the sake of, instead, regarding;- with the accusative case superior to, more than;
KJV: (+ exceeding, abundantly) above, in (on) behalf of, beyond, by, + very chiefest, concerning, exceeding (above, -ly), for, + very highly, more (than), of, over, on the part of, for sake of, in stead, than, to(-ward), very. In the comparative, it retains many of the above applications.

When Paul spoke of what shall "they" do, he was referencing the Jewish people who go through this ritual of washing or baptizing for or regarding contact with the dead. His reasoning is WHY would they even have to do something like this (cleansing from contact with the dead), if there is no Spiritual or ultimate cleansing from death, the resurrection. Hope this helps. KB

I think there's a reason why none of the orthodox commentators have made this particular interpretation about this "hardest verse in the NT". Because it's about being directly related to the resurrection. I don't see how your interpretation of it having to do with a washing ritual for touching the dead has anything to do with it.

Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?

Explain how your interpretation connects: "Why are people baptized for them" with "If the dead are not raised at all".

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Young's Literal Translation
Seeing what shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead do not rise at all? why also are they baptized for the dead?

-Notice how it never says that they were baptized for themselves for when they die, instead it says, “for them”, or “for the dead,” meaning for those who are dead, or on behalf of those who are dead.

I read it this way:
The idea behind baptism is that one confesses that He is a true believer in Christ.
Resurrection of dead means, the sinner, ignorant becomes righteous.
Thus those who are baptised, make themselves ready to preach, so, those who are dead in sin, rise to life and righteousness. Thus, they baptize for the sake of ignorant and sinners (dead) so the may rise. And if there was no way that those sinners become rightous, there was no point to become baptized and ready to teach the cause of Jesus, because it would be useless.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

i have no problem reading and understanding the bible. i do how ever find alot of people try to make the words say some thing thats not there. if i can help, I'd say stop ranting , keep it simple, to many ''words'' is an act of intimidation.

Hey if you can't answer my questions, feel free to say you don't know.
They are really rational questions.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

Hi yaddoe, the verse does not say it is for the "deads sake," it is for or on account of coming into contact with the dead. The washing or baptism was for the person who became defiled regarding or concerning coming into contact with the dead. The Greek word "huper" does not necessarily mean in one's place or stead, it can mean "regarding," or "concerning."

G5228 ὑπέρ (huper)

- a primary preposition;
- "over", i.e. (with the genitive case) of place, above, beyond, across, or causal, for the sake of, instead, regarding;- with the accusative case superior to, more than;
KJV: (+ exceeding, abundantly) above, in (on) behalf of, beyond, by, + very chiefest, concerning, exceeding (above, -ly), for, + very highly, more (than), of, over, on the part of, for sake of, in stead, than, to(-ward), very. In the comparative, it retains many of the above applications.

When Paul spoke of what shall "they" do, he was referencing the Jewish people who go through this ritual of washing or baptizing for or regarding contact with the dead. His reasoning is WHY would they even have to do something like this (cleansing from contact with the dead), if there is no Spiritual or ultimate cleansing from death, the resurrection. Hope this helps. KB

Really? I suppose these references said nothing then...

Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
Otherwise, what shall those do who are baptized for the sake of the dead, if the dead do not live again? Why are they baptized for the sake of the dead?

New Living Translation (©2007)
If the dead will not be raised, what point is there in people being baptized for those who are dead? Why do it unless the dead will someday rise again?

English Standard Version (©2001)
Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?

In most translations it says "baptized for them"

One more reason why my 3 BIG questions concerning the translation and understanding of the Bible are really important questions that should not be ignored.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

I read it this way:
The idea behind baptism is that one confesses that He is a true believer in Christ.
Resurrection of dead means, the sinner, ignorant becomes righteous.
Thus those who are baptised, make themselves ready to preach, so, those who are dead in sin, rise to life and righteousness. Thus, they baptize for the sake of ignorant and sinners (dead) so the may rise. And if there was no way that those sinners become rightous, there was no point to become baptized and ready to teach the cause of Jesus, because it would be useless.

Soooo, do you believe baptism requires water at all?

 

[Shermana]

New Living Translation (©2007)
If the dead will not be raised, what point is there in people being baptized for those who are dead? Why do it unless the dead will someday rise again?

I think the NLT summarizes it correctly here.

 

[cataway]

Hey if you can't answer my questions, feel free to say you don't know.
They are really rational questions.

Pegg answered your questions , just because you do not like the answers does not mean she is wrong ,it just means you dont like the answer.
i dont perceive you as one looking for knowledge but some one that wants to preach his own view.
if you want to know ,then ask Pegg and not only ask ,but listen. she knows what she's talking about.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

Pegg answered your questions , just because you do not like the answers does not mean she is wrong ,it just means you dont like the answer.
i dont perceive you as one looking for knowledge but some one that wants to preach his own view.
if you want to know ,then ask Pegg and not only ask ,but listen. she knows what she's talking about.

Hey, I actually learn quite a bit on here, I am able to look at things in different perspectives. For example my whole view of the theif on the cross expanded quite tremendously as I discussed it on here. I am looking to expand my knowledge of the way things are. However in my quest for greater knowledge I have to ask questions.

More or less I have to build my fortress of knowledge upon a foundation of prior experiences and observations. And as I look around the world I look for truth and when I find a teaching, I want to try and connect it to my foundation. However some new teachings conflict with some of the teachings that I have already connected to my foundation and then I have to make a decison. It is either the information I have previously connected is right and the new information is wrong, or the information I have previously connected is wrong and the new information is right, we are both wrong, or we are both right and there is a missing piece of information. I have to be very selective what I connect to my foundation and when I am unsure of something need to put it in my interesting stuff pile and save it for later in case it happens to make a better connection with some new information I have been given.
I promise I am thoroughly trying to understand the Jehovah's Witnesses and their points of view, even having a weekly Bible study with them in my house on pretty much a weekly basis. I just have a lot of sincere questions.

As for my big three questions and Pegg. She told me
"John 14:25 “While remaining with YOU I have spoken these things to YOU. 26 But the helper, the holy spirit, which the Father will send in my name, that one will teach YOU all things and bring back to YOUR minds all the things I told YOU.

If God is using holy spirit to guide our understanding and help us to know the scriptures, then surely it is going to be more reliable then a fallible human?"


This got me greatly confused because I thought the Jehovah's Witnesses did not believe in modern day revelation. Would the spirit of God today telling man what the scriptures say be considered modern day revelation? I would say so yes.

So I stated my BIG Three statements as to how the Bible does not interpret itself and how we need modern day revelation in order to understand the Bible and Pegg seemed to agree with me. Do you agree with me?