A Case for Not Reading The Bible Literally

Churchgoer said:

So are they all in paradise?
Where are they?

Click to expand...

OMC said:

2 Corinthians 5:8: "We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord."

In the context, Paul contrasts his present earthly existence in the body with being in the Lord's presence.
He says that while believers are "at home in the body," they are "absent from the Lord" (v. 6),
and that being "absent from the body" is to be "present with the Lord" (v. 8).
If the Lord is currently reigning on His throne in heaven then all who die in him go to him awaiting the day that we are all given new bodies.

Click to expand...

Davidstarr said:

I Cor 5:3 and Col 2:5 explains what II Cor 5:8 means:

"For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,"
"For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ."

Paul is simply stating that though he was not physically present his thoughts and desires were still on those people.
It's the same for II Cor 5:8. Paul is not yet physically present with God but wishes he was.

I posted above just a few minutes ago what the bible says about the state of the dead.
Your redefinition of II Cor 5:8 goes against what the bible says.

Click to expand...

tttallison said:

This is off target of your thread but you made a mis-statement and I couldn't let it go. The young man did not pass Jesus' test of being righteous. The young man wanted to know what to do to be saved and Jesus gave him the chance to confess Jesus, and the young man did not. We are saved when we confess and except Jesus as Lord. Jesus asked him, Why callest me good, there is none good save God? That was his opportunity to confess Jesus as God, and he did not do it.

Click to expand...

OMC said:

I don't think 1 Corinthians 5:3 and Colossians 2:5 establish your interpretation of 2 Corinthians 5:8, because in those passages Paul explicitly says he is still alive and physically separated from the churches while present with them "in spirit"; in 2 Corinthians 5, however, the contrast is not between being far away from fellow believers and thinking about them, but between being "at home in the body" and being "absent from the body," which is why Paul says he would "rather" be absent from the body and present with the Lord.
If "absent from the body" merely meant directing one's thoughts toward God, then Paul was already doing that while alive, and the statement loses the force of the contrast he is making.
The passage appears to describe a condition different from ordinary earthly life, one in which departure from the body results in being with Christ, even though the resurrection of the body still awaits the last day.

Click to expand...

Davidstarr said:

As I posted above your redefinition goes against what the bible plainly says about the state of the dead.

Click to expand...

RWRiley said:

I find OMC to sometimes be very knowledgeable ... he (or she?) does do a lot of dodging questions,

Click to expand...

OMC said:

If you say so. I find it very interesting that English speaking folks will try to tell a Greek how to use his language. It's remarkable actually.

Click to expand...

Davidstarr said:

Plenty of passages in scripture shows the dead are in a state of:

Perpetual sleep, do not awake - Jer 51:57
Have no thoughts - Psa 146:4
Have no emotions, no knowledge, no wisdom - Ecc 9:5-6 & 10
Cannot praise God - Isa 33:18
King David has yet to ascend into heaven - Acts 2:29&34
Paul knew he would have to wait in the grave until Jesus comes to receive his crown - II Tim 4:6-8
So did Job - Job 19:26

This is not just my "opinion". It's what the bible says in plain, simple words a child can understand. There are many more such scriptures in the bible.

I Cor 15:12-19 shows there is no hope of salvation if there is not a resurrection from the grave.

Eternal life with Jesus doesn't start until AFTER the dead are raised when He comes.

Your redefinition of II Cor 5:8 directly contradicts these facts.

Click to expand...

OMC said:

I do not deny that those passages are part of the discussion, but I don't think they settle it as decisively as you suggest, because the Bible also contains passages that appear to speak of conscious fellowship with the Lord prior to the resurrection, such as 2 Corinthians 5:8 ("absent from the body...present with the Lord"), Philippians 1:23 ("having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ"), and Revelation 6:9-10 where the souls under the altar cry out to God. The real question is not whether the resurrection is essential, because we both agree that it is. Paul explicitly says that if there is no resurrection, our faith is vain (1 Cor. 15). The question is whether believers are completely unconscious until the resurrection or whether they are with Christ awaiting the resurrection. Appealing to resurrection texts does not automatically answer that question, because the resurrection body and the intermediate state are not necessarily the same subject. So I would not say 2 Corinthians 5:8 is a redefinition of Scripture; rather, it is one of the passages that must be reconciled with the passages you cited, just as those passages must be reconciled with it. My concern is that your interpretation explains away the plain force of "absent from the body" and "present with the Lord" instead of allowing Paul to mean exactly what he says.

Click to expand...

Davidstarr said:

This is why I cited I Cor 5:3 and Col 2:5 as explaining II Cor 5:8.
Because obviously redefining II Cor 5:8 goes against what the bible says about the dead being in a state of perpetual sleep, having no thoughts, no emotions, no knowledge, no wisdom and cannot praise God.
Jesus even told His disciples Lazarus was asleep. I don't recall Lazarus complaining about Jesus taking him from heaven to bring him back to earth.
When Stephen was stoned the record states he "fell asleep" in Acts 7:60
Dan 12:2 talks about those that "sleep in the dust" shall awake.
There are no sentient, non-corporal wisps of cloud (or whatever) that survive after the body dies and the breath of life goes back to God.
The living soul/being/creature (hay nepes in Gen 1:21&24 and 2:7 -zaō psychē in Rev 16:3) simply ceases to exist. Comparable to a perpetual sleep.

Do you believe that souls, or spirits of the wicked dead burn for all eternity?
The bible does not teach that either. It says the punishment is eternal. The punishment is death not eternal suffering.
What kind of fire can burn something that is non-corporal?
Rather they burn up (are consumed) until the physical body dies. The righteous walk upon their ashes in Mal 4.
The wicked (including Satan and his angels) "shall be as though they had not been" (as though they had never existed).
The bible cannot be more plain in this matter.

Neither II Cor 5:8 nor Phil 1:23 is talking about dying.
And Rev 6:9-10 is allegorical. So is the parable about the rich man and Lazarus.

Not only is there no biblical support for a life after death (save for the resurrections) but this ideology goes completely against what the bible says on the matter.
AND it fosters Satan's lie to Eve, "Ye shall not surely die."

Click to expand...

OMC said:

I appreciate that you've laid out the soul-sleep case carefully, and I agree that the language of "sleep" is used repeatedly for death, that the resurrection is essential, and that believers ultimately await bodily resurrection.
Where I remain unconvinced is that your interpretation actually reconciles all the passages any better than the alternative.
You say 1 Corinthians 5:3 and Colossians 2:5 explain 2 Corinthians 5:8, but in those passages Paul is alive and physically distant from people while spiritually concerned for them; in 2 Corinthians 5 he is contrasting being "at home in the body" with being "absent from the body."
That is a very different contrast.
Likewise, in Philippians 1:23 Paul says he desires "to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better."
If death simply means unconscious nonexistence until the resurrection, Paul could have spoken directly about awaiting the resurrection, yet he speaks of departing and being with Christ.

As for the sleep passages, I agree they must be taken seriously, but "sleep" is a natural biblical metaphor for death because the body appears asleep and will awaken at the resurrection.
The metaphor itself does not automatically answer the question of consciousness between death and resurrection.
Daniel 12:2 certainly speaks of those who sleep in the dust awakening, but it is describing the resurrection, not necessarily defining the entire intermediate state.

My concern remains that your approach treats 2 Corinthians 5:8, Philippians 1:23, and similar texts as though they cannot mean what they appear to say because of your prior conclusion about the dead.
I would rather acknowledge that Scripture contains texts that emphasize the reality of death and the future resurrection, and texts that appear to speak of believers being with Christ after death.
The challenge is to account for both sets of passages. Simply calling one set plain and the other figurative or redefined does not really solve the tension.
The resurrection remains our ultimate hope, but I am not persuaded that this excludes a conscious presence with Christ prior to that resurrection.

Click to expand...

OMC said:

If you say so. I find it very interesting that English speaking folks will try to tell a Greek how to use his language. It's remarkable actually.

Click to expand...

Davidstarr said:

I gave the texts that there is no conscience state when dead.
You just refuse to see this.

It's a classic case of rejecting some scriptures so you can make-believe what other texts are saying.

No point arguing with me about it. It's the bible you are arguing against.
Are your personal beliefs (or your church's denominational beliefs) infallible and the bible's teachings fallible?
So they must be redefined to match your own beliefs?

Click to expand...

OMC said:

I'm not arguing against the Bible, and I'm certainly not claiming my beliefs are infallible.
My point is simply that faithful Christians look at the same Scriptures and disagree precisely because they are trying to account for all of them, not because they are rejecting some of them.
You say the passages about the dead settle the matter conclusively, but then when I point to 2 Corinthians 5:8, Philippians 1:23, and similar texts, your response is that they cannot mean what they appear to say because other passages have already settled the issue. That is exactly the same concern you raise against me, only in reverse.

The real question is hermeneutical: which interpretation best harmonizes all the data?
I fully acknowledge the passages that speak of death as sleep, the future resurrection, and the dead not participating in the affairs of this world.
What I don't see is why those passages automatically require that "to depart and be with Christ" or "absent from the body and present with the Lord" cannot refer to conscious fellowship with Christ prior to the resurrection.
Saying "the Bible says so" does not end the discussion when the disagreement is over what the Bible means in those passages.

So no, I am not asking Scripture to conform to a church tradition.
I am asking whether your interpretation explains every relevant text as naturally as you believe it explains the sleep passages.
At the moment, I think you have shown why the resurrection is essential, but I remain unconvinced that you have demonstrated that Paul's language in Philippians 1 and 2 Corinthians 5 must be reinterpreted to exclude conscious presence with Christ.
The burden is on both of us to account for the whole counsel of God, not just the passages that seem clearest to us.

Click to expand...

Davidstarr said:

I have already shown the bible tells us there is no "conscious presence" after dead except until a resurrection.

So obviously the understanding of what II Cor 5:8 is actually saying is incorrect.

Click to expand...

OMC said:

What you're doing is assuming the conclusion rather than demonstrating it.
You have shown that, in your view, certain passages about death require an unconscious intermediate state.
What you have not shown is that 2 Corinthians 5:8 and Philippians 1:23 cannot mean what they appear to say.
Simply asserting that they must mean something else because of your interpretation of other passages is not an argument; it is a hermeneutical choice.

The same issue exists on my side.
I cannot simply point to Philippians 1:23 and declare the matter settled.
I have to explain the sleep passages.
But by the same token, you cannot simply point to the sleep passages and declare the matter settled while reinterpreting every passage that appears to speak of being with Christ after death.

So the real question remains: which interpretation accounts for all the data with the fewest adjustments?
When Paul says he desires "to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better," the natural reading is that departing brings him into Christ's presence.
If that is not what he means, then the burden is on the soul-sleep position to explain why Paul chose those words instead of speaking directly about waiting unconsciously for the resurrection.

In other words, the debate is not whether Scripture teaches the resurrection. We both agree it does.
The debate is whether Scripture teaches only resurrection, or whether it also teaches an intermediate state with Christ prior to the resurrection.
That is the point still under discussion, and neither side gets to settle it merely by claiming the other is arguing against the Bible.

Click to expand...

Davidstarr said:

Now you wish to run around in circles. Just rephrase the same statements in different ways.

Either it is true what the bible says that death is perpetual sleep in the dust, no thoughts, no knowledge, no emotions, cannot praise God, etc.
Or it is not true. Any supposed evidence of a conscious living being surviving after the body dies contradicts what the bible teaches.

So, obviously, someone is misunderstanding the texts somewhere along the way.

Click to expand...

OMC said:

I agree that someone is misunderstanding the texts.
Where we disagree is which texts are controlling the interpretation of the others.

You believe the passages describing death as sleep, unconsciousness, and inactivity settle the matter so completely that 2 Corinthians 5:8 and Philippians 1:23 must be reinterpreted accordingly.

I am saying that those passages must be weighed alongside Paul's explicit statements, not over them.

The issue is not whether the dead are called asleep, because they plainly are.
The issue is whether "sleep" is intended to describe the appearance and condition of death from the perspective of this world, or whether it is intended to define the totality of a believer's existence between death and resurrection.

What I keep coming back to is that Paul does not merely say he wants the resurrection.
He says he desires "to depart, and to be with Christ, which is far better" (Phil. 1:23), and that to be "absent from the body" is to be "present with the Lord" (2 Cor. 5:8).
If those statements do not refer to being with Christ after death, then it seems to me that we still need an explanation for why Paul chose those words.

So I agree with you on one thing: either one interpretation is wrong, or both sides are misunderstanding something.
But I don't think the solution is to declare the discussion closed because one set of passages seems plainer to us.
The task is to find an interpretation that does justice to both the resurrection texts and the passages that appear to speak of fellowship with Christ after death. That is the very question under debate.

Click to expand...