Re: resuscitation vs resurrection

Lazarus was resuscitated, only to die again. Jesus was resurrected to a transformed body never to die again. There is a big difference, even if Lazarus was actually dead.
People resuscitated after their heart has stopped are not resurrected at all.

Simple, Q.E.D.

Michael
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: jack syme
  To: asa@lists.calvin.edu
  Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 7:59 PM
  Subject: resuscitation vs resurrection

  In the ASA, ID, Blogs, and my observations Glenn made the claim that many people, including ones he knows, have been resurrected because they have been revived after their heart has stopped beating. I said that this is generally called a resucitation, not a resurrection.

  But that comment begs the question. What does it mean to be dead?

  There have been many definitions of death over the centuries. The stoppage of breathing. Absence of a pulse. A flatline EKG. And most recently evidence from observation that indicates that there has been irreversible loss of whole brain function.

  But all of these definitions of death, have either no underlying concept of what it really means to be dead (brain death, flatline EKG) or errouneous concepts of what it means to be dead (breathing being the breath of life.) The modern concept of what it means to be dead, is a purely scientific one, one that is testable. And amounts to nothing more than signs, clues, evidence, that the person is dead, and makes no claims about what being dead actually means. (I dont know what death is but I recognize it when I see it.)

  So what does it mean to be dead? I think a monist view has problems here. At what point along the normal living, comatose living, heart stoppage, brain stoppage continuum does death occurr and why? For dualists. Christ essentially made the definition when he commended his spirit to God, at least that is what it seems like to me. But I was wondering if folks here had any thoughts about this matter.
Received on Wed May 25 15:43:50 2005