How does death...

User avatar
jaydam
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Portland, OR

How does death...

Post by jaydam » Mon Dec 30, 2013 11:05 pm

come to mean separation?

I was reading Revelation and was considering 20:14-15 where the lake of fire is considered the second death. If I was given no outside influence, it seems to me that from my experience of the world I would understand death to mean to cease living. Thus, the first death would mean ceasing to physically live or exist on earth, and then a second death would again refer to a ceasing to exist, or perhaps a second stage of nonexistence or removal of life.

I'm curious if anybody can tell me how the notion of death, especially in regards to the second death, is defined as existence in separation rather than ceasing to live at all?

Is it a language thing? A historical understanding? Or something else?

My mind is not quite grasping how believers of eternal hell understand death one time to mean to ceasing existing/living on the physical plane, but then understand death another time to not indicate another end to existing/living, but rather to mean separation with continued existance?

Another question that came to mind closely related to this one is: If God is the source of life, how could any form of life continue while in absolute separation from the source of life?

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: How does death...

Post by steve » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:11 am

Good points! I don't know how these popular ideas originally arose (I assume it was either through Tertullian or Augustine), but I agree that "the second death" does not sound much like continuing in a miserable "life." This is one of the strongest arguments for annihilationism, in my opinion.

User avatar
jaydam
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: How does death...

Post by jaydam » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:49 am

Thanks Steve. I've been trying to find where the idea of separation rather than ceasing to exist came from, but I have not found anything yet.

The nearest I can deduce is that death came to be understood as separation because to be dead is to be separated spirit from physical body. So the first death is seen as separation from body, and the second death could therefore be seen as some kind of separation also.

Seems a bit shaky to me. While death (the first one) results in separation from our physical body, it is only because we cease to live/exist on one plane, so we only continue to exist where we have left to live. Separation does not seem to me to be the definition of, but a byproduct of death.

Many people would agree that when we say an animal dies it ceases to exist, but why would we not say death means the same thing for us? We just have an extra part of existence to us (spirit) that an animal doesn't which means we can cease to exist twice, or must die twice.

It also fails to answer my last question since it fails to figure out how something can exist entirely separated (in hell) from the Being that causes existence (God), unless one believes that God is only needed to author or begin life/existence, but God is not a necessary ingredient to continue or sustain existence/life.

BTW, I have to say that I lean towards annihilationism because of such thoughts as these, but I obviously hold out hope for Christian universalism to be true instead since I see scripture that could support it as well.

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1920
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: How does death...

Post by mattrose » Tue Dec 31, 2013 3:03 am

I think interpreting the second death as everlasting misery is mostly the product of transferring a doctrine supposedly gleaned from other passages onto the passage in question. IF, in other words, everlasting misery is a true doctrine, THEN 'the second death' must refer to something other than extinction. Clearly the phrase, on its own, lends itself more to the doctrine of extinction.

As to your second fine point, I think the more consistent defenders of everlasting misery are those that claim that God purposefully keeps the wicked alive so as to demonstrate his wrath. To be clear I think this view is borderline insane, but it is at least potentially consistent with a certain sort of theology. Those who say hell is radical separation from God AND say that God alone is immortal are, in my opinion, being inconsistent.

steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: How does death...

Post by steve7150 » Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:10 am

It also fails to answer my last question since it fails to figure out how something can exist entirely separated (in hell) from the Being that causes existence (God), unless one believes that God is only needed to author or begin life/existence, but God is not a necessary ingredient to continue or sustain existence/life.










Yes i think the ET view is that we have immortal souls and the 2nd death is a spiritual separation. Never gave this much thought but where does it say "hell" or really the Lake of Fire must have an absence of God?

User avatar
Michelle
Posts: 845
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:16 pm

Re: How does death...

Post by Michelle » Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:32 am

mattrose wrote:To be clear I think this view is borderline insane...
Matt, would you mind briefly explaining what you mean by 'insane'?

User avatar
Todd
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 7:09 pm

Re: How does death...

Post by Todd » Tue Dec 31, 2013 12:23 pm

jaydam wrote:Seems a bit shaky to me. While death (the first one) results in separation from our physical body, it is only because we cease to live/exist on one plane, so we only continue to exist where we have left to live. Separation does not seem to me to be the definition of, but a byproduct of death.
But there is another "death" spoken of frequently in the New Testament which precedes physical death.

1 Timothy 5:6
But she who lives in pleasure is dead while she lives.

Ephesians 2:1
And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins,

Luke 15:24
for this my son was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.

It could be that the first death is spiritual death.

Also, consider the following quote from Rev 20:12

12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God,

I think it interesting that those standing before God are called "the dead". If this is referring to post-resurrection, won't they be alive? Could it be this is referring to the spiritually dead?

Todd

User avatar
jaydam
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: How does death...

Post by jaydam » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:21 pm

steve7150 wrote:Yes i think the ET view is that we have immortal souls and the 2nd death is a spiritual separation. Never gave this much thought but where does it say "hell" or really the Lake of Fire must have an absence of God?
I'm just taking winter break to review what seminary has claimed thus far. Hell is said to be utter separation from God. If it is as complete a separation as they claim to say, I just was considering how existence would continue since elsewhere in the doctrine class they seem to teach that not only is God the author of existence/life, but is essential to the sustainment of it.

Thus, it seems illogical to suppose that God is a necessary ingredient to existing, but then suppose that existence will continue in the complete absence of God's presence.

User avatar
jaydam
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: How does death...

Post by jaydam » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:30 pm

Todd wrote:
jaydam wrote:Seems a bit shaky to me. While death (the first one) results in separation from our physical body, it is only because we cease to live/exist on one plane, so we only continue to exist where we have left to live. Separation does not seem to me to be the definition of, but a byproduct of death.
But there is another "death" spoken of frequently in the New Testament which precedes physical death.

1 Timothy 5:6
But she who lives in pleasure is dead while she lives.

Ephesians 2:1
And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins,

Luke 15:24
for this my son was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.

It could be that the first death is spiritual death.

Also, consider the following quote from Rev 20:12

12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God,

I think it interesting that those standing before God are called "the dead". If this is referring to post-resurrection, won't they be alive? Could it be this is referring to the spiritually dead?

Todd
Excellent points, but after review I would still contend from your examples that death is the ceasing of life, not the separation from something. Death can refer to the absence of having spiritual life or physical life.

I can refer to many things as dead. If my joy is dead, I do not mean my joy still exists but I am separated from it, but I mean that my joy has ceased to exist. In Luke 15, the dead son for all intensive purposes was truly a person who had ceased to exist as a son. Thus, there can be many forms of claiming something is dead yet it still exists in another form, such as the prodigal son was dead as a son, but continued to exist as an independent man.

Therefore, I would still contend that dead refers to the nonexistence of something, not the separation from a thing that still exists.

To label someone as the "dead" in Revelation seems it is using something the people have experienced to then label them. They were dead because they had ceased to live prior to being resurrected, so they are called the dead, letting us know who is being referred to.

For now that's the best I've got, I should really find the time now to do a topical study on death.

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1920
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: How does death...

Post by mattrose » Tue Dec 31, 2013 4:37 pm

Michelle wrote:
mattrose wrote:To be clear I think this view is borderline insane...
Matt, would you mind briefly explaining what you mean by 'insane'?
Hey Michelle! I didn't mean it in any clinical sense (especially since I'm not qualified to make such a diagnosis). But from my perspective, anyone who thinks that God is so bent on punishing people that he takes people that would have otherwise passed away and purposefully keeps them alive solely to have them experience torture has an insane theology in the sense of.... how could one worship a god like that?

Most defenders of everlasting misery believe that people are in some sense immortal, so God doesn't really have a choice to let them pass away. But I found a couple writers that believed the wicked would naturally pass away, but God intervenes to keep them alive for torture. I think that is a crazy conception of God.

Post Reply

Return to “Views of Hell”