Who Owns our Bodies?

[MW]

If you believe that Christ is the resurrection and life you believe He has changed the nature of death. Although you die temporally you do not die eternally. You are not dead in the materialist sense; you are only asleep. After you die temporally your body remains united to your living Head, Jesus Christ, and by virtue of Him it lives; and it is on the basis of this living union that you shall be raised again, body and soul, at the last day. Such is the life of Christ in you that you account yourself dead even now because you are crucified with Christ, and the life that you live in the flesh you live by faith in the Son of God who loved you and gave Himself for you.

 

[timfost]

Tyler,

I'm sorry if I've misunderstood your argument.

Nevertheless, I still can't for the life of me understand how you've come to the conclusion you have and I hope it does not have a negative effect on your family one day.

I have more to say, but not the time to say it.

I hope you change your mind.

Blessings,

 

[ZackF]

Does taking a rib from Adam in giving Eve life have anything to add to this discussion?

 

[TylerRay]

Tyler,

I could only find one person who interprets Lev 19:28 the way you have done and that is Charles Ellicott who belonged to the Church of England. I don't put much stalk in the Church of England. I've never heard the interpretation you have given. Calvin is silent (at least I couldn't find it) on this verse as well as others. R.C. Sproul states, "Mutilation of the body created by God was incompatible with holiness, for the holy God is perfect life."

This is what pretty much what everyone else is saying,

28. Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead—"The practice of making deep gashes on the face and arms and legs, in time of bereavement, was universal among the heathen, and it was deemed a becoming mark of respect for the dead, as well as a sort of propitiatory offering to the deities who presided over death and the grave. The Jews learned this custom in Egypt, and though weaned from it, relapsed in a later and degenerate age into this old superstition (Isa 15:2; Jer 16:6; 41:5).
nor print any marks upon you—by tattooing, imprinting figures of flowers, leaves, stars, and other fanciful devices on various parts of their person. The impression was made sometimes by means of a hot iron, sometimes by ink or paint, as is done by the Arab females of the present day and the different castes of the Hindus. It is probable that a strong propensity to adopt such marks in honor of some idol gave occasion to the prohibition in this verse; and they were wisely forbidden, for they were signs of apostasy; and, when once made, they were insuperable obstacles to a return. (See allusions to the practice, Isa 44:5; Re 13:17; 14:1)."

Most of the older Reformed commentators simply say that it was a pagan practice, and the Israelites were to avoid it. However, Gill notes, "this was the custom of the Gentiles in ancient times, to imprint upon themselves the mark of an idol, to show that they were his servants." Thus, the practice was a way of dedicating oneself to an idol.

I don't see how this verse states, "God explicitly forbids us to dedicate our bodies to others, to be owned by them".

I shouldn't have said that it is explicit in the passage--it is implicit. The fact that we may not dedicate ourselves to an idol, and that we may not mutilate ourselves in the name of the dead, shows that we may not give our bodies to false gods or to men.

Further up in this same chapter in verse 20 it talks about slaves and their right not to be put to death if a man lies with the female slave. As you know, Jews did own Jewish slaves. It obviously permitted by God for someone to own another person and have them as a slave. The Bible doesn't contradict itself. God wouldn't allow the Jews to own slaves, especially Jewish slaves, and then a few verses down give an unclear verse about not owning a person. I think we should take this verse for what it says, "You shall not make any cuts on your body for the dead or tattoo yourselves."

Jewish slavery did not involve ownership in the person, but only in the person's labor. Jews were made slaves of other Jews as a way to work off debt, and it was not permanent. In the extraordinary case that a Jewish slave chose to remain with his master because he was better off there, special provision was given in the law.

Paul, on the other hand, forbids Christians from becoming slaves on the basis of God's ownership of their persons: "Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men" (1 Cor 7:23).

 

[TylerRay]

Does taking a rib from Adam in giving Eve life have anything to add to this discussion?

Not when the issue at stake is God's ownership of our bodies. God, in his capacity as creator, took a rib from Adam in order to create Eve.

 

[OPC'n]

You're right, Tyler, the Israelites and also Christians were/are not to mark oneself to show they belong to an idol. That would be idolatry. However, you would have to bend and stretch that Scripture so perversely in order for it to support your belief system on organ donation. I tend to be cautious on doing such things. The fact that I cannot find any reformed teacher who supports your interpretation leads me to the conclusion that it's not a good interpretation. I'm not trying to divisive. If you were laying all this info out in order to tell us we couldn't listen to music, I would be like, "Meh, ok, no harm done." But organ donation is a life saving process. Something this important has to have STRONG Scriptural support in order to tell other Christians they are not allowed to donate or even receive an organ which would save their lives.

 

[MW]

Believers SLEEP in Jesus. They do not suffer DEATH in the way that materialists imagine.

1 Cor. 15:51, "Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed."

1 Thess. 4:14, "For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him."

1 Thess. 5:10, "Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him."

 

[OPC'n]

Rev. Matthew you keep putting up Scriptures which talk about being asleep in Jesus. Do you really believe no believer really ever dies but is just asleep? Do you believe that Jesus didn't really die but was asleep in the grave? This really does fly in the face of Christian faith. If he were only asleep then he didn't conquer death and if we only sleep then there is no resurrection just ppl waking up from a long sleep. In any case, I don't know what this has to do with the OP, but since you keep posting this I wanted to find out what you really believe.

 

[MW]

Do you believe that Jesus didn't really die but was asleep in the grave?

Yes, Christ really died; but we believe Christ died and rose again, and His death and resurrection makes a difference to us. We die and rise in Christ. We live in death with His risen life. When Christ who is our life shall appear then shall we appear with Him in glory. That is why there can be an intermediate state in the unnatural condition of soul being separated from body. That is why we will rise again on the last day with body and soul reunited. That is why some will not die but will be alive at the coming of Christ. Giving oneself up to the fatalistic necessity of death is in accord with materialist religion, but it has no place in Christian faith and life.

Romans 6:8-11, "Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord."

 

[TylerRay]

It may be helpful for me to give a stripped down version of my argument. If anyone is truly interested in studying this issue out, let's do. However, if this matter has a foregone conclusion for you, and you refuse to be open minded because you have a hard time accepting the ramifications of such a view, then I think you are doing your theology backwards, and you need to reconsider your methods.

Here is my argument:
1. God owns our persons (that is, ourselves), and he forbids us to give our persons to others.
2. Our bodies are part of our persons, so we are forbidden to give our bodies to others.
3. Our organs are parts of our bodies, so we are forbidden to give our organs to others.

 

[OPC'n]

Rev Matthew I am quite sure you are far smarter than I am. Some of what you are saying is strange (We live in death with His risen life.) and I'm sure it's just how you are wording it. I trust from your first sentence "Please think about what you are asking" you don't believe we actually are asleep in the grave. In any case, I'm still trying to find the connection between what you keep saying and organ donation.

 

[OPC'n]

It may be helpful for me to give a stripped down version of my argument. If anyone is truly interested in studying this issue out, let's do. However, if this matter has a foregone conclusion for you, and you refuse to be open minded because you have a hard time accepting the ramifications of such a view, then I think you are doing your theology backwards, and you need to reconsider your methods.

Here is my argument:
1. God owns our persons (that is, ourselves), and he forbids us to give our persons to others.
2. Our bodies are part of our persons, so we are forbidden to give our bodies to others.
3. Our organs are parts of our bodies, so we are forbidden to give our organs to others.

Tyler, I like to think I'm open minded. PB ppl taught me to be so when I was challenging their concept of the Sabbath and was finally converted to it years ago! However, they always urged me to search the Scriptures and gave Scriptures which supported their view. You have failed to give Scriptural support for the second part of your first argument. But I'll keep watching this post for any Scriptural additions you give.

 

[MW]

In any case, I'm still trying to find the connection between what you keep saying and organ donation.

Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. You believe you will live with Christ after you die. God's ordination of things is that the soul goes to heaven and the body remains united to Christ and lives in Him. Your faith is in the life of Christ and that you live in Him.

We do not die in that sense in which a materialist thinks of death. Death is a judgment of God, not a natural necessity. Christ has taken that judgment away. We only die as a part of God's ordination as a means to a happy end, and that dying does not introduce our body to a state of death but to a state of sleep in Jesus to be awoken on the day of the resurrection. To use another biblical analogy, that body is the seed that is sown mortal to be raised immortal.

Now everyone would agree that it is unethical to cut up a sleeping man and harvest his organs to put in another person. But that is precisely what is being done from the perspective of a believer who has died in Jesus. He walks by faith, not by sight. He lives in the hope of Christ's resurrection and life. He believes his body remains united to Christ, and he will wait patiently for that which he hopes for.

 

[OPC'n]

I actually believe that my soul will go to heaven and that my body will decay in the ground until he resurrects it. I don't believe that when I die my body will be united to Christ and live in him while i'm dead in the ground....do you have a Scripture to support this? How can your physical body be united to Christ when it's an old, decaying body which is mortal laying in the ground and not in laying in heaven? Christ is in heaven not on earth so our bodies cannot be untied with him only our souls. That really doesn't make any sense. Our bodies once resurrected will be joined with our souls and we will then be joined to Christ completely but not until then. Our physical bodies actually do die. Our souls do not die bc of what Christ has done. Our physical bodies will one day be resurrected from death to immortal life. But for now.....Christians' bodies who die are actually dead. We will not be immortal until Christ resurrects us.

 

[MW]

do you have a Scripture to support this?

Our union with Christ is an unbreakable bond.

1 Thess. 4:14, "For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him."

1 Thess. 5:10, "Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him."

As the Larger Catechism (answer 86) teaches, "their souls are then made perfect in holiness, and received into the highest heavens, where they behold the face of God in light and glory, waiting for the full redemption of their bodies, which even in death continue united to Christ, and rest in their graves as in their beds, till at the last day they be again united to their souls."

 

[timfost]

Now everyone would agree that it is unethical to cut up a sleeping man and harvest his organs to put in another person. But that is precisely what is being done from the perspective of a believer who has died in Jesus.

Is it ethical to bury a sleeping person?

Very strange arguments on this thread...

 

[MW]

Is it ethical to bury a sleeping person?

Something must be done with his mortal remains, and therefore it is ethical to respectfully lay the body to rest in hope of the resurrection. It is not respectful to chop him up into pieces.

 

[timfost]

Is it ethical to bury a sleeping person?

Something must be done with his mortal remains, and therefore it is ethical to respectfully lay the body to rest in hope of the resurrection. It is not respectful to chop him up into pieces.

By what standard do we judge organ donation as disrespectful? "Chopping up in pieces" suggests a grotesque act not fitting for what actually occurs in organ donation.

The second table of the law would seem to promote organ donation, not prohibit it. The Galatians demonstrated organ donation willingness, which would not be a demonstration of love if the desire was evil.

 

[MW]

By what standard do we judge organ donation as disrespectful?

By the faith of the Scriptures, which tells us that we live united to Christ.

"Chopping up in pieces" suggests a grotesque act not fitting for what actually occurs in organ donation.

Cut out the heart and deliver it to the receiver, cut out the liver and deliver it to the receiver, cut out the kidneys and deliver them to the receivers, and you have a person chopped up in pieces.

The second table of the law would seem to promote organ donation, not prohibit it. The Galatians demonstrated organ donation willingness, which would not be a demonstration of love if the desire was evil.

Then why are you waiting until you die? Because you know the action in and of itself is a killing action. And if that is the case, you know very well that the law should not be interpreted to condone an action which the law outrightly and overtly condemns.

 

[ThomasT]

Is it ethical to bury a sleeping person?

Something must be done with his mortal remains, and therefore it is ethical to respectfully lay the body to rest in hope of the resurrection. It is not respectful to chop him up into pieces.

It may (or may not) be disrespectful, but is it a sin? I think that’s the real question.

Do medical students commit a sin when they use cadavers in their surgery training?

“Nearly all medical students in America begin their education by disassembling a human body. … Active learning in the lab is the foundation of every treatment and diagnosis the future physicians will render. A dead body can become a life-saving tool down the road.”

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/07/body-donation-cadavers-anatomy-medical-education/

 

[MW]

Is it a sin to take a sleeping man and chop him up into pieces for medical research? Does that need an answer?

Is Jesus to be believed in what He told Martha? Understandably, we all believe, as Martha did, that Lazarus shall rise in the resurrection. But it does not appear that everyone believes what Jesus then told Martha concerning Himself as the resurrection and the life, and the consequences which flow from this extraordinary truth.

Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

 

[OPC'n]

I looked up the idea of us sleeping when we die. I couldn't find one person who thought our bodies are asleep in the grave. I did find something called soul sleeping which is a new age concept and not a Christian belief.

 

[MW]

I looked up the idea of us sleeping when we die. I couldn't find one person who thought our bodies are asleep in the grave. I did find something called soul sleeping which is a new age concept and not a Christian belief.

Calvin on 1 Thess. 4:13: "He speaks of the dead as asleep, agreeably to the common practice of Scripture — a term by which the bitterness of death is mitigated, for there is a great difference between sleep and destruction. It refers, however, not to the soul, but to the body, for the dead body lies in the tomb, as in a couch, until God raise up the man. Those, therefore, act a foolish part, who infer from this that souls sleep."

On v. 14: "To sleep in Christ, is to retain in death the connection that we have with Christ, for those that are by faith ingrafted into Christ, have death in common with him, that they may be partakers with him of life."

 

[ThomasT]

Is it a sin to take a sleeping man and chop him up into pieces for medical research? Does that need an answer?

Is Jesus to be believed in what He told Martha? Understandably, we all believe, as Martha did, that Lazarus shall rise in the resurrection. But it does not appear that everyone believes what Jesus then told Martha concerning Himself as the resurrection and the life, and the consequences which flow from this extraordinary truth.

Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Question on practical morality: Given your view that medical students sin when they dissect a cadaver, and assuming (for the sake of our discussion) that every medical school on earth requires its students to dissect cadavers, should medical schools be avoided?

 

[MW]

Question on practical morality: Given your view that medical students sin when they dissect a cadaver, and assuming (for the sake of our discussion) that every medical school on earth requires its students to dissect cadavers, should medical schools be avoided?

That assumption would probably be against the trend from what I understand, and might be unnecessary with the advent of 3D printing parts; but yes, avoidance would be required if one were not willing to challenge the establishment. Part of living in a democratically pluralistic society is the ability to press one's religious freedoms, and our post-modern institutions tend to be more open to accommodating individuals than they once were, although the medical field is probably one field where post-modernism seems counter-intuitive.

 

[earl40]

To be absent from the body is to be with The Lord. I believe the body is said to be asleep which is a metaphor for death, though the soul or spirit is alive and "with" The Lord. In other words, the body is dead and not alive, but the essence or soul of the person is with The Lord, and we shall yearn for the vessel that is in the grave which will be changed like the body of Jesus.

Even when a person gets a kidney they acknowledge they have have another person kidney within themselves. I have no doubt when giver and receiver are raised on the last day they will have the original kidney they had while alive.

So far as our body being united with Jesus while in the grave I know the connection is a spiritual connection and not physical in that the body of Jesus is not laying with us in the grave, though through The Spirit our body is connected.

 

[timfost]

Is it ethical to bury a sleeping person?

Something must be done with his mortal remains...

Isn't the definition of mortal "subject to death"? Such an argument seems oxymoronic.

Christ made no such distinction:

These things He said, and after that He said to them, “Our friend Lazarus sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up.”

Then His disciples said, “Lord, if he sleeps he will get well.” However, Jesus spoke of his death, but they thought that He was speaking about taking rest in sleep.

Then Jesus said to them plainly, “Lazarus is dead..."

Yes, in a sense, they are sleeping and waiting to be awoken. But this does not detract from the fact that the dead are in fact dead-- separated body and soul. If we apply the same moral code to the dead, don't we by necessity then we bury them alive?

We should be careful not to mix metaphors as it seems to create a new law that we by necessity beak when we bury the dead.

Matt.15:3: "He answered and said to them, 'Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?'"

 

[timfost]

Heidelberg 41:

Why was He “buried”?

To show thereby that He was really dead.

 

[timfost]

Was the desire of the Galatians sinful?

For I bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me. Gal. 4:15

That's plainly hyperbole.

If the specific metaphor he used would have been sinful for them to actually do, could he just as easily have said "For I bear you witness that you would have murdered others in my place"? If a) he used hyperbole, and b) the example given would have been sinful, would the statement above communicate the same point?

 

[MW]

If we apply the same moral code to the dead, don't we by necessity then we bury them alive?

No; they are temporally and outwardly dead, though not eternally and inwardly dead. They are passed from death to life. We look at the things which are unseen and eternal, not the things which are seen and temporal. We walk by faith, not by sight.