O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
Norm Voss is back at it, misrepresenting the views of others….
I love the question that is thrown at N. T. Wright about the old lady who implores him “not to take Heaven away from her”. Then Wright begins to answer that indeed she needs to come to grips with the idea that Heaven is being taken away. I find it interesting that Wright and following after him Sam Frost have decided to take away Heaven from that little old lady. Isn’t it ironic that full Preterism embraces fully Heaven post mortem but futurist like Wright and Frost want us to go into some sort of Hadean holding realm at our deaths depriving us of Heaven. Then we get to come flying back to earth to repopulate it after its transformation into a place where we can walk and talk with the animals and they won’t eat each other.
How is when one dies immediately being with Christ, in the presence of Jesus taking away heaven? Norm, are you suggesting Jesus Christ is in some “hadean holding realm”? N.T. Wright isn’t taking anything away Norm. He unlike you is simply pointing out Biblical concepts are not to be defined along pagan Gnostic-like lines whereby death is the believer’s destiny. The point is death isn’t the Biblical understanding for the destiny of man as Loomis at point 41 on the same podcast you are reviewing claims. Resurrection and death are two fundamentally opposed points of view. Norm think the difference between Good Friday and Easter. That is the difference between death and resurrection. Norm, do you understand the differences between those two days other than the fact they are two different days?
If you are going to represent the man’s position, you ought to at least go to the trouble of getting it correct, you write,
Yes you are correct about Wright; that is why I used this language “some sort of Hadean holding realm” which emphasizes the idea of the Old Covenant Hades mixed with Wright’s idea of soul sleep. Wright in effect bypasses Heaven thus removing the “little old Lady’s hope” and then somehow brings us back to life on a regenerated paradisiacal earth. No Heaven included. That is also the title of the Time magazine article that I link to. “Christians Wrong About Heaven, Says Bishop”. http://deathisdefeated.ning.com/profiles/blogs/say-goodbye-to-sam-frost-as-a?xg_source=activity&id=2362512:BlogPost:28936&page=3#comments
The fact is Norm, you are completely WRONG!
…all the Christian departed are in substantially the same state, that of restful happiness. Though this is sometimes described as sleep, we shouldn’t take this to mean that it is a state of unconsciousness. Had Paul though that, I very much doubt he would have described life immediately after death as “being with Christ, which is far better.” Rather, sleep here means that the body is “asleep” in the sense of “dead”, while the real person – however we want to describe him or her-continues.
This state is not, clearly, the final destiny for which the Christian dead are bound, which is, as we have seen, the bodily resurrection. But it is a state in which the dead are held firmly within the conscious love of God and the conscious presence of Jesus Christ while they await that day. There is no reason why this state should not be called heaven, though we must note once more how interesting it is that the New Testamnt routinely doesn’t call it that and uses the word heaven in other ways. (Surpirsed by Hope, N.T. Wright, Haper, pgs 171,172)
Thank you for your thoughts. Norm has a very bad habit of not doing his research and thus making astonishing claims.
Thank you for your comments. Perhaps you can help me out, would Norm’s concept of “Hadean Realm” include the conscious existence of the believer in heaven which is a far better existence than what the believer enjoys on earth. An existence in the presence of Jesus Christ praising God as depicted in the book of Revelation awaiting the resurrection from the dead in which their bodies are restored to life?
Here is how the Westminster confession of faith puts it, “the souls of the righteous, being then made perfect in holiness, are received into the highest heavens, where they behold the face of God, in light and glory, waiting for the full redemption of their bodies.”
Why do you continue with your disinformation?
We know that Wright has us in “soul sleep” [similar to Hades?] post mortem
Thank you for correcting Norm…
Wright does not advocate “soul sleep.” He has an intermediate state. His point is to stress “life afterlife after death.”
…you would think the guy would actually seek to understand the man’s position before offering up his opinion. Maybe he will own up to his misrepresentation.
True to form, John Scargy at Gnostic “U” employs another logical fallacy,
Comment by John Scargy 18 minutes ago
N.T.Wright “Heaven is important but it’s not our final destination,” he explained. “If you want to say that when someone dies they go to heaven, fine. But that’s only a temporary holding pattern that is life after death. And what I’m much more interested in, or the New Testament is much more interested in, is what I’ve called life after life after death.”
Considering Wright’s unorthodox views on Justification it’s not so surprising he’d be confused on eschatology.
” N. T. Wright totally reconstructs the doctrine of justification. In fact, Wright denies justification by faith alone, a historic teaching of Reformed theology, and the imputation of Christ’s righteousness” John Fesko
Wright has the OT Saint’s waiting and waiting and waiting.And all along i thought Paul taught their hope was the resurrection that was about to be.
Act 24:15 having hope toward God, which they themselves also wait for, that there is about to be a rising again of the dead, both of righteous and unrighteous; YLT.
You said … “Wright does not advocate “soul sleep.”
Yet Wright says the following … “”If you want to say that when someone dies they go to heaven, fine. But that’s only a temporary holding pattern that is life after death.”
Whatever you want to call it is fine by me but as Wright says its a temporay holding pattern. If you or he can make any sense out of that hybrid Old Covenant type of Hadean realm I will be all ears.
Again, thank you for your thoughts. I realize we still part company over some major ground but I do appreciate your honesty in setting Norm straight. “Hadean holding realm” LOL. I don’t think Norm would know what to do without his straw.
BTW, it looks like you may have a convert over at DeathisDefeated.
Following are two postings, one by Sam and one by me where Sam again states that Wright doesn’t adhere to a post mortem existence called “Soul Sleep”. I had listed the quote in the post previous to this that Sam is addressing but somehow he didn’t notice that indeed Wright does himself describe post mortem existence for the faithful until the restored earth as “LIKE BEING ASLEEP” yet resting and conscious. Now Sam doesn’t seem to adhere to an intermediate state as described by Wright but it seems in error to state that Wright doesn’t have the faithful dead residing in a form of “Soul Sleep”.
Reply by sam on January 7, 2011 at 10:26am
Wrong, Norm…..man you gotta read…..ONCE AGAIN WRIGHT DOES NOT ADVOCATE SOUL SLEEP. You have been corrected and rebuked on this before and yet you CONTINUE…..my interaction with you is finished simply because you fail to listen……
Reply by Norm on January 7, 2011 at 11:03am
Here is Wright’s own words on the post mortem existence before the restored earth of his… ” Wright: We know that we will be with God and with Christ, resting and being refreshed. Paul writes that it will be conscious, but compared with being bodily alive, it will be like being asleep.
I ask again why should I be rebuked for quoting Wright himself describing a state of post mortem “sleep”?
You wrote: Sharon, by the way please accept my apology for demeaning your reading abilities.
Me: Apology accepted Norm. We all get frustrated with others sometimes. :o)
Sam continues to embarrass himself .
"Hal, they are not silly at all. they are to the point. There can be no "change" (transformation) when we die since "all things" have been fulfilled already. we are as "perfect" as we are ever going to get, according to Tami Jellinek.
Sam Frost on June 27, 2008 "How can Christ the Clean One be "in us" if, in fact, we are still unclean? How can a Holy and Clean Spirit dwell in us and with us if, in fact, we are still "tainted by" our sins? How can a Holy God, a CLEAN God dwell in an unclean Body - the Church? Look to Leviticus....He can't. It is IMPOSSIBLE. Conclusion, we must be, then ENTIRELY CLEAN...good news, brothers and sisters.....good news indeed (not so great news for traditional theology, but GREAT NEWS for those who look in the Bible for definitions rather than man made formulations that are old and outdated).
Looks like Sam has resorted back to taking "man made formulations that are old and outdated"... instead of "those who look in the Bible for definitions"
Sam in his own words!
IMO... this is the fruit and stupidity of reducing the Divine gospel of grace to a base exercise of uninspired “human logic”.