The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum cremation

Eesh... you cornered me well... There isn't a single word in your statement with which i will dissagre, but please understand the view point from which I say these words...

WHEN I DIE THAT CARCASE IS NOT ME ANYMORE

When God created men, He formed the body out of dirt, breathed spirit into it and men became a living soul (body + spirit = soul). When men sinned his spirit has become corrupt through sin, also his body has become corrupt through sin. In the Bible, the plan of salvation includes sanctification of the spirit and it also includes sanctification of our bodies. However, these two distinct promices do not happen in-synct; are not brought about at the same time. The curse (of sin) which was placed upon my spirit is no more (spiritual death). My body still awaits its promise, "...to be raised not in the corruptible but incorruptible..." When I get my incorruptible body, I stongly doubt it that it would be the same exact body I had in this life (because my body here is corruptible).

Also, alow me the liberty to reduce this to absurdity... Two thousand years ago Apostle Andrew's body was burried somewhere in (what is now) Ukraine. The carbon atoms decomposed in the ground and became part of a fresh new growth of grass. A cow came by and ate that grass -- now that carbon atom is part of that cow. I came by, killed that cow, and ate it. That carbon atom is now part of me thus making up my body. In the final day of resurection, if thoes bodies are to be made from the same exact elements which made up our previous bodies, to whose body will that carbon atom belong? my body or Apostle's Andrew's body?

Absurd? Yes. Therefore I dont think we have the right to talk about dead carcasses as bodies still belonging to thoes spirits.

Another aspect to add: when I'm saying "I", I am reffering to my being and we dont have the capability to distinguish "being" using a body. I have 2 arms and 2 legs and I am a being. If I loose an arm and a leg, do I become a different being? God is one being, two persons of God do not have a body, one does (Jesus). Yet, eventhough Jesus (God the Son) has a body that does'nt make him a different "being" from God the Father and God the Holy Spirit.

Hope that explains my perspective on bodies now and bodies to be.

Although it is true that the raising of Lazarus' primary purpose was to reveal the deity of Christ and that He as God had power over life and death, Paul's use of the text is certainly appropriate and applicable. The point is that man, as he was created, consisted of BOTH body and soul. This can be further seen from the martyrs who died for the cause of truth and Christ who cry out, "How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?" (Rev 6:10; cf. Rom 8:23). And, at the Judgment when the saints shall be glorified, they shall be given a new body, incorruptible in which the spirit shall live forever. (1Cor 15:52-54) In the case of Lazarus, his "life" was restored to its former state, i.e., body and soul/spirit, thus being made whole once again, his body being not only the "container" for his spirit, but also the dwelling place for the Holy Spirit. (1Cor 3:16, 17; 6:19)

In His Grace,

Marie,

I think you may be reading too much into my mention of the passage. I was not attempting to tie glorification in to the argument, rather illustrating the fact that the Lord appears to consider Lazarus' decaying material body an integral component of Lazarus (now separated from its other integral component), instead of what j..0 implies, "not Lazarus".

Yes, I think I was reading a bit much in your statement. Thanks.

jadeitedrake0,

You seem to be conflating two frames of reference-- pre-glorification and post-glorification--misapplying truths about one state to the other state.

So your reductio ad absurdum about the recycling of our physical elements into each other through the ages is indeed accurate in the pre-glorification state, due to the corruption and decay of nature. But its absurdity cannot be applied to our resurrected bodies, since even "the elements will melt with fervent heat" at the day of the Lord, and what is sown in corruption/dishonor/weakness/a natural body, is raised in incorruption/glory/power/a spiritual body (but a real body nonetheless). In your argument, however, you are attempting to apply the truths of the resurrection body (composed in an unimaginable, yet still recognizable, condition) to the natural body (whether in its casket or scattered to the winds, and continuing to decay however it has been disposed of). Since I was only trying to refute your original premise that the pre-glorified corpse has no identification whatever with the soul awaiting resurrection, the reductio is inapplicable.

Although I am in no way attributing their motives to you, your argument is similar to that of the Sadducees in Matthew 23:23-33, in which they assumed a natural continuity in all respects between this world and the next. Our bodies, when we die, and through all the dissolution that occurs to them, remain, in some peculiar way, "part of us", even when only God knows where, or into whom re-assigned, all the elements are! Although mere conjecture, I would not be surprised if one of the torments of death for the unredeemed is precisely this, that their precious bodies, beyond their control, are passing further into horrible corruption and dissolution. The redeemed, however, await "a better resurrection", not out of nothing, but in some gloriously incommunicable way, "with the self-same bodies, and none other (although with different qualities), which shall be united again to their souls for ever" (WCF 32:2).

Paul, is this a good summary of your beliefs:

-- in resurection we will have the same body in terms of kind and not in a "sereal-number" (same atoms which make up my body here are not (necessarily) going to make up my body there. But my toe there will be the same proportion as my toe here, i will have 2 arms and 2 legs, I will still be 6'2, and I will still be good looking there just like I'm good looking here . --

If this is a correct summary of your views then we never differed.

...one thing though...

Since I was only trying to refute your original premise that the pre-glorified corpse has no identification whatsoever with the soul awaiting resurrection...

...which would be my view if you eliminate the whatsoever part... our pre-glorifyed body does have an identification w/ the soul awaiting resurrection, but a corpse is no longer a body, it remains nothing more but "complex dust". Sure, a corpse was a body at one time and thus, untill it completely decays, it will have some identity of what my body is. This identity posesses absolutely no importance conserning my body; that corpse is not my body. And when I raise in glory that corpse will not be my new body. So who cares what happens to it?

If this is true, then what is it that will be "raised" (resurrected) on the last day when Christ returns? Since the soul departs from the body at death and goes to be with the Lord, and since God will create a new body (from nothing or a recreation of the original body?) in which the soul will dwell for eternity thereafter, again, what is it that is "raised" if it is not this "complex dust" you seem to have no regard for?

In His grace,

Jadeitedrake0,

As to your summary of my beliefs, you still seem to be viewing this issue from the perspective of post-resurrection/glorification, and I must reiterate that I am attempting to refute a statement you made about the pre-resurrection, but post-death, state of the material component of your person, ie your body, and not attempting to draw any conclusion about the details about how God accomplishes the resurrection.

Look what happens if I apply your statements:
to the following passage:


According to your logic, Mark should have written:


Would that change in wording and concept make any substantial difference to the faith once delivered to the saints?

jadeitedrake0 said:
This identity posesses absolutely no importance conserning my body; that corpse is not my body. And when I raise in glory that corpse will not be my new body. So who cares what happens to it?

If this is true, then what is it that will be "raised" (resurrected) on the last day when Christ returns?

Pilgrim, because it is my body which died and not my corpse, it is my body which will be raised.

lets get down to basics:

corpse --> dead body (a corpse implies a dead body)
corpse != dead body (a corpse is not a dead body)

do we agree on this? yes or no?

.
.
.
Would that change in wording and concept make any substantial difference to the faith once delivered to the saints?

err... no.

Even then, Paul, this argument does not apply because Mark is not arguing about importance of corpses, but importance of the historical fact that Jesus died and was buried amongst the rich(as according to prophesy).

Error of Hermeneutics.

I can't agree or disagree with something which I can't comprehend. Is this a terminology thing here? A body without the soul is dead, i.e., it has no "life" in it. Corpse is simply a synonym for a dead body, a body without the soul. It would appear that you are trying to make a distinction between a "dead body" and a "corpse"? If not, then it only goes to show further my inability to grasp what you are trying to do here.

In His grace,

My own personal opinion.... My husband & I want to be cremated & sprinkled some place we love in the mountains. That feels natural to us. If I was buried I would forgo the makeup, pretty dress and embalming. To me, that just feels so unnatural.

This is a nice little sophistry reminiscent of the doctrine of consubstantiation:

the bread implies Christ's body
the bread itself it not Christ's body

In reality, the case is that the corpse is the body deprived of its animating principle, the soul.

For both things to be identical (the same) they must share all the defining variables and methods.

Variables are nouns and adjectives describing the object.
Methods are actions which that object can perform and actions which can be performed on that object.

To say this...

In reality, the case is that the corpse is the body deprived of its animating principle, the soul.

...and base upon this that a corpse is the same thing as a dead body is like saying that a 10 year old Honda Civic 1995 EX is the same thing as a 10 year old horse because both share the same variable of being 10 years old.

To show that they are different we only must find one variable or a method which does not belong to both a dead body and a corpse. This is not difficult to do!

When I die, I will leave behind a corpse and/or my dead body. Five thousand years later (given that resurrection did not, yet, occur) my corpse will no longer exist (being subject to natural decay). If my dead body is the same thing as my corpse that would mean that my dead body will no longer exist! And we know that not to be true! Because my dead body will still "sleep" awaiting the resurrection; my dead body will still exist despite the contrary of my corpse.

I said it once before (somewhere) that the only way to use the Bible to imbue any importance into a corpse is if there is either: an explicit commandment (thou shall or thou shall not) or if this importance can be implicitly derived from an explicit docrtine (like the Trinity). When it comes to corpses... I just don't see that happening.

Methinks we are not getting down to the nitty gritty of this disagreement, but we ain't there quite yet. What remains is 1) for you to produce biblical evidence which teaches that dead bodies "sleep". 2) assuming you can do (1), then all that remains is to scrutinize the exegesis of that text(s) you are wanting to use.

Soooo, the proverbial "ball" is in your court.

In His grace,