wow, while men slept  , this thread progressed considerably. I notice that even bros came here to show face. I'm impressed by the interest in this kind of subject.

@longman83,
Very nice post. You read my mind accurately about my views on ecclesiastes, and I could anticipate how my friend Bobbyaf will dribble past your post. Oh well

@Pili,
as always you've so eloquently passed across 99.9% of what i'd have wanted to say and more. You see, sooner than later, the real O - G - A had to show up! That 'student' line must be the joke of the century - except it applies to longman83 perhaps
Permit me however to address the 0.1% of my concerns here on this thread shortly before moving our wahala over to that dead but ressurected thread. Cheers

@Bobbyaf,
No need for unnecessary agitation , I was just pulling your legs in my last post.
Your latest post was the 0.1% i was thinking you might use as the backdoor when I read Pilgrim.1's thorough treatise on the subject. Quite predictably, you followed suit. I will address it when when I get to work. However, before harping on the phrase "breath of life" don't you think it would be appropriate if you at least tried to address, and if not possible, acquiese to the arguements she brought forth in her post?
Cheers

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

Pilgrim please note that "breath of life" is different from breath. So when you refer to my posts, do so honestly and completely.

I hear you. I have been waiting all this while for you to enunciate the difference between them; but you seemed to be going round in circles and not leading your arguments anywhere. That was why I had to post those rejoinders to help you see that even the idea of a "breath of life does not adequately answer to the precise meaning of the spirit of man.

Would you like to go through my rejoinders again and walk me through what you perceive to be untennable?

Bobbyaf:

All life has the spirit in them.

And what is this "spirit" that they all have? Is it the same thing as enuciated in my rejoinders? Do animals have the FUNCTIONS of the spirit as we have seen so far for man?

Bobbyaf:

When all die that spirit goes back to God who gave it.

But WHAT is the precise and contextual meaning of "spirit?

Bobbyaf:

Someone stated above that man is a spirit. Come on goodly people.

Please try and fault it, abeg. Not this hide-and-seek games naw. . . !!

As for you, ricadelide, abeg make I rush off to my second job. Will get back to you soonest!!

@Ricadelide

I have been relunctant to reply you, just for the same reason y I was relunctant to draw issues with u initially, over this "spirit" thing.  and apparently this will be my last correspondence with u over this thread.  y?
because my sense of reasoning tells me that a disscussion/debate/information is for 3 purposes
a)pass knowledge, which is ascimilated
b)unlearn things u know, by learning from others.
c)butressing already known facts.
unfortunately none of these three is happening. but out of courtesy I will reply this correspondence for the last time. no insults intended.
now lets examine the issues u raised.

True that. I apologize. I said the same thing earlier,

apology accepted.

however, the nature of our discussion predicates on a proper understanding of the subject of the spirit. I didn’t go into it much in my earlier post and only did so when it became obvious that I and Bobbyaf aren’t on the same page.

No it doesnt, and if u think it does u were not able to prove that. I deduced from your first post that u were running away 4m the issues. Tayo-D mad refrence to the spirit, but did not deviate from the issue, that way I was willing to debate deep with him. he raised intellectual biblibical questions about spiritual beliefs, which I was ready to disscuss or debate out, but the moment he made refrence to your post as his stand, then I felt it was over. because yours was a whole diversion of the relevant issues. none the less I commend your biblibical expertise.

Lol . . . I doubt that even Bobbyaf himself, where he to “put into cognizance” the scriptures we have used, would claim he was/is right. Haba, you and Bobbyaf aren’t even saying the same things! Here is what Bobbyaf said

Quote
So in essence the spirit is the breath of life

If u read my last post, u will c that my first definition of the spirit was exactly what he said. I don't want to believe u re biased.

Ok. And?

be open to ascimmilating from it.

Really? Did you mean to say “the Hebrew (and likewise the Greek) word(s) can be translated to mean two main things?
If it is the former, then, this is where I differ:

I never implied or said anything of/or related to this. and did not expect u to dennote or connote such.

Unfortunately, or otherwise, the same words are translated in many instances to mean both “breath” and “spirit” and oftentimes other things. However, the context of the scripture in which those words are used allow translators to determine what is being referred to.

you are yet to prove this.

2) the state of man that provides unhindererd communication with God
Now, I DO agree with you here, albeit with some modifications/clarifications. I wouldn’t call it a ‘state’ of man, as though man can enter into and out of that ‘state’ as he pleases. Neither will I use the qualifier “unhindered”, for indeed, such faculty for communing with God in most people is actually quite HINDERED! (Their spirits being dead in sin Eph. 2:1) However, you are right in the sense that the very fullness of life of such a spirit IS the knowledge of God, as the Lord points out in John 17:3. Thus the spirits of natural man, who/which has lost this ability to communicate with God, is effectively said to be dead.

please don't argue because u have to. do so because u have something to say.
I stated in my last post that before Adam and eve sinned, they had unhindered communication with God, as a result of which the connection was lost. and that Jesus came to bridge that gap. which does not imply that d gap is now as implicit as it was.
I don't c any difference between what I said and this u have written, in refrence to the scriptures u have listed.

Ok. I don’t disagree that man is created in God’s image effectively as a spirit being. Where I disagree is your statement that “spirit can be interpreted to mean . . . breath of life”. So to clarify I’ll resort to questions:
          •   Are you aware that God mentions the animals as “having the breath of life in them” (see Gen. 6:17, 7:15)?
          •   If ‘spirit’ refers to ‘breath of life’ are you then saying that animals have spirits?
If you answer those I’d know how to proceed.

while your first position is correct (and actually the only thing I have ascimillated from u). you need to re-examine my explanation of the spirit. you are proposing a distinct nature of man to the body, a far cry from my position.
please honestly ask your self, what is spirit?, then re-read your posts, if they correspond send me an e-mail of your definition of spirit, then I will gladly draw issues with u over this spirit thing. if not, your guess is as good as mine.

I really don’t get exactly what you mean by your first statement: ‘defined, as though distinct from the body'.

what exactly do u not understand?

Not to be pedantic, do you mean ‘absent from’ the body?

No.

For the spirit is ALWAYS distinct from the body. And if what I alluded to is what you mean then I don’t agree, for one, the rich man in Jesus’ story (luke 16) was not ‘in communication with God’ as with many other instances I don’t want to go to now.

now I c y u are getting it all wrong.
luke 16`s rich man was in refrence to a parable, which doesnt imply direct communication with God.
I can't believe u said this.

Beyond that, I wouldn’t use the word ‘instincts’ to refer to spirit or spiritual things; ‘instincts’ are quite basal and primitive; even animals have some form ‘instincts’ (the case of the newborn animal's suckling instinct for example). A better word would be intuition.

please do me two favours.
a) refer to the part of my post where I used "instincts" to understand what I meant and to categorise it by your implicit definition os "spirit"
b) and please, then pick up a dictionary and compare "instincts" with "intuition" in refrence to what I said

One silly question: why do you usually put a ‘cry’ icon after saying cheers? I don’t get it
Just pulling your legs.
Cheers

i guess I will change the type of Icon, I look forward to recieving your e-mail if your definition of spirit does not in your sacroscant opinion differ with your earlier posts (mis-information)
have a lovely disscussion.
cheers

@pilgrim

Lol, I'm sorry that you're simply overblowing issues here.

no I am not. you said you were going to pop in and show us the part of the issue of ressurrection, we were not considering. I  was almost tempted to think I was wrong, because u created the impression of someone who had obeserved for long the debate, and has sensed certain things we ignored. you proved me wrong.

like I just posted to Bobbyaf, I'd rather reply in concise lines to help him see in simple terms that he doesn't really have a handle on what he was arguing. There's no denying the fact that man is actually a spirit being - and even he had quoted the verse that said man's spirit goes back to God - which clearly points to HEAVEN rather than the grave.

you havent proved these with biblibical inscription that the "spirit" that goes back to God, goes immediately to Him in Heaven.

I don't see how you have applied Biblical context in your arguments.

except of course u didnt observe well. all my claims on ressurection, I gave relevant bible quotes that apply, I didnt attempt to apply "pastoral" doctrines.

Oh dearie-dear!  How would you know that Peter said in simple "HEBREW"?

don't mind me.
but of course u don't doubt what peter said regardless of the language.

Anyhow, please understand that what Peter said in Acts 2:34 ("David is not ascended into the heavens" is in view of the the resurrection of Christ ("He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ" - v. 31). You need to find out the context of the word "ascended" in that verse 34 before denying that David is presently with the Lord Jesus Christ - in HEAVEN.

lets examine it together.

29"Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. 30But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. 31Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ,[a] that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay. 32God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. 33Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. 34For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said,
   " 'The Lord said to my Lord:
      "Sit at my right hand

ha-ba PILGRIMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!

If there was any reason y I gave no more explanation over this verse, it was because it was self-explanatory.

two men are being compared. one is a prophet named david, the other is Lord Jesus.
david recieved promises and saw ahead of his time that Jesus will be raised from the dead. Peter confirmed that as david saw it, Jesus has been raised and he ended it saying even till this time, the david who saw the prophecy, still lies dead in the grave.

That David was dead and his sepulcre "is with us unto this day" does not mean that David was still in the grave unto this day!

you still havent proven it otherwise. don't use sentiments, tell us somewhere else it was stated in the scriptures that David has risen from the dead?

  His bones may have still been there; but where was the man David himself?

honestly, only u can answer this question. his bones are there, the scripture says he hasnt risen. please tell us where he is?

Lol. . . if eternal life was a REWARD rather than a GIFT, you need to go back and learn what Paul himself said about the GIFT of salvation in Ephesians 2 v 8!!

u are right, I got that wrong. its a gift which none of us deserves.
to say its a reward is hypocrisy. none of us deserves the gifts of salvation and eternal life.
I withdraw that statement. sorry for the mis-information.

Meanwhile, the resurrection is not to be confused for the gift of eternal life - because even the wicked dead will be raised to life for judgement; and it cannot be argued that the wicked also possess eternal life! 

now u get the point.
first the righteous shall be ressurected and then there will be subsequent ressurections. this I will butress in my next post, with biblibical inscriptions to back it up.

learning from u has been nice, I look forward to hearing your (opposite) views
cheers

@noetic,

Tayo-D mad refrence to the spirit, but did not deviate from the issue, that way I was willing to debate deep with him. he raised intellectual biblibical questions about spiritual beliefs, which I was ready to disscuss or debate out, but the moment he made refrence to your post as his stand, then I felt it was over. because yours was a whole diversion of the relevant issues. none the less I commend your biblibical expertise.

This topic is about the fate of Christains when they die. We've all agreed so far that death is nothing but a separation. We've also all agreed so far that it is the physical body component of the dead saints that is still in the grave. So the question is, where is the other vital component that makes up the whole man when they were still walking amongst us? To answer this question, it is absolutely necessary to know the make-up of man. This was the basis that ricadelide was establishing and I totally think this topic cannot be rightly dealt with without us establishing that truth. If everyone just wants to come her and thump their belief in other's faces, then we'd all just say one thing or the other without anyone gaining anything. However, to establish this truth, we will have to go line upon line, precept upon precept, a little here and a little there. That's the way I was brought up in Christ. My pastor sometimes spends up to 2 years teaching on one particular topic becuase he really deals with it. That way, we all have a full understanding and not just voicing what is the opionion of another.

now I c y u are getting it all wrong. luke 16`s rich man was in refrence to a parable, which doesnt imply direct communication with God. I can't believe u said this.

Luke 16 is not a parable. It is a story of real events. How many parables did Jesus teach while mentioning peopl's names? Every time Jesus mentioned anyone's name in the NT, you can be sure it is tied to real events. His talk about, Moses, Jonah, Elijah etc were based on real events. This one with Abraham is true as well.

you need to re-examine my explanation of the spirit. you are proposing a distinct nature of man to the body, a far cry from my position.

The spirit of man is very much dinstict from his body. this has been established time and time again. The body of the dead saints are still in the grave and will not be up before the resurrection. That is what the resurrection is all about - a reconciliation of the body and the spirit. The spirits of dead saints have been seen before as in the case of Moses and Elijah on the Mount of Transfiguration, as well as those seen in Jerusalem after Jesus rose from the dead. This is not the same as resurrection. Resurrection hasn't taken place at all, and paul wanrs of the danger of thoswe who taught that the resurrection is past - 2 Tim 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

In summary, death is a separation. And according to Paul in 1 Thess 5:23, the spirit, soul and body are distinct and there is a separation between these at death.

@noetic,

noetic:

@pilgrim
no I am not. you said you were going to pop in and show us the part of the issue of ressurrection, we were not considering. I  was almost tempted to think I was wrong, because u created the impression of someone who had obeserved for long the debate, and has sensed certain things we ignored. you proved me wrong.

If you go back and read through my recent entries, I stated clearly that my objective was to clarify the confusion on the semantics on the word "spirit". I haven't yet come to the resurrection; as I'd first like us to ascertain just what Bobbyaf (and perhaps yourself) have put forward as meaning "the breath of life" as distinct from the "spirit" of man.

If we can get through the clutter about the "spirit", then the resurrection and other concepts will be easy to follow along. For now, I'm enjoying my "sidon-look" reservation until then.

noetic:

you havent proved these with biblibical inscription that the "spirit" that goes back to God, goes immediately to Him in Heaven.

I did not argue that the "spirit" goes eslewhere. Unless someone wants to get into another semantic cubicle as to where God dwells. . . then I could begin to see just why I need to "prove" anything thereto.

noetic:

except of course u didnt observe well. all my claims on ressurection, I gave relevant bible quotes that apply, I didnt attempt to apply "pastoral" doctrines.don't mind me.
but of course u don't doubt what peter said regardless of the language.

You're right - I was only being facetious, but I dig all the same!

In any case, I'll get to the resurrection in due course. I only needed to set the pavement for us to walk on level ground by clarifying the distinction between "the breath of life" and the "spirit" of man.

noetic:

lets examine it together.

Okay.

noetic:

29"Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. 30But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. 31Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ,[a] that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay. 32God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. 33Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. 34For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said,
  " 'The Lord said to my Lord:
     "Sit at my right hand

ha-ba PILGRIMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!

If there was any reason y I gave no more explanation over this verse, it was because it was self-explanatory.

I agree it was "self-explanatory". The only problem there is that we were overlooking how important it was for Peter to have mentioned the word "ascended". That is what I asked you to please carefully take the time to study in its context.

noetic:

two men are being compared. one is a prophet named david, the other is Lord Jesus.
david recieved promises and saw ahead of his time that Jesus will be raised from the dead. Peter confirmed that as david saw it, Jesus has been raised and he ended it saying even till this time, the david who saw the prophecy, still lies dead in the grave.

Look again - Peter was not laying a fundamental theological doctrine as though to contradict the fact that the "spirit" of David was with God, as Bobbyaf has always quoted that popular verse: "the spirit goes back to God". The question here would be: was David's spirit still in the sepulchre - or was he exempted from that verse quoted by Bobbyaf?

To help clear this issue, let's ask a simple one further: what does the sepulchre hold - the bones, or the spirit of man?

noetic:

you still havent proven it otherwise. don't use sentiments, tell us somewhere else it was stated in the scriptures that David has risen from the dead?honestly, only u can answer this question. his bones are there, the scripture says he hasnt risen. please tell us where he is?

I am not trying to apply semantics to "prove" anything - that is the simple reason why I often simply ask questions and follow the discussions from both you and Bobbyaf. For the present, in regards to where exactly David is at the moment, consider again the verse already referred to:

Eccl. 12:7  --  Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

Did David's spirit return to God - or is his spirit still in the sepulchre?

noetic:

u are right, I got that wrong. its a gift which none of us deserves.

Don't mind me - I quite understood that was merely a slip: no big deal.

noetic:

to say its a reward is hypocrisy. none of us deserves the gifts of salvation and eternal life.
I withdraw that statement. sorry for the mis-information.

Don't take it too hard on yourself - I knew you didn't mean it the way I highlighted it. I should have just let it pass so you don't have to feel bad about it.

noetic:

now u get the point.
first the righteous shall be ressurected and then there will be subsequent ressurections. this I will butress in my next post, with biblibical inscriptions to back it up.

I will subsequently come to the matter of the resurrection as well.

noetic:

learning from u has been nice, I look forward to hearing your (opposite) views
cheers

I've enjoyed your calm repostes. Enjoy.

noetic:

@Ricadelide

I have been relunctant to reply you, just for the same reason y I was relunctant to draw issues with u initially, over this "spirit" thing.  and apparently this will be my last correspondence with u over this thread.  y?
because my sense of reasoning tells me that a disscussion/debate/information is for 3 purposes
a)pass knowledge, which is ascimilated
b)unlearn things u know, by learning from others.
c)butressing already known facts.
unfortunately none of these three is happening. but out of courtesy I will reply this correspondence for the last time. no insults intended.

Wow. Reading your reply gives me the impression you're ticked off at me and i've read through mine to see what could be causing that. I guess you wont be replying like you said but I think I need to defend myself a little (contrary to what I'd normally do). Again I apologize if my tone was a bit off, i tend to be very informal sometimes, perhaps I'd be more formal in my repostes.

First, you DID start this thread, but many times threads evolve such that they address issues that are not raised by the OP - that's a very common thing, otherwise the thread would be very narrow IMO.

Second, threads 'give birth to' other threads, this one in particular has raised issues that did not even come up when the appropriate thread was raised on the subject earlier - and I think that is a good thing, because its not only the original poster that benefits from a thread but everyone who comes across it.

Third, (and I think this is most important), even though you DID start this thread, if you look again at my original post you'd notice I DID NOT address you in particular, nor the concerns you raised - IMO, I felt TayoD had addressed your concerns appropriately; i only addressed my response to Bobbyaf, because of a statement he made. At the end of my post (you can look at it) I DID say that I did not even go into the issue of ressurection. It was YOU in fact that addressed me first presuming that I had addressed your concerns; and which I already said I hadn't.

Fourth, my not replying to you was not because I was fleeing from the topic - i felt it had been addressed and I wasn't ready to go into it it detail; I like to do things step by step and I felt the first step was to adequately understand man's nature in order to appreciate subsequent events that require such an understanding (of man's nature).

Fifth, again in that first post, I didn't so much divert the topic - I wasn't the first person to mention the word "spirit", I just happened to be the first to go into it in detail. In my second post however, I DID divert the topic, and I apologized in advance. I only diverted somewhat when it was clear that I and Bobbyaf weren't on the same page - discussions can't really proceed effectively if your terms aren't properly defined. We had different definitions for the SAME term.

Finally, I am of the opinion that a discussion such as this CANNOT be effectively addressed in full without a proper understanding of, and adequate understanding of the nature of man. I don't think I'm the only one of this position. Obviously, you don't agree with this, otherwise you wouldn't have felt my posts were off-topic. However, that's a given.

Sorry for another off-topic, i felt you were quite hard on me unnecessarily in your reposte and didn't really appreciate my concerns. Now to the issues you raised:

No it doesnt, and if u think it does u were not able to prove that. I deduced from your first post that u were running away 4m the issues. Tayo-D mad refrence to the spirit, but did not deviate from the issue, that way I was willing to debate deep with him. he raised intellectual biblibical questions about spiritual beliefs, which I was ready to disscuss or debate out, but the moment he made refrence to your post as his stand, then I felt it was over. because yours was a whole diversion of the relevant issues. none the less I commend your biblibical expertise.

I believe it does. Perhaps I wasn't able to prove it. You've misunderstood me; i was not addressing your concerns initially. Let's see it this way; when you made a statement like this in your first post:

assuming one dies and goes to heaven, what will be ressurected since the person is already in heaven

In this statement, you make it seem like there IS a dichotomy; saying that, since the PERSON is already in heaven WHAT will be ressurected. However, if one realizes that it is the SPIRIT of the man that is in heaven and then THE BODY is what is eventually ressurected, then one would realize that there is NO dichotomy at all. THus, it is necessary to understand the different parts that make up the man, so as to appreciate the different FATES that await the different PARTS of the man. Have now I proven why I think an understanding of the nature of man is important?

Second, IMO, there's no need to be 'feel it was over' because TayoD made reference to my post. We all make reference to each other's posts when the other person anticipates and addresses one's concerns. I made reference to TayoD and Longman83's posts and I'd still make reference to Pilgrim.1's post in this reply. Trumpeter also addressed many of the things I'd have wanted to say.

f u read my last post, u will c that my first definition of the spirit was exactly what he said. I don't want to believe u re biased.

Your FIRST definition is what he said, but your SECOND definition ISN'T. And that is what I said. I said I disagreed with your FIRST definition but I agreed with your SECOND. Bobbyaf, like I quoted in my post, is of the opinion that the spirit CANNOT even communicate at all and is ONLY breath. You said it was not ONLY breath - isn't that a disagreement?
In my post, I DID NOT address WHY I disagreed with your first definition of the word SPIRIT because I didn't want to fall into the trap of deviating the topic a SECOND TIME! Good for me (and us, i might say), Pilgrim.1 has addressed that distinction that I feel exists in detail and please see her rejoinders.

I never implied or said anything of/or related to this. and did not expect u to dennote or connote such.

NO you did not. That was why I asked "Did you mean . . .?"

you are yet to prove this.

Pilgrim.1 has.

please don't argue because u have to. do so because u have something to say.
I stated in my last post that before Adam and eve sinned, they had unhindered communication with God, as a result of which the connection was lost. and that Jesus came to bridge that gap. which does not imply that d gap is now as implicit as it was.
I don't c any difference between what I said and this u have written, in refrence to the scriptures u have listed

Sorry that I have to defend myself again - I don't argue because I have to. I have been on this forum for a long while and I hardly make posts even WHEN I have a lot to say on issues. In fact, I have been observing events on the forum for up to two months without making ANY POSTS at all!
BEFORE this point in your post you hadn't mentioned the fall and you were giving a defintion for SPIRIT. You said; "the spirit can be interpreted to mean two things" remember? And that was what I addressed; i basically said I agreed with you as well. However, I love to choose my terms carefully and I'm sorry for expecting the same of you.

while your first position is correct (and actually the only thing I have ascimillated from u). you need to re-examine my explanation of the spirit. you are proposing a distinct nature of man to the body, a far cry from my position.
please honestly ask your self, what is spirit?, then re-read your posts, if they correspond send me an e-mail of your definition of spirit, then I will gladly draw issues with u over this spirit thing. if not, your guess is as good as mine.

I disagree with you here and I will send you an email later tonight even though I believe this issue has been addressed in detail. I am of the opinion that the bible teaches that the spirit is DIFFERENT FROM breath. And I am also of the opinion that the spirit is a distinct nature of man from the body. I will move my concerns over to other thread.

now I c y u are getting it all wrong.
luke 16`s rich man was in refrence to a parable, which doesnt imply direct communication with God.
I can't believe u said this.

TayoD already addressed this, and so have I earlier. I am, for many reasons, of the opinion that it is NOT a parable but rather a STORY. If you still want me to elucidate I'd oblige.

please do me two favours.
a) refer to the part of my post where I used "instincts" to understand what I meant and to categorise it by your implicit definition os "spirit"
b) and please, then pick up a dictionary and compare "instincts" with "intuition" in refrence to what I said

No offence but there is no point. Up till now I still don't fully understand what your SECOND definition of SPIRIT is, since I seem to infer that you don't agree that it is a distinct part or nature within tripartite man. In the other thread, we can deal with those issues. I won't divert this thread any longer (unless, of course, if you're of the opinion that I'm doing so even now).

i guess I will change the type of Icon, I look forward to recieving your e-mail if your definition of spirit does not in your sacroscant opinion differ with your earlier posts (mis-information)
have a lovely disscussion.
cheers 

don't mind me, i was just being facetious. I'd be more formal with you henceforth as I have tried to be in this reply. Beyond that I'd give a quick reply to your original post, anticipating that, like she promised, Pilgrim.1 will address them in detail. Thanks.

NA WA O you might as well make a book

@noetic,
Like I said, a very brief response to your original post. There are too many things in there for me to talk in any detail.

Many self-proffessing christians readily claim that once a person dies in the Lord, he readily goes to heaven, yet they still believe in ressurection of the dead. some say both happens, but how can that be?

Their spirits go to be with the Lord when they die and their bodies get resurrected to meet the Lord in the air when he comes for the saints.

assuming one dies and goes to heaven, what will be ressurected since the person is already in heaven?

His physical body. There is a seperation of spirit from body at death.

no doubt this is one of the most controversial subjects facing christiandom today.

Not so, IMHO.

No where in the old testament was the reward of obidience to God--- a place in Heaven. Jesus even clarified this in John 3vs13 "no one has ascended into heaven but He who came down from it", john 11vs25 "I am the ressurection and life, he who believes in me, though he may die, but he shall live". yet he made refrences to the kingdom of heaven in his numerous parables. God is definitely not the author of confusion, but if Jesus said this, where then is David, abraham, elijah, enoch, Moses and other prophets of old including the apostles of Christ?.

Unfortunately, there is so much stuff here for me to go into.
First, the REWARD is different from the DESTINATION. Heaven has never been the reward. All christians go to the same place but have different rewards.
No one has ascended to heaven 'to bring Christ down'. See Rom 10. Secondly, that statement was made a while ago.
Those prophets were in Hades albeit a part of hades where they were comforted rather than tormented. I believe they are now with the Lord.

Job pondered in job14vs14, " if a man dies, shall he live again?", he answers himself in verses 14 and 15.
revelation20 gives a vivid account of a ressurrection and that Christ will reign on planet earth for a thousand years, with the saved.
yet our pastors and preachers teach of a reign in heaven.

I don't see Job's answers. I don't subscribe to a "reign in heaven", the reign is here on earth. We know that of the Lord the bible says that "he must remain in heaven UNTIL . . ."(Acts. 3:21). Like you said, we are made to realize that He is coming back with the saints to earth to reign a thousand years (the final dispensation). We'd do other things in heaven however in the mean time before then.

sincerely, what do you think, do the dead in Christ go to heaven or await ressurection?

Their spirits go to heaven, they (again their spirits) await resurrection, they (when fully tripartite again) come back to earth at the appropriate time and so on.

Those are my opinions on the subject. I could be wrong and would gladly love to hear your views.
Cheers.

@toyinrayo,

toyinrayo:

NA WA O you might as well make a book

Hehe . . . that's not a bad idea now that you mention it. Will you be my editor?
I thought I only wrote a few lines, oh well, at least that's what i intended to do
The road to Bleep, they say, is paved with good intentions. Thank God I aint going there. _{Let me stop before I commit the same offence.}
Cheers

So let me ask a question. When the wicked dies where does his spirit go?

Bobbyaf:

So let me ask a question. When the wicked dies where does his spirit go?

@Bobbyaf,

Lol, how come you seem to be quickly abandoning ship? Is Ecclesiastis 12 v 7 (which you have often quoted) no longer applicable to your question? If not, please tell us WHY.

@ricadelide,

I promised to get back to you. So here:

ricadelide:

wow, while men slept , this thread progressed considerably. I notice that even bros came here to show face. I'm impressed by the interest in this kind of subject.

I'm quite enjoying the discussions; but I had to crawl out of my cubicle to help with something on the semantics of the "spirit" - as I assumed (albeit wrongly) that my "ogas" (you and longman83) were simply teasing our dear discussants on the other table.

ricadelide:

@longman83,
Very nice post. You read my mind accurately about my views on ecclesiastes, and I could anticipate how my friend Bobbyaf will dribble past your post. Oh well

And dribble, he did. . .lol!! Okay, just kidding him. At least he came back to abandon ship with his latest poser!

ricadelide:

@Pili,
as always you've so eloquently passed across 99.9% of what i'd have wanted to say and more. You see, sooner than later, the real O - G - A had to show up!

A whole 99.9%?!? You're kidding, not so? No take style yab me - I was actually looking forward to your interesting comeback - just so I could see my slips therefrom.

ricadelide:

That 'student' line must be the joke of the century - except it applies to longman83 perhaps

No comment. . . until I see what he says!

ricadelide:

Permit me however to address the 0.1% of my concerns here on this thread shortly before moving our wahala over to that dead but ressurected thread. Cheers

Lol. . . m-e-n, what you posted subsequently was actually the epistle I was waiing for. Nice job. O ka re!

@ Pilgrim

Lol, how come you seem to be quickly abandoning ship? Is Ecclesiastis 12 v 7 (which you have often quoted) no longer applicable to your question? If not, please tell us WHY.

You need to answer my question. I know what Solomon said. I want to hear from you as to what happens to the wicked man when he dies? What happens to his spirit? We know that all persons who die that their spirits go back to God. Since you are the one that advocates a spirit that somehow is aware and conscious, then is the spirit of the wicked who dies also conscious and aware?

Tell us Pilgrim!

@Bobbyaf,

You are really buying time, aint you? Well done. Let me show you how very smart you think you are:

Bobbyaf:

I want to hear from you as to what happens to the wicked man when he dies? What happens to his spirit?

If you did not know what happens to the spirit of the wicked man when he dies, then what did you mean by the spirits of ALL PERSONS going back to God in this quote:

Bobbyaf:

We know that all persons who die that their spirits go back to God.

Did you detract there to assume that the spirits of ALL persons would subtract those of the wicked? I simply want to know how you want to play this game before I walk you out tying your shoelace. If your "ALL" includes the wicked, what is the question again?

Bobbyaf:

Since you are the one that advocates a spirit that somehow is aware and conscious, then is the spirit of the wicked who dies also conscious and aware?

Tell us Pilgrim!

I would like you to quote me directly - and then perhaps you will see why this game of yours is not helping you gain anything. If you care for a genuine discussion, please offer the same.

Scuttling around these excuses when you are yet to address the several pointers that have been offered you is no way to demonstrate that you truly have a grip on your persuasions. I simply would like to see you discuss rather than offer excuses.

Cheers.

@tayo-d.

Tayo-D:

This topic is about the fate of Christains when they die.

of course.

We've all agreed so far that death is nothing but a separation.
We've also all agreed so far that it is the physical body component of the dead saints that is still in the grave.

i never concurred with u on this.
in your first post u mentioned a "spirit" in heaven and a body ressurecting to meet it. and my questionswere, whats the purpose of this body meeting this spirit? is the spirit incomplete in heaven? are these biblibical facts?
u are yet to answer. In one of your early posts u said

When Adam died in the Garden, his spirit was separated from God

I am yet to see this in the bible. Was Adam dwelling with God initially in the spirit?

logically u divided man into 3. body, spirit and soul. and emphasised that the spirit is distinct from the body as butressed by pilgrim and ricadelide who stated that the spirits has feelings, could be troubled and excited et all.
to understand my position on spirit  better, please read my post addressed to ricadelide.
then answer this is there any biblibical expression where the body and the spirit did differnt things at the same time, since they are distinct?

But If u insist on this distinct “spirit”, lets then examine this scenario.

I sat for an exam, and didn’t write well in the exam, for just no reason, because I know d course in question and read well for it. After the exam, I exclaimed to my friends that “my spirit is troubled” apparently because of how the exam went. Whats the basis of the statement?
Is this statement “my spirit is troubled” valid or invalid? Yes or no

If you answer No, what then was the basis of paul`s spirit being troubled, weak, angry like u guys biblibically emphasised? Or was Paul being sacarstic? Or did u quote him out of context?
If u answer yes. Then I ask, who wrote the exam, my body or spirit? If my spirit is angry what is the reaction of my body, since u say they are distinct?

Please draw a line between the body and spirit, since u claim they are distinct.
However, u cannot explicitly explain what u haven’t defined. You could start by answering what is man`s spirit?

So the question is, where is the other vital component that makes up the whole man when they were still walking amongst us?

I don’t know any missing vital component.
As a matter of fact only you guys can answer this, since u claim man has a distinct spirit.
my take is man is dead and unconscious in the grave, awaiting ressurection. this I have subsequently butressed (john3v13, acts2:29-35,Ecc9vs5)
if u believe man is in the grave and also in heaven, whats the purpose of reconciling the two parts? my guess is u believe men go to heaven and also await ressurection, but u can't reconcile both.

To answer this question, it is absolutely necessary to know the make-up of man.

no. I can also say answering this question has to do with other issues like the destination of righteous men, the place of the dead Hades, often translated in the bible as Hell or the venue of eternal life like recadelide submitted in his recent post that

I don't subscribe to a "reign in heaven", the reign is here on earth. We know that of the Lord the bible says that "he must remain in heaven UNTIL . . ."(Acts. 3:21). Like you said, we are made to realize that He is coming back with the saints to earth to reign a thousand years (the final dispensation). We'd do other things in heaven however in the mean time before then.

If I had raised any of this in my original or subsequent post, it would have being a complete deviation from the topic except like u, I used it to buttress a point.
The venue of Christs eternity is another issue many of  us miss.
Do u agree with ricadelide, like I do, that Christ will reign and His kingdom shall be established on earth.
If u don’t, please open another thread and lets rub minds on that.
If u do, since the bible says Christ is coming back to intervene in the affairs of men because of the atrocities of the anti-Christ and the leaders of d world will be angry at His intervention, and fight against him (rev6:16-17, 11:17-18, 16:14). Will this spirits u claim are in heaven be part of Christ forces? Whats their purpose in heaven?

This was the basis that ricadelide was establishing and I totally think this topic cannot be rightly dealt with without us establishing that truth.

No he wasn’t. u both refered to the spirit issue, you always made your conclusion with the thread question in mind. He never did. Your position is easily established, his is not.

Yes we are attempting to establish the truth, and God willing we will.

If everyone just wants to come her and thump their belief in other's faces, then we'd all just say one thing or the other without anyone gaining anything.

Of course u are right.

However, to establish this truth, we will have to go line upon line, precept upon precept, a little here and a little there.

If we however don’t stick to the basic relevant issues, we will never get it straight. We would only be gallivanting if we don’t stick to the basics. We all know certain tins in d bible, but shouldn’t relate it to all issues.
It’s a gimmick by Muslims, who often run out of ideas.

That's the way I was brought up in Christ. My pastor sometimes spends up to 2 years teaching on one particular topic becuase he really deals with it. That way, we all have a full understanding and not just voicing what is the opionion of another.

Ok. But this issue in my opinion is wrongly taught in most churches.

Luke 16 is not a parable. It is a story of real events.

Are we talking about the same luke16?

How many parables did Jesus teach while mentioning peopl's names?

It is only in our part of the world that we only call judges, Lord. In Jesus time slaves and workers, call their bosses Lord. This explains the use of lord.

Every time Jesus mentioned anyone's name in the NT, you can be sure it is tied to real events. His talk about, Moses, Jonah, Elijah etc were based on real events.

Yes.

This one with Abraham is true as well.

No its not. Cos like Jesus said in john3vs13, no one is in heaven yet.
Abraham was used because of the isrealites respect for him as a friend of God. And he said rich and poor because of the living conditions and differences between d leaders of those days n d masses. Or are u also insinuating that wealth is a yardstick for Christ`s judgement?

The spirit of man is very much dinstict from his body.

Until u answer the questions I asked u about the spirit, I disagree with this statement.

this has been established time and time again.

By whom?

The body of the dead saints are still in the grave and will not be up before the resurrection.

Yes.

That is what the resurrection is all about - a reconciliation of the body and the spirit.

You haven’t proved this, biblibically.

The spirits of dead saints have been seen before as in the case of Moses and Elijah on the Mount of Transfiguration,

Please don’t get it wrong, the account of the gospel where moses and Elijah were seen with Jesus is according to the disciples. They could have been wrong. Y?
1).Wen Jesus was seen walking on water, they thought it was a ghost, If Jesus had not told them He was the one and asked peter to come along, the biblibical account would have been they a ghost on water.
2). Moses and Elijah lived thousands of years before the time of Jesus, how then did the disciples recognise them? The jewish tradition forbade worship with pictoral images, how then did they know what this prophets look like?
3) Jesus said in john3vs13 no one has gone to heaven.
Perhaps they had seen the elders of heaven, refered to in revelation.

as well as those seen in Jerusalem after Jesus rose from the dead.

Undoubtedly, Jesus is immortal.

This is not the same as resurrection.

Of course

Resurrection hasn't taken place at all,

True.

and paul warns of the danger of those who taught that the resurrection is past

I believe it is yet to occur.

In summary, death is a separation. And according to Paul in 1 Thess 5:23, the spirit, soul and body are distinct

He never implied they are distinct. He only told us there is a spirit, the issue is, is it distinct from the body?

and there is a separation between these at death.

this he never said, unless u re quoting him out of context.

cheers

@noetic,

noetic:

logically u divided man into 3. body, spirit and soul. and emphasised that the spirit is distinct from the body as butressed by pilgrim and ricadelide who stated that the spirits has feelings, could be troubled and excited et all.
to understand my position on spirit better, please read my post addressed to ricadelide.
then answer this is there any biblibical expression where the body and the spirit did differnt things at the same time, since they are distinct?
<<snip>>

I sat for an exam, and didn’t write well in the exam, for just no reason, because I know d course in question and read well for it. After the exam, I exclaimed to my friends that “my spirit is troubled” apparently because of how the exam went. Whats the basis of the statement?
Is this statement “my spirit is troubled” valid or invalid? Yes or no

If you answer No, what then was the basis of paul`s spirit being troubled, weak, angry like u guys biblibically emphasised? Or was Paul being sacarstic? Or did u quote him out of context?
If u answer yes. Then I ask, who wrote the exam, my body or spirit? If my spirit is angry what is the reaction of my body, since u say they are distinct?

noetic:

But If u insist on this distinct “spirit”, lets then examine this scenario.

The simple premise here from which you seem to be launching your recent discourses is hinged on the word "distinct".

Please understand here that the word distinct simply means that the "BODY" is not the same thing as the "SOUL" or "SPIRIT".

That is all there is to the meaning of the word "distinct".

You seem to have rather stretched that word to connote things that are simply spiralling away from the simple core concerns of the present discussion. To me, it seems you're trying to advance the idea that the body must be connected with the spirit of man in order for either of them to even EXIST at all. Please correct me where I may be wrong - and I gracefully acknowledge same.

However, we could appreciate a clear focus of this discussion if we all try to keep our ideas as neatly as could be managed. In which case, I would ask: is the body "distinct" from the soul and spirit of man or NOT?

noetic:

Please draw a line between the body and spirit, since u claim they are distinct.
However, u cannot explicitly explain what u haven’t defined.

I think your request has already been cogently attended to - and for the life of me, no one would really be interested in a repeat session.

I would simply leave you with this fact: the Bible makes a distinction between the SPIRIT, SOUL and BODY of man (1 Thes. 5:23); also, to demsontrate that they are "distinct", the same Bible speaks clearly of the "dividing asunder of soul and spirit" in Hebrews 4:12. Could we read from you what you make of those verses? WHY would the apostle be speaking of a "dividing asunder of soul and spirit" if they were NOT "distinct" from one another?

noetic:

You could start by answering what is man`s spirit?

That was the very reason why I have tried to invite you guys over to the other thread - as earlier:

I had hoped that the issue of distinguishing between the components of man would have been discussed at length in an appropriate thread - Spirit, Soul and Body - What's The Difference?. Bobbyaf, noetic, olabowale. . . any luck of seeing you guys there with seasoned entries?

(https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-104156.32.html#msg1853599)

Cheers.

@pilgrim

pilgrim.1:

I stated clearly that my objective was to clarify the confusion on the semantics on the word "spirit". as I'd first like us to ascertain just what Bobbyaf (and perhaps yourself) have put forward as meaning "the breath of life" as distinct from the "spirit" of man.

honestly, thats irrelevant. y? because we said the dead are awaiting ressurection, tayo-d said their body is in the grave, and their spirit is in heaven. we countered that saying, no one is in heaven. man "spirit" and body is awaiting judgement in the grave. then d clarification of the spirit began.
u still did not answer d question do the dead in Christ go to heaven or await ressurection?

For now, I'm enjoying my "sidon-look" reservation until then.

i m waiting.

I did not argue that the "spirit" goes eslewhere. Unless someone wants to get into another semantic cubicle as to where God dwells. . . then I could begin to see just why I need to "prove" anything thereto.

u could help by first definig the spirit. that way we will understand better that the spirit goes to God.
and must that neccsarily mean Heaven?

God`s throne and dwelling place is in heaven, since he existed before the creation of heaven, we can't say precisely where He dwelled then. Jesus came and said He lives is us, His future kingdom shall also be established on earth with us. not also forgetting that He is omni-prescent. so the dwelling place of God in my opinion is not the issue.

In any case, I'll get to the resurrection in due course. I only needed to set the pavement for us to walk on level ground by clarifying the distinction between "the breath of life" and the "spirit" of man.

the clarification is only important if it affects your anwer. answer the thread and give your reasons.

I agree it was "self-explanatory". The only problem there is that we were overlooking how important it was for Peter to have mentioned the word "ascended". That is what I asked you to please carefully take the time to study in its context.

please be more explicit as to what context u think peter was talking. I still don't get u.

Look again - Peter was not laying a fundamental theological doctrine as though to contradict the fact that the "spirit" of David was with God,

yes he wasnt, but he never said david has a "distinct spirit" with God. to him david is dead and buried.

as Bobbyaf has always quoted that popular verse: "the spirit goes back to God".

yes the "spirit" goes back to God. your individual interpretation of the "spirit" is what differs, and whether it is distinct.
like I stated earlier, God has so many dwelling places, we need to establish takes that breadth of man meets him.

The question here would be: was David's spirit still in the sepulchre -

depending on what u call "spirit", there is no being in heaven John3vs13, so david is in his sepulchure.

or was he exempted from that verse quoted by Bobbyaf?

no he wasnt because he is not immortal.

To help clear this issue, let's ask a simple one further: what does the sepulchre hold - the bones, or the spirit of man?

the sepulchre holds david. the onus is on u to prove that david has a distinct "spirit" in heaven.

For the present, in regards to where exactly David is at the moment, consider again the verse already referred to:
Eccl. 12:7  --  Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

ok.

Did David's spirit return to God - or is his spirit still in the sepulchre?

by my knowledge of the spirit,(please read my initial post to radecalide) the spirit is not distinct from the body. his return to God could mean
1) account his stewardship to God.
2)or his place among the dead in Hades.

I will subsequently come to the matter of the resurrection as well.

I really want to hear your views.

cheers

yes!

@all

this people described here (below), where are they?

Rev. 6:9-10 - "And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? "?

I thought u said they were in heaven?

@noetic,
I don't want to respond to you since you obviously didn't consider it important to respond to my direct take on the thread.

However, don't allude statements to me that i didnt say. I NEVER said the spirit of man has feelings. It might seem trivial but it isn't.

Beyond that, I think I've established the case (at least in my most recent posts) for WHY an understanding of man's makeup is crucial to understanding man's destination. Your assumption that I've not addressed that necessity is NOT because I didn't but becuase your position is different than mine. In other words, because you hold to the position that man lies in the grave, you do not think it is important to understand man's make up. I've shown that that isn't the case.

The word play on 'distinct' isn't such a big issue IMO. I'll just give a very concise summary. The spirit doesn't have to be doing another thing from the body at the same time in order for the spirit to be distinct from it. Jesus told the apostles: "the spirit is willing BUT the flesh is weak". It is a given that the spirit, for physical things, has to act through the body. The "BUT" in Jesus' statement shows that the physical limitation poses a problem for the spirit. That is why the whole point of the life of the christian, to be spirit-controlled or spirit-led and NOT to be led by the flesh. Paul shows us this clear dichotomy both in Romans and Galatians, and that dichotomy (of flesh - actually, the sinful nature of the soul - and spirit) is only resolved by exercising the will to "yeild one's members" or one's body to the leading or control of the Spirit of God in our spirits. Paul said "I beat my body, making it my slave"

Also, I still don't understand YOUR position on 'spirit' and you have not addressed it in the appropriate thread neither. Perhaps if TayoD reads your reply to me he'd be able to make some inferences that I couldn't make.

I'll stop there for now. Cheers.

@Pilgrim,
How's the going?

Actually, that wasn't my 0.1%. When I noticed the direction the thread was progressing, I decided to mellow so as not to stifle the progression towards addressing the original issues in the first post since my post would have been in response to the questions I posed to Bobby.

I trust that you'd advance the topic in getting to that conclusion. I can already envisage another well-written five-part (A, B, C, D, E) treatise on the subject from your end .
Cheers

@noetic,

noetic:

@pilgrim
honestly, thats irrelevant. y? because we said the dead are awaiting ressurection, tayo-d said their body is in the grave, and their spirit is in heaven. we countered that saying, no one is in heaven. man "spirit" and body is awaiting judgement in the grave. then d clarification of the spirit began.

I think you are hoping that the point I made is irrelevant; however, you only managed to clarify and buttress my point rather than establish that it was "irrelvant".

The whole crux of the matter here is on what exactly is the spirit of man - how does Scripture use it in its varied applications. If we can come to a concensus on this, the discussion on the resurrection would become clearer. To assume without qualification that both the body and the spirit are in the grave is the reason why we have again and again established the fact that they are NOT - offering that persuasion from Scripture.

Even Bobbyaf has referenced a verse that reminds us that at death, the body and the spirit of man are SEPARATED - please go and see it again: (Eccl. 12 v 7) - that verse does not hint that BOTH body and spirit remain in the grave!!

This is why we have taken the time to examine the meaning of the "spirit" of man as used in the Bible - and to suddenly assume that it is irrelevant for us to make that examination is quite unfortunate.

noetic:

u still did not answer d question do the dead in Christ go to heaven or await ressurection?

Please, noetic, please please and please: that question has been answered once too many times!! The dead in Christ go to HEAVEN - and if you never read that answer, what is the basis of the debate all this while?

noetic:

i m waiting.

Please do.

noetic:

u could help by first definig the spirit. that way we will understand better that the spirit goes to God.
and must that neccsarily mean Heaven?

Phew!!    WHAT have I been doing all this while other than that very thing - DEFINING the "spirit" of man, eh? Please go back and read it - for did I not say already in this wise:

It is that part of man himself that is able to grasp spiritual matters
in the things of God, as well as express intelligent worship to Him.

Lol. . . wait first. . . you sound like I never attempted to offer you a meaning anywhere about the "spirit" of man. Please go back and read my previous posts - excerpt:

pilgrim.1:

<sup>One can readily see that spirit is distinct from breath; and both words in Hebrew as they appear in those verses are not the same:

(A) SPIRIT - רוּח (rûach)      

(B) BREATH - נשׁמה (n[sup]e</sup>shâmâh)[/sup]

^{The former ("spirit" - רוּח [rûach]) is used especially in reference to man as a rational being, including its [i.e., the spirit's] expression and functions (Strong's Concordance).} It is that part of man himself that is able to grasp spiritual matters in the things of God, as well as express intelligent worship to Him. <sup>This is clear in the following examples:

Isaiah: Isaiah 26:9
With my soul have I desired thee in the night;
yea, with my spirit within me will I seek thee early:
for when thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants
of the world will learn righteousness.

Mary: Luke 1:46-47
And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.

Paul: 1 Cor. 14:14
For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth,
but my understanding is unfruitful.</sup>

Em. . . did I offer a definition earlier or not?

@noetic,

noetic:

God`s throne and dwelling place is in heaven, since he existed before the creation of heaven, we can't say precisely where He dwelled then. Jesus came and said He lives is us, His future kingdom shall also be established on earth with us. not also forgetting that He is omni-prescent. so the dwelling place of God in my opinion is not the issue.

Hehe. . . more subjects are creeping in.

Okay. . first, you wanted us to stick with the "resurrection" and not make the distinctions between the components of man an issue. Right-O! We got the invitation to go to the appropriate thread and discuss that.

Next! It is not the distinctions that are in view - you appealed we look into the "resurrection'. Phew! We hear!

And now. . . it is not the dwelling place of God that is in view - heaven or otherwise!

Abeg, noetic. . . this is already spinning round.

The question again . . if I understand from the topic. . . mentions HEAVEN:

Do The Dead In Christ Go To Heaven Or Await Ressurrection?

We are clear that they go to God.

Now question: where is God - in HEAVEN. . . or ?!?

noetic:

the clarification is only important if it affects your anwer. answer the thread and give your reasons.

Done.

noetic:

please be more explicit as to what context u think peter was talking. I still don't get u.

But wait first, noetic. . . you're asking some fascinating questions O!

Please excuse me - I don't mean to laugh like that. But I have already provided the context - I said so a couple of times already!! See an example:

pilgrim.1:

^{Anyhow, please understand that what Peter said in Acts 2:34 ("David is not ascended into the heavens" is} in view of the the resurrection of Christ ("He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ" - v. 31). ^{You need to find out the context of the word "ascended" in that verse 34 before denying that David is presently with the Lord Jesus Christ - in} HEAVEN.

Again, I already did what you are asking again of me!

noetic:

yes he wasnt, but he never said david has a "distinct spirit" with God. to him david is dead and buried.

Nor did he say that David was a spirit in the sepulchre.

From the collective testimony of Scripture, are we agreed that the spirit of man goes back to God - yes or no?

~ If "YES", would David be an exemption to Eccl. 12 v 7??

~ If "NO" where is the "spirit" of david according to Eccl. 12 v 7?

noetic:

yes the "spirit" goes back to God. your individual interpretation of the "spirit" is what differs, and whether it is distinct.

Dear brother, I have offered a clear pointer in my previous rejoinders to demonstrate the distinction of the spirit, soul and body - they are not the same.

Second, I often try to remind you guys that the Bible shows that there is a distinction between those components by offering 1 Thes. 5:23 and Hebrews 4:12. I also offered a few questions to help you guys come round this point - I don't see your answers anywhere.

noetic:

like I stated earlier, God has so many dwelling places, we need to establish takes that breadth of man meets him.

In all the places that God dwells, HEAVEN is not one of them? That being so, the "spirit" returns to God - whereever you assume He dwells. If that is not HEAVEN, please tell us where exactly it is!

noetic:

depending on what u call "spirit", there is no being in heaven John3vs13, so david is in his sepulchure.

Please go and read what I offered about the "spirit" of man - I just re-quoted it above.

John 3 v 13 is speaking in context of what I pointed out in Peter's sermon as re-quoted above again. (Please keep the ASCENSION in clear view - it is connected with the RESURRECTION)

noetic:

no he wasnt because he is not immortal.

I never made the case that Eccl. 12 v 7 applies ONLY to IMMORTAL persons (if there were any). In anycase, if he wasn't exempted, then what again have you been arguing? Does that not already establish the fact that you have only agreed with what you tried to disagree with at first?

noetic:

the sepulchre holds david. the onus is on u to prove that david has a distinct "spirit" in heaven.

Still on Eccl. 12 v 7 - is David exempted from that verse? Does that verse prove that the spirit of David is in the sepulchre?

noetic:

by my knowledge of the spirit,(please read my initial post to radecalide) the spirit is not distinct from the body. his return to God could mean
1) account his stewardship to God.
2)or his place among the dead in Hades.

Lol. . . the words in bold is funny! What - "the spirit is not distinct from the body"??

Lol does that mean that the body and the spirit are the SAME?

noetic:

I really want to hear your views.

cheers

I have been trying to share them best I could.

Enjoy.

@noetic,

noetic:

@all

this people described here (below), where are they?

Rev. 6:9-10 - "And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? "?

I thought u said they were in heaven?

(a) They could not have been in the GRAVE:

~ the grave is not the same place as the ALTAR:
"I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God"

(b) They could not have been on EARTH:

~ that is why they cried about those on earth:
"avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth"

If these people were in the graves, could you please kindly establih WHERE it says so?

@ricadelide,

ricadelide:

@Pilgrim,
How's the going?

Bo, my bros - I'm doing ok. Given time off work today to settle in my new apartment. Your sister lazy and has been playing instead of cleaning!

ricadelide:

Actually, that wasn't my 0.1%.

I thought as much! When you finally land, food go don!

ricadelide:

When I noticed the direction the thread was progressing, I decided to mellow so as not to stifle the progression towards addressing the original issues in the first post since my post would have been in response to the questions I posed to Bobby.

Aye. The reason why I decided to follow up and post rejoinders to follow up the discussion was in view of that same fact - we have been waiting for Bbbyaf's answers to the simple questions you and longman83 offered. Seeing that they haven't helped matters much, I had to try and help the thread.

ricadelide:

I trust that you'd advance the topic in getting to that conclusion. I can already envisage another well-written five-part (A, B, C, D, E) treatise on the subject from your end .
Cheers

Lol. . . I never really start. Since we have been asked to "define" the spirit (I anticipated that query would show up sooner than later), I have done that already and also invited our dear discussants to proceed to the relevant threads where we could all further the discussion on the difference between the components of man - spirit, soul, body: what's the difference?

As for the parts A-E. . . lol, I am still your student O!

Cheers.

pilgrim.1:

I think you are hoping that the point I made is irrelevant; however, you only managed to clarify and buttress my point rather than establish that it was "irrelvant".

if I was, then there is no point disagreeing. If u think I clarified it better, good for u.

The whole crux of the matter here is on what exactly is the spirit of man - how does Scripture use it in its varied applications.

I have offered my opinion in the appropriate thread.

If we can come to a concensus on this, the discussion on the resurrection would become clearer.

it is still not a parameter.

To assume without qualification that both the body and the spirit are in the grave is the reason why we have again and again established the fact that they are NOT - offering that persuasion from Scripture.

what then is your understanding of the spirit?

Even Bobbyaf has referenced a verse that reminds us that at death, the body and the spirit of man are SEPARATED - please go and see it again: (Eccl. 12 v 7) - that verse does not hint that BOTH body and spirit remain in the grave!!

but according to u, the "spirit has ascended into heaven. prove it.

This is why we have taken the time to examine the meaning of the "spirit" of man as used in the Bible - and to suddenly assume that it is irrelevant for us to make that examination is quite unfortunate.

I insist that, that I have offered my opinion on the spirit in the right thread.

Please, noetic, please please and please:

must u shout?.

that question has been answered once too many times!! The dead in Christ go to HEAVEN - and if you never read that answer, what is the basis of the debate all this while?

their body or spirit? we have both examined the scriptures where we established that the dead are buried, u havent told of us where the spirit of the dead are seen dwelling in heaven.

Please do.

I still am.

Phew!!    WHAT have I been doing all this while other than that very thing - DEFINING the "spirit" of man, eh? Please go back and read it - for did I not say already in this wise:

yes ma.
but u since u also claim that spirit is distinct and not inherent in man. tell us where in the bible it is seen dwelling with God?

It is that part of man himself that is able to grasp spiritual matters
in the things of God, as well as express intelligent worship to Him.

so y are u saying it is distinct and it ascends to heaven?
or is it because others said so?

Lol. . . wait first. . . you sound like I never attempted to offer you a meaning anywhere about the "spirit" of man. Please go back and read my previous posts

yes, we are saying the same thing.
but what is d basis of your belief that a "spirit" is going to heaven, by parting ways with the body?

Em. . . did I offer a definition earlier or not?

yes u did.
but where u changing position or what?.
u said initially that it aids our communication with God. so how does this aid, fly to heaven when man dies?

pilgrim.1:

Hehe. . . more subjects are creeping in.

at all.
is there any u doubt or u think my claim is not genuiue?
then I will elucidate futher.

Okay. . first, you wanted us to stick with the "resurrection" and not make the distinctions between the components of man an issue. Right-O! We got the invitation to go to the appropriate thread and discuss that.

i have just done that.

Next! It is not the distinctions that are in view - you appealed we look into the "resurrection'. Phew! We hear!

have u done so?
ok, I think so, but i disagree with your point of view, for reasons I stated earlier.

And now. . . it is not the dwelling place of God that is in view - heaven or otherwise!

u have two options.
1) u either  open a new thread and we rob minds on it or
2) u could tell ricadelide to explain better to u, because u get along well.
to help u start, I will quote him, he said

I don't subscribe to a "reign in heaven", the reign is here on earth. We know that of the Lord the bible says that "he must remain in heaven UNTIL . . ."(Acts. 3:21). Like you said, we are made to realize that He is coming back with the saints to earth to reign a thousand years (the final dispensation). We'd do other things in heaven however in the mean time before then.

Abeg, noetic. . . this is already spinning round.

no its not.
stick with the issues, then u wont be confused.

The question again . . if I understand from the topic. . . mentions HEAVEN:
Do The Dead In Christ Go To Heaven Or Await Ressurrection?

yes.

We are clear that they go to God.

God is everywhere, so where exactly are u talking about?

Now question: where is God - in HEAVEN. . . or ?!?

He lives in me.

Done.

thank God.

But wait first, noetic. . . you're asking some fascinating questions O!

again!

Please excuse me - I don't mean to laugh like that.

ok.

But I have already provided the context - I said so a couple of times already!! See an example:

u provided it like I did, but did not tell us exactly what u think it means, since u think peter was talking in another context, compared to the opinion I expressed.

Again, I already did what you are asking again of me!

I insist u havent.

Nor did he say that David was a "spirit" in the sepulchre.

exactly!
so please tell us where his spirit is, since he has a "spirit" that must go to heaven?

From the collective testimony of Scripture, are we agreed that the spirit of man goes back to God - yes or no?

your question is confusing. y? because u have u have 2 definitions for spirit
1) that aids communication to God
2)that is distinct and goes to heaven after death. so which of them are u refering to?

~ If "YES", would David be an exemption to Eccl. 12 v 7??

~ If "NO" where is the "spirit" of david according to Eccl. 12 v 7?

until u answer the above, I can't answer this.

Dear brother, I have offered a clear pointer in my previous rejoinders to demonstrate the distinction of the spirit, soul and body - they are not the same.

no u havent. its not clear.
even in the other thread, u didnt give your own opinion of the issue, u just picked holes in someone else`s.
tell us in your own terms, without refrence to other people.

Second, I often try to remind you guys that the Bible shows that there is a distinction between those components by offering 1 Thes. 5:23 and Hebrews 4:12.

I have offered the meaning of this verses in the relevant thread, u invited me to.

I also offered a few questions to help you guys come round this point - I don't see your answers anywhere.

please repost your questions.

In all the places that God dwells, HEAVEN is not one of them?

yes it is.

That being so, the "spirit" returns to God - whereever you assume He dwells.

good, now u re talking. but whats your stand on that "spirit"

If that is not HEAVEN, please tell us where exactly it is!

the dead are in the grave called Hades.
if u know any spirit that ascended to heaven, tell us where it is written in the scriptures.

Please go and read what I offered about the "spirit" of man - I just re-quoted it above.

I have read it, and like I said, it is contradicting.

John 3 v 13 is speaking in context of what I pointed out in Peter's sermon as re-quoted above again. (Please keep the ASCENSION in clear view - it is connected with the RESURRECTION)

exactly, so they are all in the grave awaiting ressurection.

I never made the case that Eccl. 12 v 7 applies ONLY to IMMORTAL persons

ok.

In anycase, if he wasn't exempted,

of course he wasnt.

then what again have you been arguing?

that he is in the grave, awaiting ressurection

Does that not already establish the fact that you have only agreed with what you tried to disagree with at first?

noooooo.

Still on Eccl. 12 v 7 -

ok

is David exempted from that verse?

u asked this earlier on, I said No.

Does that verse prove that the spirit of David is in the sepulchre?

of course not. neither does it say he "spirit" ascended to heaven

Lol. . . the words in bold is funny! What - "the spirit is not distinct from the body"??

you are the only laughing. I c it as a fact.

Lol does that mean that the body and the spirit are the SAME?

please read my post in the thread u invited me to.

cheers

noetic,

i never concurred with u on this. in your first post u mentioned a "spirit" in heaven and a body ressurecting to meet it. and my questionswere, whats the purpose of this body meeting this spirit? is the spirit incomplete in heaven? are these biblibical facts?

To answer your question, we will need to delve into various things, but with the danger of sidetracking from the main topic imminent, I will try and just highlight salient points.  A man's body is very necessary for him to influence what happens on earth. Your physical body is like your passport, without which you will have no right to live and influence the earth. We have a earthly body and an heavenly body 2 Cor 5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.As Christians, we have been given dual nationalities - heaven and earth. The body we have before the resurrection is determined by whether we live on earth or heaven. The physical body for those alive and the spiritual body for those who are now in heaven with Christ.

This is the reason why demons are always so eager to possess a man's body because they can't be influential on earth until they have a man's body. Same thing with God, He needs our bodies to be influential on earth because the earth he has already goven to the sons of men. In Jesus, we have seen the extent of God's influence on earth when a human body is completely under His control, and in the antichrist we will see the full extent of the influence of the devil when a human body is under his control. That is perhaps the main reason why the devil tempted Jesus and promised Him the entire kingdom of the world if he bows to him. While Jesus declined, the antichrist would not.

In one of your early posts u said: "When Adam died in the Garden, his spirit was separated from God" I am yet to see this in the bible. Was Adam dwelling with God initially in the spirit?

I am curious, what do you think happened to Adam when he ate that fruit? I think you've suggested earlier that the devil lied to him and he really did not die. If that is really your stand, you are gravely mistaken. Adam actually died spiritually separating him from God. Scriptures? Try 1 Cor 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

then answer this is there any biblibical expression where the body and the spirit did differnt things at the same time, since they are distinct?

The spirit can exist outside of the body. There are several pointers to this in scripture. these scripture have been pointed out to you eralier. Please check out 2 Cor 12: 2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth such an one caught up to the third heaven. 3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth Here Paul definitely implies that it is possible for the spirit to ascend to heaven outside of the body. We know apostle John also ascended to heaven out of his body Revelation 4:1 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. 2 And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.John was commanded to come up to heaven and immediately he was in the spirit.

But If u insist on this distinct “spirit”, lets then examine this scenario.
I sat for an exam, and didn’t write well in the exam, for just no reason, because I know d course in question and read well for it. After the exam, I exclaimed to my friends that “my spirit is troubled” apparently because of how the exam went. Whats the basis of the statement? Is this statement “my spirit is troubled” valid or invalid? Yes or no

People use the words spirit very loosely. But really, the spirit is the real man, and there is nothing wrong in saying "my spirt is troubled." Now look at it this way, at the judgement, we are told that everyman will receive the rewards for the things they did in their bodies 2 Cor 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.. This implies that though it is our bodies that we see doing different things, it is the spirit man - the real man that receives the reward. That is why Paul says in 1 Cor 9:27 But [b]I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.[/b] here Paul distinguishes between his body and his spirit "I." It is the spirit, the real man that is in charge and will receive the reward for whatever is done in the body.

@noetic,

This is getting really hilarious, and there doesn't seem to be any gist in your latest rejoinder other than the same old repeated innuendoes. Anyways, let me quickly run through them, leaving what is unnecessary to address due to unneeded repetition already addressed. Here:

noetic:

what then is your understanding of the spirit?

I already offered that:

[list][li]It is that part of man himself that is able to grasp spiritual matters in the things of God, as well as express intelligent worship to Him.[/li][/list]

If you have to come back asking again, let me reiterate it:

  [list][li]It is that part of man himself that is able to grasp spiritual matters in the things of God, as well as express intelligent worship to Him[/li][/list].

If again you would repeat the same question without carefully settling down to read through my rejoinders, here again is my answer:

  [size=14pt][list][li]It is that part of man himself that is able to grasp spiritual matters in the things of God, as well as express intelligent worship to Him[/li][/list].[/size]

Just so that you don't come back asking the same question like you paid no heed, here again:

  [size=18pt][list][li]It is that part of man himself that is able to grasp spiritual matters in the things of God, as well as express intelligent worship to Him[/li][/list].[/size]


I would really appreciate that you carefully read through my rejoinders before asking THE SAME questions that are already addressed.

noetic:

but according to u, the "spirit has ascended into heaven. prove it.

Please quote me precisely. I only referred you to Ecclesiastes 12 v 7 for a start; and where I made reference to "ascended" in is connection with Peter preaching on the RESURRECTION in Acts 2.

I now understand why ricadelide wasn't amused that you were attributing things to him that he never stated. I really do not mind - but I would prefer that you make clear reference to what exactly I pointed out, so we don't muddle up issues.

noetic:

must u shout?

I wasn't shouting. I needed to emphatically appeal to you to please carefully go through people's rejoinders so you don't have to come back asking the same questions that are already addressed!

noetic:

their body or spirit? we have both examined the scriptures where we established that the dead are buried, u havent told of us where the spirit of the dead are seen dwelling in heaven.

What does Ecclesiastes 12 v 7 mean to you, noetic?

noetic:

but u since u also claim that spirit is distinct and not inherent in man. tell us where in the bible it is seen dwelling with God?

Yes, the spirit is DISTINCT from the body and soul - meaning that the spirit is not the same thing as the body or soul.

The word "distinct" as used in my rejoinders is simply = "not the same as".

That said, once again, the spirit is distinct from the body. . . meaning: the spirit is NOT the same thing as the body. They are DIFFERENT.

noetic:

so y are u saying it is distinct and it ascends to heaven?

My reason for distinguishing them is because the Bible distinguishes them - for example in 1 Thes. 5:23 and Hebrews 4;12. Please read them and see if there is NO DIFFERENCE made between the body, soul and spirit in scripture:

1 Thessalonians 5:23
And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God
your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto
the coming of our Lord Jesus.

Hebrews 4:12
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any
twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit,
and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and
intents of the heart.

Do those texts make the body the very same thing as the spirit?

@noetic,

noetic:

but what is d basis of your belief that a "spirit" is going to heaven, by parting ways with the body?

I believe that the Bible teaches that the "spirit" parts ways with the "body". Eccl. 12 v 7 shows that they do not go to the same place. Here are a few more:

James 2:26 -- the body without the spirit is dead

2 Corinthians 12:3 -- whether in the body, or out of the body

2 Corinthians 4:16 -- though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed

These are some texts that demonstrate that there is a difference between the body and the spirit - they are not the same in Scripture. If the spirit leaves the body, it goes back to God who gave it (Eccl. 12 v 7); and the body that is left is buried and decomposes.

noetic:

but where u changing position or what?

If I changed my position on what I offered, I surely would not have had to repeat it so many times, would I?

noetic:

u said initially that it aids our communication with God. so how does this aid, fly to heaven when man dies?

This is what I said:

[size=18pt]It is that part of man himself that is able to grasp spiritual matters
in the things of God, as well as express intelligent worship to Him.[/size]

noetic:

stick with the issues, then u wont be confused.

With due respect, I have stuck with the issues here; and if anyone was confused, perhaps it's the one who is always asking the same questions that have already been addressed?

noetic:

God is everywhere, so where exactly are u talking about?
He lives in me.

I see. So. . . the spirits of dead men enter inside you?

Hehe. . . please look at Eccl. 12 v 7 - that should help you, bros!

noetic:

so please tell us where his spirit is, since he has a "spirit" that must go to heaven?

I hope you are not just buying time and hoping you had not read my answers already. Please open your Bible to Ecclesiates 12 v 7.

noetic:

your question is confusing. y? because u have u have 2 definitions for spirit
1) that aids communication to God
2)that is distinct and goes to heaven after death. so which of them are u refering to?

I would like you to not assume things - this is what I said:

[size=18pt]It is that part of man himself that is able to grasp spiritual matters
in the things of God, as well as express intelligent worship to Him.[/size]

noetic:

until u answer the above, I can't answer this.

Lol. . . HOW MANY TIMES do you want me to keep referring you to my answers - which I have repeated again and again? Simply say you no wan answer, then we go rest this thread jo!

noetic:

no u havent. its not clear.

What is not clear to you?

noetic:

even in the other thread, u didnt give your own opinion of the issue, u just picked holes in someone else`s.

Oh com'on! I'm not a yoyo spinning on repetitions. I argued out my case and gave clear pointers to my persuasions - both in this thread and the other one! Haba!

noetic:

tell us in your own terms, without refrence to other people.I have offered the meaning of this verses in the relevant thread, u invited me to.please repost your questions.
yes it is.

My dear noetic, I was not quoting anyone when I said this:

[size=18pt]It is that part of man himself that is able to grasp spiritual matters
in the things of God, as well as express intelligent worship to Him.[/size]

Those were my own words.

noetic:

good, now u re talking. but whats your stand on that "spirit"

This guy. . . na wah for you!! Now that you have finally seen my answers on the spirit, what is the meaning of your asking me again about what my stand is on the spirit again?!?

noetic:

the dead are in the grave called Hades.

I was coming to that - but because you were wont to complain about sticking to resurrection and sicussing nothing else, I haven't said anything yet about Hades, Tartarus, et al.

noetic:

if u know any spirit that ascended to heaven, tell us where it is written in the scriptures.

I ahve made clear that the word ascend was used contextually in Peter's address in Acts 2 in view of the resurrection. I did not by that assume that the resurrection had taken place, did I?

Besides, why is it so hard for you to be specific about what people have stated and not assume to read things into their posts?

noetic:

that he is in the grave, awaiting ressurection
noooooo.oku asked this earlier on, I said No.
of course not. neither does it say he "spirit" ascended to heaven
you are the only laughing. I c it as a fact.please read my post in the thread u invited me to.

I don't see what sense you have made in this unnecessarily long rejoinder. I do apologise, but I could say that 45% of your reposte is mere needless repetition over the same things that have been addressed again and again.

Could we see some more cogent discourse from you?

Enjoy.

noetic,

Please draw a line between the body and spirit, since u claim they are distinct.
However, u cannot explicitly explain what u haven’t defined. You could start by answering what is man`s spirit?

I have said before that a man's spirit is the real man. The body becomes lifeless without it, and the spirit by all indication is eternal. The Bible says that man is created in God's image and His likeness. God's image is Christ - 2 Cor 4:4 lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. God's likeness is spirit, which is why we are told in John 4:24 - God is a Spirit. Man created in God's likeness must therefore be spirit.

I don’t know any missing vital component. As a matter of fact only you guys can answer this, since u claim man has a distinct spirit. my take is man is dead and unconscious in the grave, awaiting ressurection. this I have subsequently butressed (john3v13, acts2:29-35,Ecc9vs5) if u believe man is in the grave and also in heaven, whats the purpose of reconciling the two parts? my guess is u believe men go to heaven and also await ressurection, but u can't reconcile both.

I have mentioned the purpose of reconciling both earlier so i won't go into it again. As to dead saints being in heaven, I mentioned that to you earlier from Hebrews 10:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, Please explain away the phrase in bold. I don't believe I need to prove that their bodies are still in the grave.

To make things clearer, you need to understand that dead saints were usually taken to Abraham's Bossom before Christ. After Christ's ascension we all go to heaven. I have explained this several times on nairaland. Please check out the following if you are interested - https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-8687.32.html#msg346855
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-42512.64.html#msg954861

no. I can also say answering this question has to do with other issues like the destination of righteous men, the place of the dead Hades, often translated in the bible as Hell or the venue of eternal life like recadelide submitted in his recent post that

. they are all connected one way or the other. Now I need to make soem things clear which isn't evident from my link above. Dead saints before the ascension of Christ were kept in Abraham's bossom because though they were righteous, their spirits were not yet perfected without the church Hebrews 11:40 - God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect. When Christ arose and brought them justification, their spirits were perfected and they were raised with Him to heaven. It is the spirits of these men that the people of Jerusalem saw - Matthew 27;52-53. Hebrews 10:22 -23 that I quoted above tells us that the spirits of these just men that have been perfected are now in heaven.