doubtingthomas

I think that if you read further you will find that it does in fact mean to die.

52 "In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. " 2 Cor 15:52

Notice that the author differentiates between the dead and those will be changed. This verse clearly says that some people shall be changed still alive, that others who are dead will be raised, and that these events will happen simultaneously.

edit: btw I'd like to hear your comments to my reply at page 3.

Gregg

Truthfully I was sort of playing devil's advocate there. I never was a fundie or even a mainstream Christian but I did accept New Thought Christianity for several years, and I held a view of Scripture somewhat like you outline below. My real argument is that Scripture as we have it--often vague, indirect, contradictory, etc.--is rather persuasive evidence AGAINST the fundie conception of God (and of Scripture itself).

Magus55

First of all, do you mean virigin birth? Immaculate conception is not the virgin birth.

And why would Mark need to show Jesus claiming to be God? Each Gospel is not an identical account of everything. Its multiple perspectives, and each apostle had interest in different aspects of the events. Matthew, Luke, and Paul all talk about Jesus' divinity. John is the main Gospel that speaks of His divinity because that was what John wanted to focus on - Jesus' miracles and divinity.

Magus55

I never claimed that translations are innerant. They aren't, only the originals were inspired.

As to errors having greater effect, well the Bible is the most preserved and accurately copied book on Earth. Despite the occasional copying error ( which is fairly easy to do from the Hebrew), the Bible is meticulously well preserved.

And copyists don't necessarily check the content. The purpose of copying was to write down exactly what was already there. As my link showed, if the papyrus that was written on had a smudge or was worn where the symbol for 22 was, the copyist would have just copied it as they saw it, and not even noticed the error. Its a minor error anyway. Oh no, a guy's age is off in one verse, but correct in another. Hardly detrimental.

doubtingthomas

Is it not true, though, that we do not have the originals? My point is, how can you say the original text is inerrant when you are not in possession of it? You can't say, for instance, that certain people didn't alter the originals and that the now extant copies are errors.

judge

One lot (the dead) gets raised. The other lot (those who are not dead when the resirrection of the dead) occurs get changed. But when does the change happen?

This change cannot happen whilst a person is still alive on earth. How can a person become immortal on earth?
Or as Paul writes in the same section "a seed must first die"

This change happens on death. People don't wait now , people no longer "sleep". Now they go to the heavens.

Gullwind

Perhaps not, but this topic is about contradictions and for an inerrantist, this is a contradiction since there can be NO mistakes of any kind.

But again, without the originals, how do you know? Not to mention that the number of copies in existance says nothing about the truth of what the document says. There are supposed to be around 24,000 ancient copies of the New Testament floating around. All that proves is that a lot of people spent a lot of time writing. There are millions of copies of The Lord of the Rings. That does not mean that any of the events depicted in that document actually happened.

But it's curious that no one thought to correct that error in centuries of copying and studying. And it is pretty detrimental to at least one inerrantist I know.

Amlodhi

Hello again, judge,


Thank you. I hope that you and yours are well also.

The problem is that even if you're right, that doesn't solve the contradiction problem.

Consider:

In the Matthean account, there is no question that the priests purchase (with the 30 pieces of silver) the potter's field as a burial place for strangers.

Presuming that Judas is still alive beyond the Matthean account, we are left with two possibilities:

1. Judas purchases a different field in which he falls headlong and disembowels himself. In which case we are (as before) left with the unlikely coincidence that both of these fields become commonly known as "the field of blood".

2. The potter's field purchased by the priests is considered to be a proxy purchase by Judas (lame, but it has been suggested and so should be dealt with). The time span between Passover and Pentecost is 50 days. According to Acts, Judas died sometime within this timespan. Thus, in this circumstance, we are first forced to imagine that Judas would have known about and had some sort of interest in visiting this cemetery within a few weeks following his emotional turmoil.

Worse, verse 20 of the Acts account states that the circumstances surrounding Judas' death were presaged in the Psalms, i.e. "Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein; and his bishopric let another take". If this was a field that had already been purchased by the priests for use as a cemetery, it could scarcely be considered to have been Judas' "habitation" even if one accepts the proxy purchase theory. Yet, if a different field is meant, there would be nothing to prevent someone dwelling there after Judas' death; so the cemetery does seem to be indicated.

So, if Judas is emotionally distraught but still alive, it seems that the only alternative we are left with is that the priests purchased the field at a later time than is indicated in Matthew. This sequence would require that Judas threw the 30 pieces of silver in the temple and left distraught. Then, a short time later, he purchases the potter's field with some ill-gotten gain (perhaps stolen from the disciples treasury money) and falls headlong on his newly gained property and hemorrhages to death. Then, the priests of the temple use the 30 pieces of silver to purchase (perhaps from the city) this same (now ownerless) field for use in burying strangers.

One problem with the above sequence is that it necessarily indicts the authors of both Matthew and Acts as being signally incompetent to convey even the simplest of concepts through the use (in the original) of their own language. Further, it presumes that a few weeks after Judas' serious emotional trauma, he had recovered sufficiently to use stolen treasury funds to purchase some personal property.

Thus, whether one prefers to think that Judas literally hung himself or simply became choked up emotionally, the simplest and most rational explanation for the seemingly contradictory accounts remains that they are contradictory accounts.


As always, namaste'

Amlodhi

doubtingthomas

The verse implies that their is a single event

"In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound"

Then two changes shall occur:

"and the dead shall be raised incorruptible"

This means the people who are at that time dead will be raised in a pure nature.


"and we shall be changed"

Here he says that those currently living will be changed.

Since these changes are supposed to happen at the same time, one must conclude that their will be two groups changed (1) Those who are dead and (2) Those alive when the trumpet sounds.

judge

I agree .. if we read it in english with punctuation that we have added it could seem to infer that these two events are a single event.

But is our modern punctuation correct always?