What is the meaning of “مرگ?”

This posting arises from comments made by Erik Hallendorf in response to the article, ‘آیا عیسی واقعا مرگ?‘ For the sake of completeness, I’ll begin with his original post…

اریک هالندورف

اجازه دهید گزارش های کتاب مقدس و تفاسیر رایج مسیحی از گزارش های مرگ عیسی را به عنوان یک داده در نظر بگیریم. These include that Jesus’ body was horribly mutilated and died a relatively quick death.

منظور ما از مرگ هیچ فعالیت مغزی و عملکرد قلب نیست.

بیایید داستان رستاخیز را نیز به عنوان یک داده در نظر بگیریم. بعد از آن دوباره زنده شد 3 days, فقط آثار سوراخ شدن پهلوهایش را داشت, پا و دست, اما به طور کامل از زخم های وحشتناک بهبود یافت. از آنجایی که بدن مرده نمی تواند هیچ گونه توانایی شفابخشی داشته باشد, باید تصور کنیم که عیسی در بدنی جدید یا بدنی که به طور معجزه آسایی شفا یافته بود دوباره ظاهر شد, برای متقاعد کردن شک کنندگان برای برخی از نمره ها صرفه جویی کنید.
با توجه به باورهای پذیرفته شده مسیحی در مورد عیسی در بالا, می خواهم بپرسم: عیسی واقعاً به چه معنا مرد؟?

اجازه دهید تعریف فوق از مرگ را به روشی کاملاً معقول اصلاح کنم:

منظور ما از مرگ هیچ فعالیت مغزی و عملکرد قلب به عنوان یک حالت دائمی نیست. به عبارت دیگر, اساسی ترین درک از مرگ این است که نشان دهنده پایان دائمی زندگی است. Jesus “death” does not satisfy this understanding of death simply because there is no permanence. Christian doctrine is at pains to prove that his “death” was only temporary, and in doing so, provides the answer to the question, did Jesus really die? Clearly he did not.

We do not need to argue about whether he simply swooned or fainted, or whether his heart and brain actually stopped, whether he was clinically dead or not for 3 days. All of that becomes irrelevant.

So much is made of the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus. When is wasn’t ultimate at all. Especially since he knew ahead of time he would only be gone for 3 days. He knew before he “died” he would be “undead” in the blink of an eye.

Here is what it boils down to. If you were to offer me a deal that enables me to secure world peace forever, and all I have to do is be executed (for real), remain dead for 3 days, and then by some miraculous mechanism, که برای من تضمین شده است, بدون هیچ عواقبی از اعدامم به زندگی برمی گشتم, من آن را بدون سوال می پذیرم. برای خوابیدن فقط یک آخر هفته، اصلاً فداکاری نمی کنید, مخصوصاً اگر برای همیشه بعد از خواب عالی من به عنوان یک آخر هفته طولانی به همه داده شود تا فداکاری بزرگ من را به یاد آورند.

خط پایین: In what way does Jesus “death” satisfy the basic definition of a permanent ceasing of life? بر اساس گزارش های خود، مهم ترین آموزه مسیحی نیز بزرگترین اشکال آن است. اگر بگوییم صادقانه تر خواهد بود: «بعد از تحمل شکنجه های وحشتناک برای بخشی از روز, عیسی برای عدالت مرد 3 روزهای گناهانت, اما پس از آن دوباره مرده شد همانطور که او می دانست, به طور کامل بهبود یافته است، به جز برخی از علائم که نشان می دهد او شکنجه شده است. او فداکاری کرد 3 روزهای زندگی او برای شما. Now you need to give your whole life for him”.

مدیر says:

سلام, Erik!

Thanks for your comments. I note that you seem quite willing to concede the main point about the historicity of the gospel accounts of Jesus’ مرگ و رستاخیز. But your point is a very interesting one to which I will very briefly respond here: but which I think merits a much fuller discussion elsewhere. If you do not object, I should like to reproduce your message and offer a fuller response elsewhere on this site in the very near future. I will, of course, send you a link when I do so.

In brief, if you once embrace the premise that death ‘represents a permanent end to life’ then your argument makes good sense. در واقع, if it were true not only I, but every Christian who has ever lived is, in the words of St. پل, ‘most to be pitied’ (1 Corinthians 15:19). اما یکی از آموزه های اساسی مسیحیت این است که چنین نیست.

اما در اینجا مسائل بسیار بزرگتری وجود دارد. اگر مرگ پایان دائمی زندگی نباشد, چیست؟? و ماهیت و هدف واقعی عیسی چه بود؟’ رنج کشیدن? من می خواهم بعداً در این مورد به طور کامل بحث کنم.

اریک هالندورف

با سلام و تشکر از پاسخ شما. خوشحالم که سعی نکردید سریع پاسخ دهید، زیرا در واقع این سؤال نیاز به پاسخ سنجیده دارد و من خوشحالم که شما سؤال را در جای دیگری مطرح کنید.. نشان دهنده یک معماست, اینطور نیست?

در اصطلاح مسیحی, مرگ به معنای پایان دائمی زندگی روی زمین و آغاز همزمان زندگی پس از مرگ است, یا, یک زندگی جدید به شکلی متفاوت.

– مرگ عیسی پایان دائمی زندگی بر روی زمین نبود … پس او چه بود “مرگ” سپس?

– عیسی می دانست که او خواهد بود “undead” بعد از 3 days, بنابراین چه کاری با مفهوم “فداکاری نهایی”. و از چه نظر می‌دانست که پس از عروج به طور کامل با پدرش در بهشت ​​ملحق می‌شود، اصلاً فداکاری وجود دارد., این بار بدون باری از شکل انسانی?

– من به گرایشی در میان انجیلان برای به تصویر کشیدن عیسی اشاره کرده ام’ رنج در شرایط بسیار گرافیکی, جایی که آشکار می شود که آنها به دلیل نیاز به نشان دادن عیسی انگیزه دارند’ رنج جسمی بسیار بیشتر از هر انسانی بود که قبلاً تجربه کرده بود و در آینده برای هر انسانی تجربه خواهد شد. آیا این واقعاً یک نیاز محوری است؟? اگر نه, پس چرا اینهمه رنج او را تحمل می کند? اگر بله, پس از آن به نظر می رسد پشتیبان گیری در برابر شواهدی از رنج بسیار شدیدتر فردی در طول اعصار برای مدت طولانی توسط شکنجه گران سادیست سخت باشد., دیکتاتورها, جنگ افروزان, دیوانه های نسل کش, بیماری ها و غیره.

اینها سؤالات مهمی هستند زیرا مسیحیت به رنج توجه می کند, مرگ و رستاخیز سنگ بنای ایمان آن است, بدون آن هیچ چیز قابل توجهی وجود ندارد.

باید اشاره کنم که من به هیچ وجه علاقه ای به پاسخ به این سوالات ندارم; من صرفاً به صحت هر استدلال ارائه شده علاقه مند هستم.

My response:

Apologies for the delay responding: but I’ve been working to a deadline on a job and only just finished… But I felt it necessary to try and present an overview of the issue to avoid getting bogged down in details.

The issue I think we need to address first is what Christians believe about life and death: and I’d better start by pointing out that there were 2 differing viewpoints amongst the Jews of Jesus’ day. The Sadducees, whilst believing in God, did not believe in life after death: whereas the Pharisees believed both in a spiritual world beyond our normal perceptions and that man would somehow enter that realm when their current mortal life ended. بنابراین, even in Jesus’ day, many were in doubt about this subject. ولی, despite his disagreement with the Pharisees on many other issues, عیسی (and his disciples) always came down firmly on their side in this respect (c.f. Mt 22:23-32 & Acts 23:6-9).

The question of what life after death is like is a complex one, on which Christians do not necessarily entirely agree. But it is much easier to establish a few basic facts about death. Let us start with the very first biblical reference to human death – the story of Adam and Eve. Jesus himself cited this account when arguing the biblical case against divorce (Mt 19:3-8); so we know he took it very seriously. God had warned Adam, ‘… in the day you eat of [the forbidden fruit] you will surely die’ (Gen 2:17). Now Adam did not die physically until many, many years later: yet something very important did happen immediately: he was barred from the Garden of Eden and the ‘Tree of Life,’ to which he formerly had free access. So the death that Adam suffered was first and foremost relational – cut off from the presence and life of God. Physical death and decay was an eventual by-product.

Even today, people do not normally immediately cease to exist when they die. The entire body and organs remain, and may be medically resuscitated before too much decay has occurred. But at death communication with the corpse ceases and our previous relationship with the person is abruptly ended.

بنابراین, what I am saying is that, if you want to understand what is really meant by death and resurrection in Biblical terminology, you need to start thinking more in terms of communication and relationships than modern clinical definitions. This perspective is critical to a full understanding of the significance of Jesus’ crucifixion.

The primary problem Jesus came to address was the alienation of man from God. This had resulted in a number of secondary problems:

• Loss of understanding about the character of God

• Loss of understanding about our own place and purpose in the Universe,

• Moral degradation. (Every child is now born in a corrupted environment which begins making its impressions on their character before they even know it.) The most serious aspect of this is pride and self-centredness (the very opposite of love).

• Guilt and shame arising from hurts which we have (with varying degrees of intent) inflicted on others.

• Disease, decay and, ultimately, physical death.

• Doubt and fear about what might await us after death.

As you examine the ministry of Jesus, you will see how he addresses himself to all of the above issues in people’s lives; claiming to be able to provide, not just a philosophical bandage, but an actual cure.

But there was a secondary problem: justice. And it wasn’t simply an issue of God having been wronged by man’s rebellion. That was an issue too: since mankind had openly rebelled against God in spite of His warnings about the consequences. So if He just said, ‘Forget the consequences,’ that would make Him a liar. But there were also two other groups involved in this. Mankind was one of them. People who have been hurt by others often demand retribution or recompense: and God, who is the moral source of all justice, will not simply ignore that claim.

But the third party is a claimant far more subtle and far less open to doing deals. Man is not the only sentient being with powers of choice. Satan, one of the most powerful of these (though puny in comparison to God) had demanded independence and been expelled from God’s presence in a fall far greater than that of Adam. It was he who had sown mistrust in the minds of Adam and Eve. His goal was simple: to establish a legal claim to the human race and the world they had been given to control; taking the human race hostage to secure a place for himself.

Now the old adage says, ‘Justice must not only be done: it must be seen to be done.’ To Satan, it seemed he had God over a barrel, morally speaking. God had given man authority over the entire planet. But by obeying Satan’s suggestions, rather than God’s, man had unwittingly but voluntarily made himself Satan’s servant: so now Satan, not man, was the legal master of earth and all its inhabitants (c.f. Lk 4:5-7).

One further point: your understanding of God, the Universe, eternity and Jesus himself are far too small. We will see why this is so important shortly.

Now, as to your specific questions…

مرگ عیسی پایان دائمی زندگی بر روی زمین نبود … پس او چه بود “مرگ” سپس?

عیسی’ death and resurrection was both a demonstration and a sacrificial gift far greater than we can ever properly conceive.

• By physically resurrecting the dead body of Jesus, it showed us that there is life on the other side of death.

• It demonstrates that Jesus, uniquely amongst all the world’s religious leaders, was who he claimed to be, knew exactly what he was talking about and had the ultimate power to put his words into effect.

• It demonstrates the astonishing love of God; that he would do this for those who were, after all, self-centred rebels against His law, with no right to expect anything from Him.

• It established a mechanism that was capable of anulling the legal claim that Satan had established over the human race.

• It paid a price greater than the sum total of all and every claim for justice and recompence for mankind’s wrongdoings that ever has or ever could be laid against us.

I think that the first 3 points are fairly self-explanatory: but now let me enlarge upon the last in relation to your other 2 questions:

عیسی می دانست که او خواهد بود “undead” بعد از 3 days, بنابراین چه کاری با مفهوم “فداکاری نهایی”. …

و …

I have noted a tendency among evangelists … جایی که آشکار می شود که آنها به دلیل نیاز به نشان دادن عیسی انگیزه دارند’ physical suffering was far greater than … any human before and … in future. آیا این واقعاً یک نیاز محوری است؟?

آره, it is. As the Apostle John puts it, “It is he who is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world’s.” (1 Jn 2:2) Most of us are familiar with the old adage, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ If anyone is to pay for the sin of the whole world, then it must mean that their suffering must be greater than the sum total of every single case of the most ‘extreme individual suffering over the ages for extended periods of time at the hands of sadistic torturers, دیکتاتورها, جنگ افروزان, دیوانه های نسل کش, بیماری ها و غیره.‘

And that ‘sum total’ is not just massive beyond our ability to conceive. It is potentially infinite: because the effect of our rebellion was to leave us permanently separated from God and hostage to Satan.

I have heard some pretty graphic sermons and watched Mel Gibson’s ‘The Passion of the Christ.’ It’s brutal and gut-wrenching: but in terms of what Jesus actually had to endure it’s not even remotely close. If I could produce a film to attempt to convey what was involved, I think I would start with scenes slowly and graphically displaying the kind of scenes you describe, then gradually accelerate into a rushing kaleidoscope of seemingly never-ending horrors, perhaps ending with that ear-splitting scream of ‘My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?’ But nothing could ever come close to the reality of that billions-multiplied mass of agony – particularly as we could only watch it, whereas Jesus had to actually feel it all.

How could this be? If Jesus were just a man, it couldn’t. But Jesus claimed to be God. The apostle John describes him as the One through whom all of creation came into being (Jn 1:1-3 & 14). Opinions may differ as to how much sentience and capacity for pain a fish, or a worm or microbe may have: but most would accept that the greater and more complex the mind, the greater its probable capacity for suffering. How great, سپس, is that of the One who is bigger than the Universe and inhabits eternity? و, whereas you and I can only empathise with another’s pain as, having no direct connection to their mind, we cannot actually feel it; God, who knows our thoughts better than we know ourselves, can and does feel it. (I’ve discussed this at more length in a posting I made on ‘The Connectedness of God’ at http://tbl.liegeman.org/the-connectedness-of-god (now hosted here on this site).)

ولی, given that God is the infinite and eternal creator of all things, how could such vast suffering – even though, from our limited, temporal perspective, it seems to have been only for a finite period of our time – not be a full and sufficient settlement for all the debts we owe?