# Death



## Oneal (Nov 1, 2018)

I recently had a loved one die. When this happened I did some research on what death is like (Don't do this, please), and found a number of people who died and were brought back reported that there was nothing. Basically, they said it was like dreamless sleep. I am a really looking for a way to resolve this apparent problem. Here is an example:

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...ing-to-a-guy-who-died-for-a-bit-10068959.html

While I refuse to give up my faith, stories like the one above cause some concern. Any help would be GREATLY appreciated.

Thank you and God Bless


----------



## Edward (Nov 1, 2018)

Oneal said:


> a sleepless dream.



?

That doesn't sound like 



Oneal said:


> there was nothing


----------



## Oneal (Nov 1, 2018)

Corrected to dreamless sleep

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Nov 1, 2018)

In my opinion, if they could still be brought back, then they weren’t truly dead, and thus their soul would have remained in their body.

Reactions: Like 6 | Amen 1


----------



## Tom Hart (Nov 1, 2018)

The article linked above deals with clinical death. That is not the same thing, I think, as actual death from which the body does not wake up. The conclusion of the professing atheist in the article, that the "blackness" he experienced reveals that there's no such thing as God or heaven or hell, has no bearing on Christian theology.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Oneal (Nov 1, 2018)

First of all, thank you for the quick responses. I appreciate the help. As for my Theology, this does not in any way deter me. Instead, it just brings up a concern that I want an answer for; for myself, but even more so for other people who may ask me in the future. 

Again, thank you for the responses.


----------



## Jack K (Nov 1, 2018)

Bill The Baptist said:


> In my opinion, if they could still be brought back, then they weren’t truly dead, and thus their soul would have remained in their body.



Yes. This is the answer.


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Nov 1, 2018)

Brother, don't let this bother you. There are many many other stories of people who say they die and they went to heaven (or hell). Whether any of these stories are true or not, the point is that many people claim to have spiritual experiences. 

We hope for and have faith for the reason that we cannot yet see what is to come. If I were you, I wouldn't even entertain the idea of nothing after death. That is a terrible thought, and one that will never be proven by anyone now living. As Colossians 3 says, set your mind and your heart on the things above. Rest assured that the glories of heaven are real, and that God who promised them in the Scriptures, cannot lie. 

It won't do anyone any good to listen to some random person's opinion about their experience of death. There are so many factors and variables to consider.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Nov 1, 2018)

We usually hear stories about people having NDE (near death experience) heading to some "light" or "bliss." Less often are voiced stories about emptiness (like you relate). But, they clearly exist. And, there are stories that are highly negative experiences, and since these are not mass-pop-spiritual fodder, they get little press today. But they too are reported.

As little as the latter are reported (or popularized) for all we know, they might be much more common than the others; but in the nature of their cases, those who have bad experiences are probably even more disinclined to relate them to others, in comparison to those who have pleasant or boring ones. If you have an NDE that is terrifying, and all the NDEs you've heard about before are "heavenly," are you likely to tell the people around you: "I thought I was halfway or more to hell?"

In any case, experiences cannot speak more reliably than divine revelation. "We have a *more sure word* of prophecy," writes Peter (who saw the glory of the heavenly realm and heard the Voice on the mountain). He did not trust in his OWN experience more than the knowledge he had of truth by the Word of God.

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 2, 2018)

Oneal said:


> I recently had a loved one die. When this happened I did some research on what death is like (Don't do this, please), and found a number of people who died and were brought back reported that there was nothing. Basically, they said it was like dreamless sleep. I am a really looking for a way to resolve this apparent problem. Here is an example:
> 
> https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...ing-to-a-guy-who-died-for-a-bit-10068959.html
> 
> ...



Most reports of NDEs (near-death-experiences) of people who were clinically dead report the exact opposite. Of course, we don't prove our faith by tallying stats, but still.
https://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Death...r=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=moreland+death+afterlife


----------



## Smeagol (Nov 2, 2018)

Concerning the article linked in the OP. I would not give it much weight. The bible clearly describes atheist as "Fools". Secondly, one of the author's supposed NDEs was from overdosing on pain medication. Now I could be wrong (as I have never over-dosed), but I do not think I would be very trusting of anything I experienced after an over-dose on pain-killers.

Similarly, my own grandmother was technically dead for 2 solid minutes before being brought back by the paramedics. They keep her sedated for 2 days as they slowly brought her back to full consciousness in order to help reduce the likelihood of brain damage. When she was brought back she had lost 2 full weeks of memories. (Side note: she actually forgot about all the wedding gifts she had bought me, which she found 2 months later and was not sure why she bought them.) Guess what...she is still a convinced Presbyterian and loves the Lord! She did not temporarily die from an OD or from a car crash either. Her heart failed while she was working her desk job. Further, she did not try to write some book about lights, tunnels, blackness, or heaven is for real. She trust the Word of God. I trust Paul's words over a pill-abusing atheist's experience any day!

To be absent from the body is to be with Christ. If this still does trouble you bother, then go back to the Word, remind yourself of the promises of our Covenant Lord.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## timfost (Nov 2, 2018)

As an aside, it seems likely that Lazarus did not go to heaven when he died prior to being raised back to life. Imagine the disappointment after being in heaven a few days and then coming back to this body?


----------



## OPC'n (Nov 2, 2018)

i sometimes have dreamless sleep and feel like I died until my alarm wakes me up


----------



## earl40 (Nov 2, 2018)

timfost said:


> As an aside, it seems likely that Lazarus did not go to heaven when he died prior to being raised back to life. Imagine the disappointment after being in heaven a few days and then coming back to this body?



As an aside, I believe Lazarus was in heaven before he was raised from the dead.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 2, 2018)

What does "heaven" even mean?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## VictorBravo (Nov 2, 2018)

Oneal said:


> Corrected to dreamless sleep



I liked the image of a sleepless dream. Have you ever been so tired you'd start to hallucinate?

As for the experiences, a bit of reading on hypoxemia (low blood oxygen) and dream perception might point to a lot of what people sense in an NDE.


----------



## Pergamum (Nov 2, 2018)

Atheists ought to know by now that if you've nearly died, it pays a lot better to write a book claiming there really is something. And it must be fantastic and colorful. 

"It was all just an empty black void" doesn't sell too many bestsellers, after all!

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 2, 2018)

This is why the doctrine of the soul is so important. If I am not my body, then it is metaphysically possible that I survive my body.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## earl40 (Nov 2, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> What does "heaven" even mean?



In the context of the conversation it is a place where the soul resides when the body is dead. I understand some believe time and space cease to exist after death or in the new heavens, though I would disagree with that also with me being a creature.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 2, 2018)

earl40 said:


> In the context of the conversation it is a place where the soul resides when the body is dead. I understand some believe time and space cease to exist after death or in the new heavens, though I would disagree with that also with me being a creature.



So far, so good. 

Part of the dififculty is the nature of the soul. We are tempted to think my soul is *in* my body. Yet, if I lose my arm, I don't lose 1/20th of my soul.

Therefore, the soul's connection to the body is not one of spatial location. So that raises the question, "Where is the soul?"


----------



## Smeagol (Nov 2, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> So that raises the question, "Where is the soul?"


I know I know. Is it in the Medulla Oblongata?:


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 2, 2018)

Grant Jones said:


> I know I know. Is it in the Medulla Oblongata?:



No, Colonel Sanders. You're wrong.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## earl40 (Nov 2, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> So far, so good.
> 
> Part of the dififculty is the nature of the soul. We are tempted to think my soul is *in* my body. Yet, if I lose my arm, I don't lose 1/20th of my soul.
> 
> Therefore, the soul's connection to the body is not one of spatial location. So that raises the question, "Where is the soul?"



Our souls are with our body while alive, and in heaven (or hell) when the body is dead, is enough explanation for me. So far as it not being spatial, I believe it is somewhere therefore spatially existent. Such is the thing with any creature.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 2, 2018)

earl40 said:


> Our souls are with our body while alive, and in heaven (or hell) when the body is dead, is enough explanation for me. So far as it not being spatial, I believe it is somewhere therefore spatially existent. Such is the thing with any creature.



Is the soul spread out through the body? Or it is located in one place? That's why no defender of substance dualism in the modern age says that the soul is spatially located in the body.


----------



## jwithnell (Nov 2, 2018)

Contra_Mundum said:


> We usually hear stories about people having NDE (near death experience) heading to some "light" or "bliss." Less often are voiced stories about emptiness (like you relate). But, they clearly exist. And, there are stories that are highly negative experiences, and since these are not mass-pop-spiritual fodder, they get little press today. But they too are reported.
> 
> As little as the latter are reported (or popularized) for all we know, they might be much more common than the others; but in the nature of their cases, those who have bad experiences are probably even more disinclined to relate them to others, in comparison to those who have pleasant or boring ones. If you have an NDE that is terrifying, and all the NDEs you've heard about before are "heavenly," are you likely to tell the people around you: "I thought I was halfway or more to hell?"
> 
> In any case, experiences cannot speak more reliably than divine revelation. "We have a *more sure word* of prophecy," writes Peter (who saw the glory of the heavenly realm and heard the Voice on the mountain). He did not trust in his OWN experience more than the knowledge he had of truth by the Word of God.


May I underscore the importance of what is said here about divine revelation? The scriptures are the ONLY way to triangulate your perspective and understand what happens as one passes from this life to the next and exists, for a time, awaiting a glorified body and the new earth. In the end, the scriptures are all we have, and our heavenly father has deemed that enough.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## bookslover (Nov 2, 2018)

Cynically - they're either mistaken or lying to make a quick buck. That's happened several times.


----------



## earl40 (Nov 3, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Is the soul spread out through the body? Or it is located in one place? That's why no defender of substance dualism in the modern age says that the soul is spatially located in the body.



The soul of a person is the real person, be it with or without body, and that person is always located somewhere. Our Lord's human soul was located in heaven between the cross and the resurrection.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 3, 2018)

earl40 said:


> The soul of a person is the real person, be it with or without body, and that person is always located somewhere. Our Lord's human soul was located in heaven between the cross and the resurrection.



I don't think that is accurate. we can't say the person is the soul. If we apply that to Christology, then Jesus has two persons (since mind is usually equal to soul).


----------



## Ed Walsh (Nov 3, 2018)

Oneal said:


> I did some research on what death is like (Don't do this, please), and found a number of people who died and were brought back reported that there was nothing.



I am of base here? But doesn't Hebrews 9:27 have the answer?
And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,


----------



## jwithnell (Nov 3, 2018)

earl40 said:


> The soul of a person is the real person, be it with or without body, and that person is always located somewhere. Our Lord's human soul was located in heaven between the cross and the resurrection.


The difficulty here is the word "real," which cones out of the Greek worldview and fed Gnostic thought.

The physical body and the soul are equally real.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 3, 2018)

Ed Walsh said:


> I am of base here? But doesn't Hebrews 9:27 have the answer?
> And just as [you]it is appointed for man to die once[/you], and after that comes judgment,



I don't think that is absolute 100% of the time. Lazarus died twice, as did Jairus's daughter.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 3, 2018)

and there is that guy in 2 Kings who was thrown into Elisha's grave and came out alive.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 3, 2018)

earl40 said:


> The soul of a person is the real person, be it with or without body, and that person is always located somewhere. Our Lord's human soul was located in heaven between the cross and the resurrection.



I certainly understand the truth you are expressing. I am not identical to the material particles in my body. That is the false teaching of many in the Calvin College circle (which is also why some of them accept a form of theistic evolution).

And there is a form of consciousness that survives my death. I just don't want to say that the "I" = "the soul." If applied to Christology, that is Nestorianism.


----------



## Ed Walsh (Nov 3, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> I don't think that is absolute 100% of the time. Lazarus died twice, as did Jairus's daughter.



I get what you are saying up to a point. But those were supernatural miracles, and I think the exceptions that prove the rule. Can we not say truthfully that the Jordan River does not part to let people cross on dry land because it did so when those carrying the ark entered the water? Do you see my point?


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Nov 3, 2018)

Ed Walsh said:


> I get what you are saying up to a point. But those were supernatural miracles, and I think the exceptions that prove the rule. Can we not say truthfully that the Jordan River does not part to let people cross on dry land because it did so when those carrying the ark entered the water? Do you see my point?


Can you unpack that "the exceptions prove the rule" statement, Ed?

Given your earlier:
https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/death.96630/#post-1181552

Is the appointment to "die once" from Heb. 9:27 the _rule_ to which you state is _proven_? I assume this to be the case.

I wonder, as an aside, where was Lazarus's soul when he was first dead? Did our Lord's miracle re-summon his soul from wherever his soul was at the time back to earth to reunite with his body? Or, given the ordaining of God, knowing Lazarus was to be resurrected, it was such that Lazarus's state was but one of psychopannychia? In other words, what is the right view of "die once" from Heb, 9:27?

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 3, 2018)

Ed Walsh said:


> I get what you are saying up to a point. But those were supernatural miracles, and I think the exceptions that prove the rule. Can we not say truthfully that the Jordan River does not part to let people cross on dry land because it did so when those carrying the ark entered the water? Do you see my point?



Don't get me wrong. The average person who dies, dies once. No takebacks. But there are exceptions to the verse in Hebrews.


----------



## ZackF (Nov 3, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> I certainly understand the truth you are expressing. I am not identical to the material particles in my body.



Right. What if you donate or receive a kidney?


----------



## JM (Nov 3, 2018)

What bothers me more than a dreamless sleep is the Eastern Orthodox idea of Toll Houses. 

https://feileadhmor.wordpress.com/2017/10/06/when-dreams-become-doctrine/

Yours in the Lord, 

jm


----------



## Ed Walsh (Nov 3, 2018)

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> Can you unpack that "the exceptions prove the rule" statement, Ed?
> 
> Given your earlier:
> https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/death.96630/#post-1181552
> Is the appointment to "die once" from Heb. 9:27 the _rule_ to which you state is _proven_? I assume this to be the case.



I hope I am using the expression properely, even though many do not.

What I had in mind as a definition goes something like this:
That the presence of an exception, (especially a miraculous one), applying to a specific case establishes ("proves") that a general rule exists.
The rule being: When men die they stay dead.​

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## earl40 (Nov 3, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> And there is a form of consciousness that survives my death.I just don't want to say that the "I" = "the soul." If applied to Christology, that is Nestorianism.



Jesus had no problem with using a form of I with "me", and as you say a "form" survives death which is you without a body. This is in no way a form of Nestorianism.

And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with "me" in paradise.


----------



## earl40 (Nov 3, 2018)

jwithnell said:


> The difficulty here is the word "real," which cones out of the Greek worldview and fed Gnostic thought.
> 
> The physical body and the soul are equally real.



A body is the real physical part of man. Though a body without a soul is simply material. If you lose a finger in a meat slicer no one says that finger is me.


----------



## earl40 (Nov 3, 2018)

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> I wonder, as an aside, where was Lazarus's soul when he was first dead? Did our Lord's miracle re-summon his soul from wherever his soul was at the time back to earth to reunite with his body? Or, given the ordaining of God, knowing Lazarus was to be resurrected, it was such that Lazarus's state was but one of psychopannychia? In other words, what is the right view of "die once" from Heb, 9:27?



To be absent from the body is to be present with The Lord.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 3, 2018)

earl40 said:


> Jesus had no problem with using a form of I with "me", and as you say a "form" survives death which is you without a body. This is in no way a form of Nestorianism.



If Person = soul/mind, then we have two persons in Jesus.




earl40 said:


> And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with "me" in paradise.



None of which proves the Cartesian point that Person = Soul, full stop.

Yes, the soul survives death and is responsive. But it is not a full person. It is a diminished person. That is why we confess the resurrection of the body.

Here is the clincher: If soul = person, then who was the subject of the divine Logos after death: The Divine mind or the Human mind?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 3, 2018)

JM said:


> What bothers me more than a dreamless sleep is the Eastern Orthodox idea of Toll Houses.
> 
> https://feileadhmor.wordpress.com/2017/10/06/when-dreams-become-doctrine/
> 
> ...



Oh boy. If you really want to make modernist Orthodox uncomfortable, bring up toll houses.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 3, 2018)

ZackF said:


> Right. What if you donate or receive a kidney?



That's a big problem in ethics courses that are taught by physicalists. If I am my material particles, and these molecules change over time, then am I the same person? If I commit a crime today, yet get half my arm shot off, then I can't be legally charged since it is a different person.

That idiocy is taken seriously and you will have guys define the person as a "phase sortal."


----------



## JM (Nov 3, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Oh boy. If you really want to make modernist Orthodox uncomfortable, bring up toll houses.


I do...every chance I get.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## earl40 (Nov 4, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> If Person = soul/mind, then we have two persons in Jesus.



So did Jesus have a human soul? I say yes, and it was what he took on in the incarnation, along with with a body.

PS. This is a good discussion because of the christological ramifications.


----------



## earl40 (Nov 4, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Here is the clincher: If soul = person, then who was the subject of the divine Logos after death: The Divine mind or the Human mind?



Do you want to take out all the mystery of the Trinity and the incarnation? Here I believe you may be treading on ground you may not want to, in that it appears you may be melding the human and divine natures of Jesus. I believe the word distinction would be appropriate here, in that it seems the charge of Jesus being two persons is what you seem to be charging me with.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 4, 2018)

earl40 said:


> Do you want to take out all the mystery of the Trinity and the incarnation?



Yes.


earl40 said:


> Here I believe you may be treading on ground you may not want to, in that it appears you may be melding the human and divine natures of Jesus.



Prove that I am doing so.


earl40 said:


> I believe the word distinction would be appropriate here, in that it seems the charge of Jesus being two persons is what you seem to be charging me with.



I am simply summarizing Cyril of Alexandria's teaching. If soul/mind = person, then when Jesus was in the tomb, or storming Hades, or whatever, which soul/mind was the acting subject?

As to the relation between the minds, it is an asymmetrical accessing relation.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 4, 2018)

earl40 said:


> So did Jesus have a human soul? I say yes, and it was what he took on in the incarnation, along with with a body.



Yes. We have to say yes, since saying no makes us Apollinarian.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 4, 2018)

To all: here are JP Moreland's courses on philosophy of mind and metaphysics. Listen to these and you will know more philosophy than in a dozen seminary courses.
No charge.
https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator:"CourageousChristiansUnited.org"&and[]=subject:"Moreland"

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## earl40 (Nov 5, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Yes..



That is very very disturbing.



BayouHuguenot said:


> Prove that I am doing so.



"Here is the clincher: If soul = person, then who was the subject of the divine Logos after death: The Divine mind or the Human mind?"

You are indeed delving into the mystery of the incarnation to which none will get an answer...ever.

The answer to your clincher is Jesus, and to think how the divine mind and human mind work is a mystery.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 5, 2018)

earl40 said:


> That is very very disturbing.



I was speaking tongue-in-cheek. You asked a question that only a negative answer is a correct one.


earl40 said:


> You are indeed delving into the mystery of the incarnation to which none will get an answer...ever.



The answer to my question was already given at the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon. Since a divine Person assumed human nature, there is only one person. This means that mind =/= person on the pain of Christological heresy.


earl40 said:


> The answer to your clincher is Jesus, and to think how the divine mind and human mind work is a mystery.



Now you have shifted the argument. No one is saying we can have an accurate answer to the asymmetrical accessing relation between the divine and human mind. What I was getting at, per Cyril of Alexandria and the Council of Chalcedon, was that the subject of all actions is the Divine person of the Logos, which rules out the Cartesian mind = person formula.


----------



## Smeagol (Nov 5, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> What I was getting at, per Cyril of Alexandria and the Council of Chalcedon, was that the subject of all actions is the Divine person of the Logos, which rules out the Cartesian mind = person formula.


Well I guess Colonel Sanders is wrong after all:
https://puritanboard.com/threads/death.96630/#post-1181464

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ed Walsh (Nov 5, 2018)

earl40 said:


> Do you want to take out all the mystery of the Trinity and the incarnation?





BayouHuguenot said:


> Yes.



I read later where you qualified this one-word answer, but I couldn't resist my initial reflex to repond. Not to you, but to all of us, that think we know a lot about the threee-in-one God who is.
Just consider what I wrote below a tribute of sorts to the wonder and glory of God.
1 Corinthians 13:9,13
_For we know in part,_
_For now we see through a glass, darkly_(1 Cor 13:9,13)
Psalms 77:19
_Thy way is in the sea, and thy path in the great waters, and thy footsteps are not known._​
I haven't been very involved in the overall discussion, but this partial quote by Earl and your one-word answer "Yes," made me laugh out loud. Sure your answer was too short to draw any valid conclusion, but taking it at face value it is one of the most nieve (I almost said ignorant, but I do not want to offend statements I have ever heard in any theological discussion from any Christian persuasion. I'm sure I missed your meaning. I really must have. I have been a Christian for 45 years, studying the Bible and meditating on the Persons of the Godhead, well over a 1,000 hours a year for the past years. Maybe I am nieve too when I say that we have real fellowship together in ways I never dreamed possible in my younger years. One of my most passionate prayers, as I am studying is that now, at long last, I would be granted a better understanding of who and what Jesus the God/Man truly is. I think I do not relate to Jesus as I should. It's like Paul's desire in Philippians 3:10, _"That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;_" I trust the Lord will grant me even some of this knowledge before I die. This has been a most earnest quest as I draw nearer and nearer to the sight of Him. Even then, after this vile body is transformed to be like his glorious body, and my mind enlarged to know him better who so perfectly knows me—even then, throughout all eternity I will know more and more of him without ever exhausting the depth of the God I now see so darkly.

Romans 11:33
_O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God!_
_how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!_​
See what a one-word answer that I totally misunderstood can grow into.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 5, 2018)

Ed Walsh said:


> I read later where you qualified this one-word answer, but I couldn't resist my initial reflex to repond. Not to you, but to all of us, that think we know a lot about the threee-in-one God who is.
> Just consider what I wrote below a tribute of sorts to the wonder and glory of God.
> 1 Corinthians 13:9,13
> _For we know in part,_
> ...



No offense taken. I didn't think the question was materially different from "Have you stopped beating your wife," so I gave a similar answer.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## earl40 (Nov 5, 2018)

"If Person = soul/mind, then we have two persons in Jesus."

Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.

Above we have the one Person of Jesus saying what was on His "mind" which expressed a desire to have the cup pass, which was not The Fathers will. Now Jesus being God, and having the same will of The Father, in His divine essence, was still one person even though it has been suggested He is "two persons" if there appears to be a conflict in wills.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 5, 2018)

earl40 said:


> "If Person = soul/mind, then we have two persons in Jesus."
> 
> Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.
> 
> Above we have the one Person of Jesus saying what was on His "mind" which expressed a desire to have the cup pass, which was not The Fathers will. Now Jesus being God, and having the same will of The Father, in His divine essence, was still one person even though it has been suggested He is "two persons" if there appears to be a conflict in wills.



Will is a faculty of nature, not Person. Two natures, still one person. Therefore, two wills in Christ. Standard dyotheletism.


----------



## earl40 (Nov 6, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Will is a faculty of nature, not Person. Two natures, still one person. Therefore, two wills in Christ. Standard dyotheletism.



So are you saying that the person of Jesus did not have 2 wills and that dyothelitism is incorrect.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 6, 2018)

earl40 said:


> So are you saying that the person of Jesus did not have 2 wills and that dyothelitism is incorrect.



The person of Jesus had two wills because he had two natures. Will belongs to the category of nature, not person.


----------



## earl40 (Nov 6, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> The person of Jesus had two wills because he had two natures. Will belongs to the category of nature, not person.



Are you saying I said the Jesus is two persons?


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 6, 2018)

earl40 said:


> Are you saying I said the Jesus is two persons?



No, I am saying that your linking soul (or mind) with person confuses the category of nature and person, which leads to the conclusion of two persons (or prosopa) of the Logos.


----------



## earl40 (Nov 6, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> No, I am saying that your linking soul (or mind) with person confuses the category of nature and person, which leads to the conclusion of two persons (or prosopa) of the Logos.



How else should on link the soul unless to that of a person? Edit...I can say the soul is linked to a body but sometimes the soul is no longer in the body when the body dies.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 6, 2018)

earl40 said:


> How else should on link the soul unless to that of a person? Edit...I can say the soul is linked to a body but sometimes the soul is no longer in the body when the body dies.



Linking the soul to the person is fine. Making a 1:1 identity statement is not.


----------



## earl40 (Nov 6, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Linking the soul to the person is fine. Making a 1:1 identity statement is not.



Why not? I think you may have stated why before, but one more time for me in language I will understand.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 6, 2018)

earl40 said:


> Why not? I think you may have stated why before, but one more time for me in language I will understand.



Because if Person = Mind, and Jesus has two minds (which we haven't affirm to avoid the Apollinarian heresy), then we have two Persons of Jesus, which is Nestorian.


----------



## earl40 (Nov 6, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Because if Person = Mind, and Jesus has two minds (which we haven't affirm to avoid the Apollinarian heresy), then we have two Persons of Jesus, which is Nestorian.



What word is missing here? 

"which we haven't affirm to avoid the Apollinarian heresy"


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 6, 2018)

earl40 said:


> What word is missing here?
> 
> "which we haven't affirm to avoid the Apollinarian heresy"



Sorry. "Have to affirm" If you say it fast it sounds the same.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## earl40 (Nov 7, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Sorry. "Have to affirm" If you say it fast it sounds the same.



OK. So what I am saying is that Jesus took on a human mind which means he took on human personhood, while still retaining His divinity personally.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Nov 7, 2018)

earl40 said:


> OK. So what I am saying is that Jesus took on a human mind which means he took on human personhood, while still retaining His divinity personally.


Else one denies _anhypostasis_, the human nature assumed was not an individualized person.

https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/anhypostasis-what-kind-of-flesh-did-Jesus-take

https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/enhypostasis-what-kind-of-flesh-did-the-word-become


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 7, 2018)

earl40 said:


> OK. So what I am saying is that Jesus took on a human mind which means he took on human personhood, while still retaining His divinity personally.



That....could work, as long as we are saying it is a single divine Person who is assuming the rest, with the end result being still a single divine Person.

Taking on human personhood is fine, as long as it doesn't mean taking on one more person.


----------

