Is The Physical Realm Analogous To A Simulated Reality?

[VladtheDestroyer]

This has been a delightful conversation, Vlad. Just wanted get that out there.

I think so also. Thank you.

I don't think we understand what the nonphysical part of man really is.

Well sure! Sometimes we have to use our imagination and then test it with the scriptures to see whether our idea is consistent with what the Bible teaches. I hope I wasn't giving the impression that I am trying to do somethings else besides that. Or that I have a perfect understanding of all of these things or that it would be impossible for me to be wrong about something I have said.

I agree that its is unlikely that DNA is going to contain that information, else identical twins would have identical souls/spirits. But I don't think the spirit needs to be the entity sans body. Rather the body cannot function without God's spirit, which can be thought of as a life-giving force (not necessarily the same as God's Holy Spirit).

You'll have to elaborate on that, as I don't understand your gripe.

I think creationists focus too much on the physical part of us. If we focused our arguments more on the mind and our non-physical selves, I feel our arguments would be more intuitive.

I don't see that 'acceptance' as a one-time act, but more as a change in attitude that persists forever, even into the next realm. But yes, the start of that is the most important thing.

That's a good way to put. I agree.

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

You don't think Peter was saying that David, being a prophet, was not talking about himself, but about Christ? And the evidence he presents is that David (not just his body, but David the person) is still dead and buried?Therefore the passage couldn't be about David, since it talks of not being left to corruption (turning back to dust) and not being left in sheol/hades (the grave). And David was still in the corrupted and grave-bound condition.

I agree that the point of Peter's message here is that David is dead, so David surely wasn't talking about himself. He was talking about the coming Messiah. I don't see how this precludes the idea that our spirits go to the Lord when we die. I don't think Peter is saying "Jesus is the Messiah David wrote about + BTW our spirits go to the grave when we die"
Though by now we are probably speaking past each other a bit. By grave I mean soul sleep.

 

[Idolater]

I think it means that we are dead to the wages of sin (it no longer has any effect on us in some way, probably in the fear it produces, since He gives us perfect peace). If we have died (in Christ), then we can't die again. But it's looking forward to a future reality when we will be resurrected never to die again, so we still have to work to not sin in this current reality, which is the mortification of our flesh, or the old man, as you say.

In your view, I'm not seeing why we would need to mortify the flesh, metaphysically speaking (to use a fake and gay word). Just because you're bored? nothing else to do? I can't find the motive in your view, for resisting temptation—again, metaphysically speaking. Is it just what Catholics would call a devotion for you? meaning not a duty, but just voluntary? Or what I've heard @Nick M mention, that it's profitable?

$$ Tit 3:8
[This is] a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.

$$ 1Ti 4:7
But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself [rather] unto godliness.
$$ 1Ti 4:8
For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come.

But mainly, this whole notion of us dying in anything other than a metaphorical sense, is like a camel versus a gnat, or a plank versus a speck. Because when we see a faithful and morally disciplined Christian 'fall off the wagon' into some habitual grave sin (or sins), that seems much more to us like a death in a metaphorical sense. What has died is the Christian, in some sense. The man we once knew, but know no longer. I mean if our brother or sister is earning the wages of sin (death), it's almost like they are really dead right before our eyes, though they do continue to physically live and breathe.

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

Because when we see a faithful and morally disciplined Christian 'fall off the wagon' into some habitual grave sin (or sins), that seems much more to us like a death in a metaphorical sense. What has died is the Christian, in some sense. The man we once knew, but know no longer.

It can be even worse than that sometimes

 

[Derf]

In your view, I'm not seeing why we would need to mortify the flesh, metaphysically speaking (to use a fake and gay word). Just because you're bored? nothing else to do? I can't find the motive in your view, for resisting temptation—again, metaphysically speaking. Is it just what Catholics would call a devotion for you? meaning not a duty, but just voluntary? Or what I've heard @Nick M mention, that it's profitable?

Profitable to what end? Are you saying it is profitable to make sure we are saved? Why not just profitable to please our Lord? Maybe if we are faithful in these little things, like being holy like He is holy, then He will put us in charge of greater things.

$$ Tit 3:8
[This is] a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.

$$ 1Ti 4:7
But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself [rather] unto godliness.
$$ 1Ti 4:8
For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come.

But mainly, this whole notion of us dying in anything other than a metaphorical sense, is like a camel versus a gnat, or a plank versus a speck. Because when we see a faithful and morally disciplined Christian 'fall off the wagon' into some habitual grave sin (or sins), that seems much more to us like a death in a metaphorical sense.

Why just in a metaphorical sense? Paul talked of those who had already died for such things. And why not? If a Christian is a true believer, surely there are still some things that would cause him to die earlier than he might normally have died, right? But would that cancel out his salvation?

What has died is the Christian, in some sense. The man we once knew, but know no longer.

Do you mean the perfect Christian who never sins? Is that the man you once knew? Did Peter "fall off the wagon"?

I mean if our brother or sister is earning the wages of sin (death), it's almost like they are really dead right before our eyes, though they do continue to physically live and breathe.

If the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord, then the gift must be overcoming the effects of sin, not just providing salvation to the already perfect. It's the sick that need a doctor, after all.

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

Do you mean the perfect Christian who never sins? Is that the man you once knew? Did Peter "fall off the wagon"?

I was thinking of an extreme case when I first replied to Idolaters comment, of a priest who was assigned to nearby church when was in my late teens. Back then everyone loved the guy. Even people who weren't Catholics ,like myself, knew who he was and my friends and would I often visit him in his rectory. So I was pretty devastated when years later he was in the news about the following:

From AI: In November 2022, the Vatican's Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a final canonical judgment finding Seculoff guilty of the sexual abuse of minors and solicitation in the Sacrament of Confession.

But now that I think about it, how could I be sure he was ever a Christian in the first place? Could a real Christian even do something so horrible that it would be as if he were dead to me? I don't know...

 

[Idolater]

Profitable to what end? Are you saying it is profitable to make sure we are saved? Why not just profitable to please our Lord? Maybe if we are faithful in these little things, like being holy like He is holy, then He will put us in charge of greater things.

You're going to have to tell me. I was interrogating you to clarify what would motivate you to cease from sin, because I don't get it. Under your view, as best I can tell, there IS no reason really, to cease from sin, so long as you have faith. But then, if you don't have faith, then the same question would remain, Why would you cease from sin, even if you do NOT have faith?

Again; because it's profitable? is that why?

The above was the context of the question. So I'm not asking it as if I would know what profitable means in terms of resisting sin and doing good. It's something I've heard a TOL user here say, I was wondering if that was your answer too.

I was suggesting possible answers to my question, because again I do not get it. I don't get why you should "play dead" (in the context of Colossians 3 or Romans 6) if you don't feel like it. If you don't feel like e.g. going to church on Sunday, or being faithful to your wife, for two examples, then why should you be faithful anyway? One answer for why you'd say Yes, might be, Because it's profitable. I was guessing. If the answer was right, then you'd tell me what it means, not the other way around. Apparently the answer is No, so we don't need to consider what it might mean to be moral and good because it's profitable. I didn't mean it to be a red herring, distraction, derailment.

Why just in a metaphorical sense? Paul talked of those who had already died for such things. And why not? If a Christian is a true believer, surely there are still some things that would cause him to die earlier than he might normally have died, right? But would that cancel out his salvation?

No but that's not what I'm talking about. Sure, if you commit adultery and your collaborator's husband finds you and kills you then it's not a metaphorical death. ofc that's just dead dead. I mean that the contrast between how a faithful good Christian lives his life, compared to one who has abandoned some grave elements of Christian life, to me, to us, is like losing somebody. I no longer know or identify with that man. They have changed so much that it's like they are dead to me now.

So I was saying that if Paul is being literal, that we are metaphysically dead in some way when we believe the Gospel, then that is a jarring and confusing contrast to what our friend looks like to us, who has "fallen off the wagon" of Christian living, and now lives like a pagan in some real sense. That seems like he's dead to us. So that puts death on both sides here, to me that's confusing. If you're a good Christian man, you avoid sin and do good, and that's what dead looks like, and if you're not living the whole Christian life then you also appear to be dead, because you're NOT avoiding sin.

It's just confusing. If one of the sides is metaphysical death (or to put it less gayly and less fakely for Vlad, 'literal' death), then the side where he's not avoiding sin looks more real. Like if he doesn't try, he's going to stay dead. It's a rut. There's no way out unless you literally, metaphysically, pick yourself up and get out of the grave.

Because death to me is not something you have to try at. There's no effort involved at all. And if there is effort, then sinning is the lesser of two efforts.

Do you mean the perfect Christian who never sins? Is that the man you once knew? Did Peter "fall off the wagon"?

Not 'never', but yeah, basically. The man I once knew didn't always commit adultery or break the Sixth Commandment in some other way, but now he does. The man I once knew attended church every Sunday and now he never goes. He doesn't fall off the wagon but get right back on again, he falls off, and he stays off, and shows no signs of wanting to get back on.

Peter:

$$ 2Pe 2:22
But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog [is] turned to his own vomit again

That's what I mean.

If the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord, then the gift must be overcoming the effects of sin, not just providing salvation to the already perfect. It's the sick that need a doctor, after all.

... I mean, yes, but I don't see how this is relevant.

=

I was thinking of an extreme case when I first replied to Idolaters comment, of a priest who was assigned to nearby church when was in my late teens. Back then everyone loved the guy. Even people who weren't Catholics ,like myself, knew who he was and my friends and would I often visit him in his rectory. So I was pretty devastated when years later he was in the news about the following:

From AI: In November 2022, the Vatican's Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a final canonical judgment finding Seculoff guilty of the sexual abuse of minors and solicitation in the Sacrament of Confession.

But now that I think about it, how could I be sure he was ever a Christian in the first place? Could a real Christian even do something so horrible that it would be as if he were dead to me? I don't know...

Part of the blessing of having such old parishes (I'm from New England where the average age of Catholic parishioners is well into retirement) is the modeling that the oldsters are doing for the young, they're showing what the Mass obligation (you have a duty to attend Mass every Sunday and holiday) looks like, that it's a lifelong commitment; being a practicing Catholic is a lifelong commitment; like a marriage.

There's a sense in which you're right, you can't really know, until you see someone keep it up into old age. The oldsters who are going to Catholic Mass are going to die one day, and they're telling the rest of the parish, that the Sunday before they die, they'll be at Mass. We're doing it all the way to the end.

It's only after someone's Earthly life is over that we can begin to make a safe assessment. Who knows what the future brings otherwise? Free will.

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

Part of the blessing of having such old parishes (I'm from New England where the average age of Catholic parishioners is well into retirement) is the modeling that the oldsters are doing for the young, they're showing what the Mass obligation (you have a duty to attend Mass every Sunday and holiday) looks like, that it's a lifelong commitment; being a practicing Catholic is a lifelong commitment; like a marriage.

There's a sense in which you're right, you can't really know, until you see someone keep it up into old age. The oldsters who are going to Catholic Mass are going to die one day, and they're telling the rest of the parish, that the Sunday before they die, they'll be at Mass. We're doing it all the way to the end.

I had family members on one side who were involved with the Catholic Church (including one who was a priest!) and a couple on the other side who went to a Methodist Church. So when I was a kid I had to go to both.

I really loved them both too. And they were complete opposites of each other. As a small boy you had to really behave and act like a man at the Catholic Church. And the old people at the church would really take notice of that. If you were quiet and didnt fuss around during Mass they'd say "You behave so well. You are going to be a man like your great-grandpa someday." -things like that. I was very small but that memory I have fits a lot with what you are saying.

The Methodist Church was just the opposite. They must have had an unwritten rule that the childeren were allowed to run around and do what they want. It's probably a miracle none of us got hurt.

Of course the queers came and ruined everything. Like they always do. Both churches let them in and now they are both dead to me.

 

[Idolater]

Thanks for starting it not at the beginning.
That's a really realistic crucifix, wow. There's not much more obv and identifyingly and distinctively Christian, to someone who doesn't know Christianity, than carrying around a gigantic crucifix.

(For those who do know Christianity, we know that this is a devotion, and not a duty, so it's therefore not indicative that you're not a Christian, if you fail to carry around a crucifix. But if you fail to obey the Sixth Commandment, and you fail to go to church on Sunday, then we have questions.)

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

Thanks for starting it not at the beginning.
That's a really realistic crucifix, wow. There's not much more obv and identifyingly and distinctively Christian, to someone who doesn't know Christianity, than carrying around a gigantic crucifix.

(For those who do know Christianity, we know that this is a devotion, and not a duty, so it's therefore not indicative that you're not a Christian, if you fail to carry around a crucifix. But if you fail to obey the Sixth Commandment, and you fail to go to church on Sunday, then we have questions.)

Sure! But I think these are at least men who love the Lord. And I like that.

 

[Right Divider]

Sure. When I die, my spirit will leave my body. Part of my spirit has already left my body when I was saved.

Do you have scriptural support for this idea?

Jesus circumcised my flesh from that part of my spirit.

Again, where does scripture support this idea?

We can't see it, But Paul knew it. So he is telling us that that is what happened.

Where does Paul tell us this?

So I might even take it a step further and say Paul isn't necessarily telling us these things so we will remember this is what happened. He is telling us these things to help us realize that is what happened.

Men aren't born knowing that some of us are circumcised and some are not. Someone has to tell us. Paul is telling us.

Where does Paul tell us this?

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

Do you have scriptural support for this idea?

Again, where does scripture support this idea?

Where does Paul tell us this?

Where does Paul tell us this?

Sure. To start with, Genesis affirms the idea that death is when the spirit separates from the body.

Gen 35:18 And as her soul was departing (for she was dying), she called his name Ben-oni;[g] but his father called him Benjamin.

Also reaffirmed in James 2:26 "For as a body without the spirit is dead, so is faith without works"



Then Paul comes. And He talks about death more than any writer in the Bible. Mostly about what Jesus's death meant for us, of course. But he also talks about our death. And he talks about our death in different ways, that almost seem to contradict each other. As a separation from the Lord. And as a union with the Lord. But he knew more about these things than we do.


So here Paul speaks of it as a separation
Ephesians 2:1-3 And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.

And here he speaks of it as a union
2 Corinthians 5:8-9 We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord. Therefore we make it our aim, whether present or absent, to be well pleasing to Him.

And then there is this
Colossians 3:1-4 If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth. For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory......so stop sinning.

So Paul give us this sort of multi-dimensional view of death, that is a bit unique from the rest of the Bible:

We died in Christ and we were raised in Christ.
Death is sin and separation from the Lord.
Death is to be present with the Lord.

Paul knew he would have to explain this mystery to us. And he does so in Colossians 2:11-12

In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body [h]of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

He's not saying WE raised ourselves from the dead, baptised ourselves and circumcised ourselves. He is saying Jesus did these things to us, when we became saved. Jesus circumcised our flesh from us (our spirit) but not all of it. So that we are still here, talking and walking around. Just as the Jews did not cut away ALL of the flesh when they circumcised their children.

 

[Right Divider]

Sure. To start with, Genesis affirms the idea that death is when the spirit separates from the body.

Gen 35:18 And as her soul was departing (for she was dying), she called his name Ben-oni;[g] but his father called him Benjamin.

Also reaffirmed in James 2:26 "For as a body without the spirit is dead, so is faith without works"



Then Paul comes. And He talks about death more than any writer in the Bible. Mostly about what Jesus's death meant for us, of course. But he also talks about our death. And he talks about our death in different ways, that almost seem to contradict each other. As a separation from the Lord. And as a union with the Lord. But he knew more about these things than we do.


So here Paul speaks of it as a separation
Ephesians 2:1-3 And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.

And here he speaks of it as a union
2 Corinthians 5:8-9 We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord. Therefore we make it our aim, whether present or absent, to be well pleasing to Him.

And then there is this
Colossians 3:1-4 If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth. For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory......so stop sinning.

So Paul give us this sort of multi-dimensional view of death, that is a bit unique from the rest of the Bible:

We died in Christ and we were raised in Christ.
Death is sin and separation from the Lord.
Death is to be present with the Lord.

Paul knew he would have to explain this mystery to us. And he does so in Colossians 2:11-12

In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body [h]of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

He's not saying WE raised ourselves from the dead, baptised ourselves and circumcised ourselves. He is saying Jesus did these things to us, when we became saved. Jesus circumcised our flesh from us (our spirit) but not all of it. So that we are still here, talking and walking around. Just as the Jews did not cut away ALL of the flesh when they circumcised their children.

Your arguments attempt to synthesize various biblical passages into a unified theology of death. However, these points rely on conflating distinct biblical definitions of death and misapplying the imagery of baptism and circumcision.

Distinguishing Types of Death​

The primary error in the argument is the failure to distinguish between physical death and spiritual conditions.

• Genesis 35:18 and James 2:26: These verses address the cessation of biological life—the point where the life force (spirit or breath) leaves the physical body. This is a physiological event.
• Ephesians 2:1-3: This passage does not describe biological death, but rather a state of spiritual alienation. One can be biologically alive ("walking according to the course of this world") while being "dead in trespasses." Treating this as the same phenomenon as the death in Genesis 35 ignores the context of moral and legal standing before God.

Resolving the "Contradiction" in Pauline Theology​

The argument posits that Paul creates a "multi-dimensional" and conflicting view of death. This disappears when examining the specific subjects involved.

• 2 Corinthians 5:8: This refers to the believer's transition from physical life to the presence of the Lord. It describes the state of the soul after the body dies.
• Colossians 3:1-4: This refers to the believer's identification with Christ. Because the believer is positionally "in Christ," their old identity died at the cross. This is not a physical death, but a legal and spiritual reality.

There is no conflict here because these verses address two different realities: one concerns the departure of the soul from the body, and the other concerns the judicial status of the believer before God.

The Nature of Baptism and Circumcision​

The interpretation of Colossians 2:11-12 as a "partial" cutting away of the flesh misses the doctrinal point of the passage.

• Baptism and Circumcision: Paul uses these terms as metaphors for the believer's identification with Christ’s death and resurrection. When he speaks of "putting off the body of the sins of the flesh," he is referring to the removal of the old man’s legal standing—the power of the sin nature—not a partial surgical removal of some physical aspect of the soul.
• The "Body of Sin": Paul explains in Romans 6:6 that "our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed." This is a complete identification with Christ’s death to sin.

The argument that Jesus only circumcised "part" of the flesh to allow us to keep "walking and talking" contradicts the biblical teaching that believers are new creatures. The "flesh" remains present, but the believer is no longer under its dominion. The argument confuses the persistence of the physical body with the status of the spirit, leading to the incorrect conclusion that the "circumcision of Christ" is a partial, ongoing biological process.

 

[Right Divider]

Death is sin and separation from the Lord.

No, it's not. Sin brought death.

Rom 5:12 (AKJV/PCE)​

(5:12) Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:​

Death is to be present with the Lord.

Not the eternal kind of death.

Death is separation and those that refuse God will be separated from God forever. That is the second death.

Rev 20:14-15 (AKJV/PCE)​

(20:14) And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (20:15) And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.​

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

Your arguments attempt to synthesize various biblical passages into a unified theology of death. However, these points rely on conflating distinct biblical definitions of death and misapplying the imagery of baptism and circumcision.

I think what Paul was doing in the verses I gave, is unifying different concepts of death by explaining the relationship between the spirit and the body and to God and death. So that we understand that the circumcision and baptism Christ gives us are real things. Not just imagery and metaphors. Christ gives us the real circumcision (to men and women) and a real death (not just a symbolic one) and the real baptism.

How does Jesus do that? How does He do these real things? What are they? (I would love to hear your answer to that if you get time.)

Bob Enyart once said that the brain is the interface between the body and the spirit. Now as far as I know, he only mentioned this maybe once or twice. But I think that was a useful teaching. So I am extending that idea here, to concepts of death in the Bible and to what Paul wrote. (Because I think Paul does the same thing.) To see if it fits. To see if it helps us model these things that Paul talks about in Colossians, as though they really happened. As though they are real things. (They are in fact, real things) And not just symbols, metaphors and imagery.


Specifically, these things:

The circumcision of Christ (The circumcision Christ gives us)
Our death and baptism in Him
And that we have died and our lives our hidden with Christ in God (I am taking Paul literally and treating this as an actual real event that really happened.)

Spoken of here:

Colossians 2:11-12 In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body [h]of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

Colossians 3:1-4 If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth. For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory......so stop sinning.



Because Paul tells us, that when he speaks about Christ, he speaks of reality. Again, right here in Colossians!
Colossians 2:16-17 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.



So, with all these things in mind (including the Law, which I haven't really mentioned yet), how might a cohesive structure of these things be modeled? Regrettably, I was not able to afford the set of Bob's Bibles studies on Paul, which was recently on offer. I am having trouble with walking so I am not able to work as much as I used to at the moment. So I don't know, or remember, a lot about what Bob specifically taught about Paul. And I am not as knowledgeable as Bob and Paul were. But I like Bob's idea, of understanding the brain as an interface between the body and the spirit. And I suspect that Bob would not have posited such an idea, if he felt it conflicted with something Paul wrote. Quite the opposite actually.

So I model all these things in the following way:

When God created Adam, He restricted a part of Adam's spirit from becoming attached to his brain/flesh/body. So that Adam did not know Good and Evil. There was no place at the time in the spiritual realm (flesh did not exist there) to learn about evil, so God somehow kept this part of Adam's spirit in the spiritual realm, with Him. So that Adam could still interact with the physical creation, but God did something to protect him from sin.

Adam bypassed this protection, when he disobeyed God. So that part of Adam's spirit which God was hiding from the physical realm, became attached to the flesh. Adam died in that very instant, not because his spirit was leaving his body. His death was the opposite of Christ's circumcision. Adam's death is something we now all experience, once our human brains develop a particular attachment of our spirit to the physical realm. This is Adam's death. A once unique event which we all now experience. (Babies don't experience it)

When Rachel dies in Gen 35:18, because her spirit departs from her body, this was not Adam's death. In Adam's time it was just a normal thing that happens to us when we cannot eat from The Tree of Life (God was loving when he removed that access to that tree). Now we call it death. But it was not what God said death was, when he told Adam "In that day you shall surely die". Jesus did not need access to that tree, because He is God. Jesus' spirit was attached to his brain/body the same way Adam's spirit became on the day Adam disobeyed God. His temptation was real. But Jesus overcame it.

Jesus did not overcome this death because He had a special privilege of not inheriting Sin from a human father. The correct way to understand inherited sin is understanding it as the same "full" attachment Adam experienced on the day he surely died. Likewise, Jesus didn't have to be crucified to prevent babies from going to Hell when abortion doctors murder them.

Fast forward 4000 years or so. After Christ's Resurrection, Paul is saying "Remember the death that Adam died when he (his spirit, we our are spirits, not our bodies) was separated from God and became attached to the Law and to the Physical Realm? That same death we all go through (but not babies) because of him? We don't have to worry about that death anymore. Because Jesus overcame that death on the cross. The only death that exists for us is death of our spirit disconnecting from our bodies (disconnecting a part of the spirit from the interface). And we have already experienced what that death is like for us, the day we were saved. On that day, Jesus circumcised a part of our spirit from our flesh. The very same part that became attached to this physical realm, the day Adam died in The Garden. So stop sinning.

It is the opposite of Adam's death in The Garden. Adam immediately knew he was naked when he died that death. Adam didn't have to learn how to sin. That dreadful knowledge God protected him from, came to him immediately on that day. With our death in Christ, Paul is telling us to stop sinning because we have to learn how to stop sinning and that we can stop sinning. To understand that the part of the spirit Christ circumcised, is with HIM now. It is a new thing. It is a new relationship that we can learn and grow in. So Paul tells us to stop sinning. Because now we can and Christ is helping us.

Genesis 35:18 and James 2:26: These verses address the cessation of biological life—the point where the life force (spirit or breath) leaves the physical body. This is a physiological event.

These verses help to affirm the idea that death involves the separating of spirit from the flesh.

Ephesians 2:1-3: This passage does not describe biological death, but rather a state of spiritual alienation. One can be biologically alive ("walking according to the course of this world") while being "dead in trespasses." Treating this as the same phenomenon as the death in Genesis 35 ignores the context of moral and legal standing before God.

Sure. I pretty much agree, I guess. That is not what I am doing though.

The argument posits that Paul creates a "multi-dimensional" and conflicting view of death.

No, my argument is that Paul resolves what can seemingly be misunderstood as contradictions concerning death in the Bible.

If i told someone Death is separation from God. And then told Him Death is when the spirit leaves the body, he might see that as a contradiction. Or as 2 conflicting views.

Paul solves this, not by adding more symbolism and metaphors to old ones. He solves it by telling us what he knows is a reality.

Paul uses these terms as metaphors

Paul is not using these terms as metaphors. Why would you even think he would do something like that? He wasn't given a metaphor to preach to the gentiles. He was given the reality. From God.

The argument that Jesus only circumcised "part" of the flesh to allow us to keep "walking and talking" contradicts the biblical teaching that believers are new creatures

No it doesn't

Sin brought death.

Rom 5:12 (AKJV/PCE)(5:12) Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Sure, but it brought the death that Adam immediately died in the Garden. It is not the same death some babies tragically die from when suffering from a physical illness.

When an unborn baby is murdered by an abortionist, it is not because the baby committed a sin or because God is punishing the baby for something his father did. Or for what Adam did. When Jesus died on the cross, it wasn't because He sinned.

Not the eternal kind of death.

Death is separation and those that refuse God will be separated from God forever. That is the second death.

Rev 20:14-15 (AKJV/PCE)(20:14) And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (20:15) And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Of course it is useful to point this out. But I don't understand why you think this necessarily conflicts with something I have said.


I appreciated your criticisms and I hope you will make more of them if you can. I hope you will also answer the question I asked at the beginning of this post. Because I am interested to know what you think.

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

Bob Enyart once said that the brain is the interface between the body and the spirit.

@Right Divider After posting this, I did a search at kgov and found the following quote:

For emotional pain is felt directly whereas physical pain first must be translated into the non-physical realm of awareness before being "felt". For in the human brain, the soul and the spirit are interfaced to the body, and it is in the soul and spirit where awareness (thought, creativity, etc.) occurs. -

RSR's List of Things, Real Things, that are Not Physical | KGOV.com

kgov.com

Now this particular quote seems to be from July, 2020

But the actual quote I had in mind was from a show more than 20 years ago, before I got married!

So for at least 20 years, I can say that this quote has been foundational to my understanding of how death relates to the body and the spirit, and in our relationship with God. In accordance not only to our understanding of science and the mind, but in accordance with the Bible itself! And not once in my life have found a single conflict that would cause me to dump that specific idea.

Now that isn't to say the way I model these thing in my above post is perfect. But the core idea I base this model on, has held true for more than 20 years. And I have studied the Bible every day for those 20 years.

So I can't be that far off? Can I?

I would love to know exactly how far off I am compared with what Bob teaches in his Bible studies on Paul!

 

[Right Divider]

@VladtheDestroyer I've still not seen any attempt to address my main questions...

Part of my spirit has already left my body when I was saved.

Jesus circumcised my flesh from that part of my spirit.

I see no scriptural justification for either of those comments.

When Paul speaks of OUR circumcision... it has nothing to do with the flesh per se. OUR circumcision is purely spiritual.

Col 2:11 (AKJV/PCE)​

(2:11) In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: ​

OUR burial in baptism is also not physical but spiritual.

1Cor 12:13 (AKJV/PCE)​

(12:13) For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether [we be] Jews or Gentiles, whether [we be] bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. ​

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

@VladtheDestroyer I've still not seen any attempt to address my main questions...

RD, in these 2 replies, I've quoted Paul directly from several different epistles, explained how I understand them and provided a model, based on that understanding, which involves Adam, Jesus, Babies, Postnatal development, all Christians everywhere and the Circumcision of Christ. Surely this at least qualifies as an attempt.

I'm not asking you to take my word for it, but I think it is something worth considering.

Is The Physical Realm Analogous To A Simulated Reality?

This has been a delightful conversation, Vlad. Just wanted get that out there. I think so also. Thank you. I don't think we understand what the nonphysical part of man really is. Well sure! Sometimes we have to use our imagination and then test it with the scriptures to see whether our...

theologyonline.com

Is The Physical Realm Analogous To A Simulated Reality?

This has been a delightful conversation, Vlad. Just wanted get that out there. I think so also. Thank you. I don't think we understand what the nonphysical part of man really is. Well sure! Sometimes we have to use our imagination and then test it with the scriptures to see whether our...

theologyonline.com

When Paul speaks of OUR circumcision... it has nothing to do with the flesh per se. OUR circumcision is purely spiritual.

Col 2:11 (AKJV/PCE)​

(2:11) In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: ​

I would point out, that this specific verse doesn't even mention the spirit, it mentions the flesh. Yet we both agree that it at least has something to do with the spirit. That's what we mean by spiritual, right?


Would you agree with me, that when something spiritual happens to us, it means something happened to our spirit?

Because spiritual doesn't mean "not real" When something spiritual happens to us, it means something real has happened to our spirit.

So, what was the real thing that actually happened to our spirit when we became saved, that involves:

1. The Flesh
2. Circumcision
3. And the spirit

To me it seems, the answer is clear as day.

I think most Christians today would say something like "Well Paul is just saying that when Christians stop committing the sins they used to commit , it's like the same thing as getting circumcised."

What I am saying is, that may be close to what Paul is saying here. But not quite exact. What Paul is saying is that, when we became saved, Jesus circumcised our spirit from our flesh.

OUR burial in baptism is also not physical but spiritual.

1Cor 12:13 (AKJV/PCE)​

(12:13) For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether [we be] Jews or Gentiles, whether [we be] bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. ​

But again, spiritual does not mean "not real". With that in mind, I don't see how this verse conflicts with something I said. Not at the moment anyway.

 

[JudgeRightly]

RD, in these 2 replies, I've quoted Paul directly from several different epistles, explained how I understand them and provided a model, based on that understanding, which involves Adam, Jesus, Babies, Postnatal development, all Christians everywhere and the Circumcision of Christ. Surely this at least qualifies as an attempt.

I'm not asking you to take my word for it, but I think it is something worth considering.

Is The Physical Realm Analogous To A Simulated Reality?

This has been a delightful conversation, Vlad. Just wanted get that out there. I think so also. Thank you. I don't think we understand what the nonphysical part of man really is. Well sure! Sometimes we have to use our imagination and then test it with the scriptures to see whether our...

theologyonline.com

Is The Physical Realm Analogous To A Simulated Reality?

This has been a delightful conversation, Vlad. Just wanted get that out there. I think so also. Thank you. I don't think we understand what the nonphysical part of man really is. Well sure! Sometimes we have to use our imagination and then test it with the scriptures to see whether our...

theologyonline.com

I would point out, that this specific verse doesn't even mention the spirit, it mentions the flesh. Yet we both agree that it at least has something to do with the spirit. That's what we mean by spiritual, right?


Would you agree with me, that when something spiritual happens to us, it means something happened to our spirit?

Because spiritual doesn't mean "not real" When something spiritual happens to us, it means something real has happened to our spirit.

So, what was the real thing that actually happened to our spirit when we became saved, that involves:

1. The Flesh
2. Circumcision
3. And the spirit

To me it seems, the answer is clear as day.

I think most Christians today would say something like "Well Paul is just saying that when Christians stop committing the sins they used to commit , it's like the same thing as getting circumcised."

What I am saying is, that may be close to what Paul is saying here. But not quite exact. What Paul is saying is that, when we became saved, Jesus circumcised our spirit from our flesh.




But again, spiritual does not mean "not real". With that in mind, I don't see how this verse conflicts with something I said. Not at the moment anyway.

I think what RD is trying to say is, "how do you get from those verses, to your claims he quoted?"

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

I think what RD is trying to say is, "how do you get from those verses, to your claims he quoted?"

I think by basically just taking Paul literally. I am not an expert on Paul, so I don't actually know how I would do anything but that.