Re: Question for Clergy

Just who is this JP Holding?
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Janice Matchett
  To: jack syme ; Robert Schneider ; tandyland@earthlink.net ; D. F. Siemens, Jr.
  Cc: asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 9:38 PM
  Subject: Re: Question for Clergy

  At 03:21 PM 4/21/2006, jack syme wrote:

  .. This is from John Cooper's essay Biblical Anthropology, and the Body-Soul Problem: [snip]
  Paul certainly thought that existing in a disembodies state was possible: II Cor. 12: 2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know-God knows. 3And I know that this man-whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows- 4was caught up to paradise. He heard inexpressible things, things that man is not permitted to tell.

  @ "...This proves that Paul believed that a man could have a conscious life apart from a body. He didn't die (most commentators think he is referring to himself obliquely here, and his conversion experience on the road to Damascus, as a means of not assuming too much honor) but he allows that he may have been "out of the body" and yet was still conscious and able to hear things (in spite of having no "ears"). None of this proves this state was static or permanent, but it is clear that he allows for the separation of two elements with consciousness remaining even in the separation. The conclusion for now: It is clear that consciousness is possible in the intermediate state before resurrection; whether it is a steady or a changing state is a matter of speculation. ... Previously and in other contexts we have noted that under the Semitic Totality Concept a man is a unity. But this does not necessarily equate with the constituent elements being inseparable; it simply means that to make a whole man, the elements "belong" together. The question would remain as to whether the elements can indeed exist separately and whether a practical dualist view is warranted in terms of the afterlife. - JP Holding - Bedtime for Spirits Much more here: http://www.tektonics.org/qt/sleepy.html

  *
  The Semitic Totality Concept James Patrick Holding http://tektonics.org/af/baptismneed.html

  "...Behind much of the thought in the Bible lies a "peculiarly Semitic" idea of a "unitive notion of human personality." [Dahl, Resurrection of the Body, 59] This notion combined aspects of the human person that we, in modern times, often speak of as separate entities: Nausea is thought of as a condition of the soul and not the stomach (Num. 21:5); companionship is said to be refreshing to the bowels (Philemon 7); and the fear of God is health to the navel (Prov. 3:8). This line of thinking can be traced through the Old Testament and into the New Testament (in particular, the concept of the "body of Christ") and rabbinic literature.

  Applied to the individual, the Semitic Totality Concept means that "a man's thoughts form one totality with their results in action so that 'thoughts' that result in no action are 'vain'." [ibid, 60] To put it another way, man does not have a body; man is a body, and what we regard as constituent elements of spirit and body were looked upon by the Hebrews as a fundamental unity. Man was not made from dust, but is dust that has, "by the in-breathing of God, acquired the characteristics of self-conscious being." Thus Paul regards being an unbodied spirit as a form of nakedness (2 Cor. 5). Man is not whole without a body. A man is a totality which embraces "all that a man is and ever shall be."

  Applied to the role of works following faith, this means that there can be no decision without corresponding action, for the total person will inevitably reflect a choice that is made. Thought and action are so linked under the Semitic Totality paradigm that Clark warns us [An Approach to the Theology of the Sacraments, 10]:
  The Hebraic view of man as an animated body and its refusal to make any clear-cut division into soul and body militates against the making of so radical a distinction between material and spiritual, ceremonial and ethical effects.

  Thus, what we would consider separate actions of conversion, confession, and obedience in the form of works would be considered by the Hebrews to be an act in totality. "Both the act and the meaning of the act mattered -- the two formed for the first Christians an indivisible unity." [Flemington, New Testament Doctrine of Baptism, 111] ..."

  Much more at above link.

  ~ Janice
Received on Fri Apr 21 17:13:53 2006