RE: Jesus, Least Fit Moral Judge
January 23, 2013 at 2:45 am
(This post was last modified: January 23, 2013 at 2:48 am by Ryantology.)
See, many words either have multiple meanings, or different values when referring to words which are quantitative in nature (unless the words in question are specific numbers or describe amounts tied to specific numbers; 'dozen' is always twelve). Such words, by themselves, cannot have a single exclusive meaning. It depends on context provided by words surrounding them.
In this particular example, it might mean that everybody, ever, will be brought back to life. However, it cannot, because there is a qualifier: 'in Christ'. Acceptance of Christ as Lord and Savior is paramount to the Christian idea of everlasting life, it is, indeed, one of its very core tenets. It is made abundantly clear throughout the New Testament that rejection of Christ denies one this alleged gift and the gift of salvation, the price of which is to be refused entry into Heaven and to be cast into the lake of eternal fire.
You assert that everybody, including those damned, will be brought back to life. The term 'in Christ' denies this; its very meaning exempts the damned from resurrection, because they are not 'in Christ'. They have rejected him. It's the very reason they were damned. Thus, 'all' in this statement means 'all who have accepted Christ', as the following descriptions of this event all focus on the truly faithful. Those who are not are nowhere mentioned or described in this chapter. It is made abundantly clear that resurrection is a reward to be earned by the select.
"I used all the eggs" can mean "I used all the eggs in the world", but "I used all the eggs in my fridge" cannot have the same meaning unless all the eggs in the world resided in my fridge.
And that is how context works.
In this particular example, it might mean that everybody, ever, will be brought back to life. However, it cannot, because there is a qualifier: 'in Christ'. Acceptance of Christ as Lord and Savior is paramount to the Christian idea of everlasting life, it is, indeed, one of its very core tenets. It is made abundantly clear throughout the New Testament that rejection of Christ denies one this alleged gift and the gift of salvation, the price of which is to be refused entry into Heaven and to be cast into the lake of eternal fire.
You assert that everybody, including those damned, will be brought back to life. The term 'in Christ' denies this; its very meaning exempts the damned from resurrection, because they are not 'in Christ'. They have rejected him. It's the very reason they were damned. Thus, 'all' in this statement means 'all who have accepted Christ', as the following descriptions of this event all focus on the truly faithful. Those who are not are nowhere mentioned or described in this chapter. It is made abundantly clear that resurrection is a reward to be earned by the select.
"I used all the eggs" can mean "I used all the eggs in the world", but "I used all the eggs in my fridge" cannot have the same meaning unless all the eggs in the world resided in my fridge.
And that is how context works.
