Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: tp0x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Thomas Carl Price) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Resurrection (was: invoking saints) Message-ID: Date: 12 Aug 90 06:08:22 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Lines: 30 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu >Psalm 6 reflects a common notion at the time that the abode of the dead was a >place of no activity surrounded by darkness. This notion held firm almost >until the time of Christ when God Himself revealed a clearer notion of the >hereafter. Wisdom 3:1 says: Right away I can see we shan't get anywhere because our conceptions of the Bible are not compatible. If David in the Psalms gets some of his metaphysical information wrong, and from common ignorance, and yet gets some of it right and prophesies of our Lord, how am I to tell which is which? I don't have any standard apart from the scriptures from which I can deduce that part of Psalm 6 must be common ignorance. In a related difficulty, there is no book of Wisdom in my bible. I could cite Gen 3:19; Ecc 12:7, 3:18-22; Ps 6:5, 31:17, and 146:4, but of course these are from the Old Testament. What do you say about Acts 2:34? Your further objections I did not understand. You said that passages about the day of judgment are all about the overthrows and violence associated with the rule of Christ on Earth, but that passages about the reward after death are not associated with those overthrows and violence, and then concluded that the rule of Christ on Earth and the reward after death cannot be concurrent. Even if I accept the generalities about the context of passages, the conclusion does not follow. Would you like me to look into the generalities about the context of passages, to see if the two are always separate? Finally, I know I am not the only person reading this board who denies an inherently immortal soul on the basis of Scripture. Could I invite the rest of you to post? Tom