AlanF,
:: Define "life", Schizm. : I tried to do that very thing up above. How did you manage to miss it?
I didn't miss your attempt. That's why I asked you to define "life". Your description was vague, fuzzy and circular, and in no sense a definition.
No, it wasn't vague. No, it wasn't fuzzy. No, it wasn't circular. And yes, it was a definition.
You even told Gumby that you hoped he understood the sense in which you were using the term, which indicates that you know you didn't properly define it but hoped that he'd see through your fuzziness.
No, that's not true at all. What I did say, was this:
I'm sure that you [Gumby] understand the sense in which the term "life" is being used here.
Due to what I had said up to that point, I felt "sure" (confident) that Gumby would get the sense of what I had said. So far he hasn't said that he didn't understand it.
Specifically you need to give clear explanations for problems like, If the tree of life provided certain substances that, as long as Adam continually ingested them, allowed him to live forever, then "life" must be those substances and not some thing or quality that Adam personally possessed or lacked.
No, not at all.
Here's what I said up above:
Adam had "[lasting] life" prior to his having sinned. He did not have death hanging over his head. After he sinned he no longer had "[lasting] life" ... even though he still lived for several hundred years after the fact.
Note that I have now added the word "lasting" in hopes of making it easier for YOU to grasp. Now, what is it about those words of mine that you find so hard to grasp or agree with? Is it not true that Adam would've continued to live on indefinitely had he only obeyed his Creator?
I also said to Gumby:
Although alive, you and I do not have "[lasting] life."
Is that not true? But Adam himself did enjoy lasting life (prior to his sin). The reason he did is because God was allowing him to take in the special ingredients found in the fruit of the tree of life. Surely, those particular ingredients were exactly what man needed in order to ward off the aging process. Hard to understand? I fail to see why!
: Also, I had hoped that you would've made it back in order to offer a reply to my last post, addressed to you, but you never replied. I chose not to because you simply danced around my points, and I don't much feel like dancing with people about this topic.
It's one thing for you to say I danced around your points, but it's quite another thing for you to demonstrate that as being true. The fact is that I dealt with every point you brought up. Can you show me where I have been evasive in that post of mine (the one that you've chosen to ignore)? What point did you make that I did not cover there?
Really, since I believe it's like arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, I'll take the time only as long as I have nothing more pressing to do. It's only of minor academic interest.
Suit yourself.
...I asked you to define "life".
Of course I've already done that, by way of an example.
"Life" defined: An existence whereby death is not inevitable. Hence, "lasting life" or "indefinitely lasting life".
Revelation 20:5 says in part:
(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.)
This has reference to both those who will have survived Armageddon as well as those who will have been resurrected during the 1000-year reign of Christ. Yes, ALL these ones will have been alive during that period of time, but they won't have lasting "life" (whereby death is not inevitable) until the end of the thousand years. Thus, the Scriptures themselves define "life".
Schizm
