We will waltz across Texas..... [Archive]

Justme

May 13th 2003, 11:13 AM

Hi TWeb,

In a thread on Eschatology Dee Dee said:

Hey Justme, okay. I do have to say though if it is an "explanation" that places the resurrection mentioned in 1 Cor 15 as a past event that we start a new thread on it, and that it be started in Religion 102.

Then I came to this forum and read the unorthodox statement and all the rest.

First the 1 Cor 15 bit.

There is a lot of resurrecting going on in 1 Cor 15. Obviously the resurrection of Jesus is past. As far as other discussion of resurrection in that chapter I didn't realize anyone considered that as a past event. Certainly not any preterist people I have talked to, but I haven't talked to many. But anyway where does this concept come from about 1 Cor 15 being all over and done with? It most certainly is not me.

There that said I'll say that that is not my main concern. I come here and read on this thread about a forum discussing unorthodox teachings. This on a website that talks about the dead climbing up out of graves sometime in the future and waltzing across Texas. This on a website that considers a rapture!

Since this website promotes the rapture and this out of the graves/walk around/start over plan I think they should be able to back up what they are saying. If they can't back it up I think they should cosider re-wording the forum description..

On the other hand if I can't prove them wrong, biblically speaking, then I should shut up.

I propose the following.

I will take on the entire clan at this website and answer their questions, relevent to the issues, if someone on the board will deal with mine.

What we are dealing with here is a very simple situation...either I am dead wrong biblically or you are.

Because I am on the short side of the field and it is my religion that is being called unorthodox by this website I want to lead the discussion.

I will lead the discussion using what I have learned from dealing with false religious teachings over the past 15 years. We deal with only one short topic at a time. That leaves zero possibility of dodging any issue.

It is highly unlikely that anyone on the face of the planet has a cut and dried answer for every verse in the bible and I will consider that as we go thru a discussion.

If a religious doctrine discussion is taken far enough the one with the unbiblical solution will eventually contradict themselves, thus the scripture will eventually prove itself.

I'll point out the advanges I have in this situation as I see it.

I have done this a zillion times.

Nobody has ever lasted, so I am a determined sort of guy.

I control the area of discussion. That shouldn't be as scary as it sounds, because if a doctrine is sound it should fit the entire bible.

If it's a go I'll ask this question to determine how far back we have to start this.

The Great Tribulation mentioned in Matthew 24...how many times does that particular event occur?

Thank you,

Justme

seer

May 15th 2003, 05:58 AM

Hey is this Justme from CARM? Seer/James here - how are you doing?

Justme

May 15th 2003, 07:09 AM

Hi,

Justfine, thank you, how about you?

Yes, I was on Carm a year or two ago, had fun.

Justme

Justme

May 18th 2003, 12:32 AM

Hi everybody,

Well, it seems that topic floated by like a lead baloon. For what reason, we may never know.Let's try another.

In 1 Cor 15, as I see it, Paul talks about a future raising of the dead in a spiritual body.

However,in Daniel 12 there is talk of people sleeping in the dirt and then being raised to righteousness or shame.....I say that raising of the dead is past tense, and I say I can lay out the verses that prove it.

I would hate myself if I didn't point out my hidden agenda here.
Throughout the www and plastered all over TV is what I consider to be false teaching. It would seem reasonably clear that false religious teaching was, at least in part, responsible for the deaths of many people on Sept.11. There are people who are dead today in this modern world, who could have lived, but chose to follow a false religious teaching. There are people dead today because of fantical religious leaders, that took them to their early graves. Jim Jones, Koresh, cults to no end and some other groups who shall , at this time remain, un-named, have been responsibile , in my opinion for the untimely deaths of many followers.
Prior to 2000 we heard of the radically misinformed stockpiling food, water and guns to protect it because of the 'end times' or as I prefer 'doomsday' theories of Chicken Little. It becomes a dreadful waste of time, energy and, in fact, lives, if there really are no 'signs' of 'end times' predicted in the bible. Is there any, if so where?
If you use any search engine on the web you will find an overwhelming list of sites which deal with 'end time' rapture, and like issues and I feel it is useful to present the other side of the coin from time to time so that people reading thru this stuff gets another angle to think about.

So yea, I have my reasons to want to talk about this stuff.

Thanks for reading,

Justme

Justme

May 24th 2003, 10:47 AM

Hi Jade,

Want to come out and play?

Justme

Justme

May 24th 2003, 10:18 PM

Hi Dee Dee,

Apparently Paul wrote his letters to the Corintians in 52 AD. The letters to Timothy were his last, in the year 67. That leaves fifteen years for things to happen.

1 Cor 15 tells about Jesus sitting at the right hand until all enemies were put under His feet and that the last enemy was death. 1 Tim 2:10 says death WAS destroyed.

Further evidence that death was destroyed is in John 11:

26and whoever lives and believes in me will never die.

Jesus was talking to Martha. If she wasn't going to die , death must have been destroyed.

I haven't been talking to many people, I'm so blue!!!

Justme

John Reece

May 24th 2003, 10:44 PM

Justme,

I'm not talking, because I have nothing to say yet. But I find your drift rather intriguing. I read with great interest what you are writing

John

dizzle

May 25th 2003, 07:34 AM

Dear Justme:

I know you started this looking for my heavy participation, and I thank you for starting it in the correct forum, but I hope I do not disappoint you with my level of participation. I do not have the time I used to since I have many administration duties. I will stop in and answer what I can when I can. I am sure that you have read my article on Neo-Hymenaeanism so you know my position on this.

Justme

May 25th 2003, 09:51 AM

Hi Dee Dee,

Yes, I have read your articles. At least some of them.

I would like to extend this conversation with some one to bring out the other interpretation for the consideration of readers, but I understand your time would be limited.

I may just type out a short post to explain the idea and leave it at that.

Take care and thank you,

Justme

dizzle

May 25th 2003, 09:55 AM

Sure Justme, I will try the best that I can. I have just been so swamped lately.

Justme

May 25th 2003, 04:39 PM

Hi

Before I attempt to illustrate what I see the orthodox biblical interpretation to be I have to mention two assumptions.
1) I assume the bible to be correct.

2) I assume a temple in Jerusalem actually was destroyed in or about 70 AD.

The first thing that has to be dealt with is the great tribulation, not when it was/is, but how many there was/is.

Matthew 24

21 "For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will.

Mark refers to it as

19because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now--and never to be equaled again.

Joel says:

2 a day of darkness and gloom,
a day of clouds and blackness.
Like dawn spreading across the mountains
a large and mighty army comes,
such as never was of old
nor ever will be in ages to come.

These verses should be enough to point out that there is only one Great Tribulation. Distress and tribulation happen all the time, but the biblical meaning of this is that there is only one great tribulation followed by the coming of the son of man.

There is only one great tribulation.

Daniel says:

There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then.

Daniel 12 adds to that by saying:

But at that time your people-everyone whose name is found written in the book-will be delivered. 2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame ....

So somehow in and around this great tribulation is a resurrection of the dead.

So now the timeframe of that Great Tribulation becomes important.
As far as I know the bible doesn't tell us specifically when the GT will occur.
However, the events both before and after the GT are laid out rock solid.

There is a warning given to the followers of Jesus to avoid this GT. The resulting flight of the people takes place prior to the GT.

Mark 13

14"When you see 'the abomination that causes desolation'[1] standing where it[2] does not belong--let the reader understand--then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

Matthew 24

15"So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,'[2] spoken of through the prophet Daniel--let the reader understand-- 16then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

Luke 21

20"When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. 21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains,......

In each of the books these verses lead up to the time of distress/wrath/ ttribulation.

Verses about pregnant women and travel on sabbath give some hint as to the timeframe, but is not 100% final.

Following the GT there is a celestial display that includes the coming of the son of man.

Following are verses that would place the coming of the son of man in the 1st century.

Luke 21

32"I tell you the truth, this generation[2] will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

One of the 'all these things' is the army surrounding Jerusalem and another is the GT.

15"So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,

Where is the 'holy place'?

Hebrews 9

2A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand, the table and the consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place.

That was in the temple. To see the A of D the temple would have to be standing.

Matthew 24

14And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

One of 'all these things' is the preaching of the gospel and another is the GT.

When was the gospel preached.
Matthew 10

23When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

The above is from the chapter where Jesus gives His instructions to His apostles to go out and proclaim the gospel.

AND

Col 1

23if you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel. This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.

John 21

22Jesus answered, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?...............

Jesus was talking about John the beloved.

There are other verses to tie down the timeframe of the GT, but these should do for now.

Now we must return to what Daniel said in chapter 12 :

But at that time your people-everyone whose name is found written in the book-will be delivered. 2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame ....

These people will be resurrected( I prefer raised up) at or near the time of the GT.

Other verses that agree with that are:

25I tell you the truth, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live.
Note the HAS NOW COME.
AND

1 Thess 4

15According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep.

Who are some of the people who 'sleep in the dust.'

Daniel himself would be one of them.

13 "As for you, go your way till the end. You will rest, and then at the end of the days you will rise to receive your allotted inheritance."

Paul states that the WE WHO ARE ALIVE AT THE COMING shall not precede... If the coming is in the first century and Paul was right, that resurrection took place back then.

That does not rule out further raising of the dead. There is a natural body and a spiritual body, the earthly body and the heavenly body.

In 1 Cor 15 Paul talks about the raising of the spiritual body. That can not occur until the death of the natural body. That is an ongoing event. The coming of the son of man was the establishment of the kingdom of God, the beginning of the priviledge of eternal life after the sacrifice on the cross.

The second coming of Christ for those who lived after the general resurrection of GT times occurs at their 'end' or their death.
Hebrews 9:

27Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment,

This raising of the dead to heaven or hell is quick, like the blink of an eye even, as it states here in John 11:

26and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"

All of the above can be summarized in this short paragraph which I have printed many times.

The second coming of Christ occurs at the personal death of each individual and this process had it's beginning in the first century.

The first coming is the natural which we can only read about, the second is the spiritual which every eye will see, albeit in the spiritual realm not the physical.

That means no rapture and if you want to waltz across Texas you better get started.

Thanks for reading,

Justme

John Reece

May 25th 2003, 06:42 PM

Thanks, Justme.

Justme

May 25th 2003, 10:37 PM

Hi,

The great tribulation is a massive key to understanding the most talked about biblical prophesy.

There are groups who consider that the second coming occurs once and for all sometime in the future at the end of time. Some just consider that sometime 'soon' Jesus will return and destroy all of the earthly inhabitants, except of course, that precious group who believes as they do.

However, biblically speaking, the physical existance of mankind does not end with the 'parousia.'

Rev 14

13Then I heard a voice from heaven say, "Write: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on."
"Yes," says the Spirit, "they will rest from their labor, for their deeds will follow them."

The rest of the chapter talks about the coming. Blessed are those who 'DIE' after the coming. That would agree with what I said about the eternal life has been made available after the cross and the final details of salvation.

Further to that we can again go to the Book of Revelation, chapter 22.

I'll paraphrase here.

Here the city of Jerusalem is the new Heaven, within it is the throne of God. I have seen where some consider the New Jerusalem to be the church, but I doubt any church on earth is holy enough to 'hover' and I also doubt God has a throne in any of them. The righteous may enter in. Outside the dogs, the immoral and others remain. Earlier John tells us the vile will continue to be vile and the holy will continue to be holy.

Jesus is coming soon, however, Heaven is in place and operational. Jesus would come at the death of each individual outside (on earth) and the judgement would be handed down to each individual at their physical death.

The righteous would be allowed into the new heaven where God is and remain there for ever and ever. Well, I guess eternity is a really long time. If you are going to be in this Heaven for ever, there is no possibility of dancing out of that Heaven and continuing on across Texas.

It is quite obvious that there is not a 1500 foot cubed 'heaven' hovering in space above Boston, so the whole story must be taken figuratively.

I have also heard it said many times that God will come and lay His wrath on the masses and kill the wicked.

Let's look at who is involved in this great tribulation time of wrath.

Throughout the Olivet Discourse the writers refer to 'YOU' will see this, or 'YOU' will hear this and 'YOU' must flee Judea. The 'YOU' always sounding like the favorites of Jesus.

It is 'THEY" who feel the wrath of God.

Luke 21

4They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

The friends of Jesus had fled the province of Judea BEFORE the GT.

HOwever, look at who ends up in Heaven.

Rev 7

15And he said, "These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Therefore,
"they are before the throne of God
and serve him day and night in his temple;

So any talk about the GT being the cleanup of the earthly wicked is not totally correct. There are some who go on to the righteous existance.

These are also among the first to be resurrected according to 1 Thess 4.

15According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep.

One interesting point which I have never seen brought up, is if this interpretation proves out there is no such thing as biblical eschatology.( if I properly understand 'eschtology') There is no biblical talk about any future signs of end times. The bible says all life on earth will end, but says it will happen unannounced.

If there is no signs of the end, all these promoters of end time philosophy look a bit foolish.

I'll read any comments anyone may have that they would consider to prove me wrong.

I will only consider scriptural evidence however. The 'BUT IT NEVER HAPPENED stuff doesn't cut it. To be thinking there would be physical documentation of a spiritual and invisible happening 2000 years ago is too big a stretch.

Justme

John Reece

May 26th 2003, 06:09 AM

Thanks again. Justme.

Look at the diagrams on www.johnreece.us and see what you think.

Justme

May 26th 2003, 08:18 AM

Hi John,

My computer doesn't pick up the diagrams for some reason, but I read a quite a bit and bookmarked your page.

What I have read so far is awesome.

Would you allow links to that page from posts in other forums?

Justme

John Reece

May 26th 2003, 10:02 AM

Today @ 01:18 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=107977#post107977)
Justme:

Hi John,

Would you allow links to that page from posts in other forums?

Justme

Yes.

Justme

June 19th 2003, 10:57 PM

Hi ya'all,

I would like to spend some time discussing things from this thread with a person I see visiting from another area. I would like to see how he makes out when he can't falsely accuse and use his moderarator powers to ban the opponent.

That person would be OldShepherd, are you brave enough to fight fair???

Justme

dizzle

June 19th 2003, 11:01 PM

Justme, we do not drag quarrels with leadership on another forum over here. I am familiar with CF, and they do not allow rogue bannings from Moderators, just as we do not allow such here. If you feel you must air this dispute out here, please take it to the Locker Room. Otherwise issues with another forum should be addressed at that forum.

Justme

June 19th 2003, 11:27 PM

Hi,

I put a post in the locker room, but I would like to keep the challenge up to this gentleman on this thread. In fact I would gladly discuss this thread with anyone.

Justme

Cherith

June 30th 2003, 02:57 AM

I just started reading this thread, so I hope you guys will forgive me while I play catch-up.

JustMe:In 1 Cor 15, as I see it, Paul talks about a future raising of the dead in a spiritual body.

However,in Daniel 12 there is talk of people sleeping in the dirt and then being raised to righteousness or shame.....I say that raising of the dead is past tense, and I say I can lay out the verses that prove it.

Ok, I'll bite.

1) Are you affirming that the resurrection in 1 Cor 15 is future?

2) Are you equating the resurrection in 1 Cor 15 with the one that is prophesied in Dan 12 - i.e. does it take place at the same point in time?

3) Are you qualifying the resurrection in Dan by saying "THAT raising of the dead is past tense"? Or that "raising of the dead" (in general) is past tense?

JustMe: There are people who are dead today in this modern world, who could have lived...
...There are people dead today because of fantical religious leaders, that took them to their early graves.
...responsibile...for the untimely deaths of many followers.(emphasis mine)

Careful, your love for Biblical truth could back you up in a unwanted corner with this statement. I'm sure you're not really advocating that there is any person who has ever died who could have"add[ed] a single hour to his life"? The word "could" indicates ABILITY... Bad foot to get started with me on. :no: But I digress...

1 Tim 2:10 says death WAS destroyed.

1 Tim 2:10 says "But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works." And 2 Tim 2:10 says “Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.” Perhaps you had in mind Heb 2:14 “Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;”...? But please, my good fellow, please be so kind as to define "death" for us before we go on.

Further evidence that death was destroyed is in John 11:26 and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Jesus was talking to Martha. IF she wasn't going to die, THEN death must have been destroyed.

1) Did Jesus make this statement to Martha BEFORE or AFTER “death was destroyed”?

2) Where does The Text say that Martha, unlike her brother (who apparently “live[d] and believe[d]” in Christ and yet died physically, but then was supernaturally raised from the dead by that self same Saviour), “wasn’t going to die”?

3) HOW was “death” destroyed?

4) WHEN was “death” destroyed?

5) Your conclusion doesn’t necessarily follow from your premise. For example, IF Enoch and Elijah weren’t going to/or didn’t die, THEN does that mean that death had already been destroyed as far back as then?

Nice to meet you. More later,
--C

Justme

June 30th 2003, 09:52 PM

Hi Cherith,

I am glad you responded. I have wanted to go thru this discussion with some one on this board.
When I first put this up I thought if I sounded boastful enough people would come out of everywhere to kick me off my high horse. Didn't work.

I'll answer your questions and at the end I'll ask you one.

1) Are you affirming that the resurrection in 1 Cor 15 is future?

It talks about the resurrection of Jesus there too, but the gist of the main part is that we can look forward to being raised, and it talks about the body that IS raised.etc. Yes, I see that part as being future.

2) Are you equating the resurrection in 1 Cor 15 with the one that is prophesied in Dan 12 - i.e. does it take place at the same point in time?

The raising of the dead in 1 Cor 15 is both different in some ways,as well as being at a different times.

3) Are you qualifying the resurrection in Dan by saying "THAT raising of the dead is past tense"? Or that "raising of the dead" (in general) is past tense?

The resurrection talked about in Daniel 12:1-3 is past tense.

Careful, your love for Biblical truth could back you up in a unwanted corner with this statement. I'm sure you're not really advocating that there is any person who has ever died who could have"add[ed] a single hour to his life"?

What I am meaning there is that the religion they allowed to rule their lives was the cause of their death. Look at the front page of the Watch tower or Awake? from May of 1994, I believe it was. Pictures of 24 kids who died because they believed the Watchtower. It is possible that a blood transfusion would not have saved all of them anyway, but I know some members of my family are alive today because they DID have a blood transfusion.There was also a ban on vacinations at one time by that group. They were not allowed to have transplants for a time. Did people die early because of that, you bet they did. There are groups who discourage medical help and call for help from the Almighty instead. I met a young man, who you may have seen on the news 2 or 3 years ago. He relied on faith in God to bring him out of cancer. Didn't work. I would say if it was my 14 year old son I would have tried anything as well, but I would have totally exhausted medical help first. Can you think of any murderers who killed their children because God TOLD them to get them out of this wicked world. In those cases it is mental disease coming in as well, but how much of it can be traced to false religious teaching. If violent movies can lead to violent behaviors, so can false religious teaching repeated over and over lead to ridiculus acts?

1 Tim 2:10 says death WAS destroyed.

Great!!It should be 2 Tim 1:10

0but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.

As I understand it this was written in about 68AD. It was past tense then. There are other verses that show a future tense, but were written much earlier.

But please, my good fellow, please be so kind as to define "death" for us before we go on.

That will fit in with the next part of your post.

I talked about John 11:

25Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; 26and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"

Jesus plainly states that she will LIVE ater she physically dies. She dies and leaves the physical/ natural life and LIVES again in the spiritual/heavenly life. This has to be almost instant because Jesus tells her she will never DIE. The spiritual follows the physical fast enough to be termed eternal life.

1) Did Jesus make this statement to Martha BEFORE or AFTER “death was destroyed”?

It doesn't say as far as I recall, nor does it matter. Jesus would know if she was destined to live until that time.

2) Where does The Text say that Martha, unlike her brother (who apparently “live[d] and believe[d]” in Christ and yet died physically, but then was supernaturally raised from the dead by that self same Saviour), “wasn’t going to die”?

Right there in John 11:26, 25 as well.

It doesn't say that either of them were not going to PHYSICALLY die.

3) HOW was “death” destroyed?

BY the establishment of the Kingdom of God. By the fact that Jesus died for the sin of mankind. By making the kingdom of Heaven available for the common man.

4) WHEN was “death” destroyed?
Sometime around this:
...Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death ......2 Tim 1:10.

5) Your conclusion doesn’t necessarily follow from your premise. For example, IF Enoch and Elijah weren’t going to/or didn’t die, THEN does that mean that death had already been destroyed as far back as then?

Death could not have been destroyed back then or what was Jesus doing here in the first century and why did Paul write this in about 52 AD.

1 Cor 15

26The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

As for Enoch and Elijah, I can't help you. God chose to use them at various points in history and I have never looked in to it at all as to why.

I would gladly dig into this resurrection bit as deep as we can. I have never pinned down all the minute details, but I have the major ones fitting in my mind.

My question to you. Do you consider the great tribulation to be past or future?

Take care,
'Justme

Cherith

July 4th 2003, 01:24 AM

JustMe:The raising of the dead in 1 Cor 15 is both different in some ways [from the one prophesied/promised in Dan 12],as well as being at a different times.

Please elaborate. I would tend to agree, IF we're thinking along the same lines... :teeth:

Justme

July 4th 2003, 12:59 PM

Hi Cherith,

1 Cor 15 tells us first that there IS reason to believe that we will be raised to eternal life sometime. Here it also tells us about the resurrection body, the process of resurrection in a way. I guess it applies to believers AND non-believers, but I seldom think that as I read this chapter.

At any rate I see this as different because after the cross the raising of the dead occurs at death whereas prior to that there is the sleeping in the dirt situation. So I see the 'general' resurrection being somewhere near the coming of the son of Man, which is that of all those who died prior to the coming and then of course all those who die after that as a continous thing. The process of the raising of the dead is the same as I see it , but at different times.

That is how I see the whole thing anyway.

Justme

Cherith

July 4th 2003, 02:29 PM

JustMe:What I am meaning there is that the religion they allowed to rule their lives was the cause of their death. Look at the front page of the Watch tower or Awake? from May of 1994, I believe it was. Pictures of 24 kids who died because they believed the Watchtower. It is possible that a blood transfusion would not have saved all of them anyway, but I know some members of my family are alive today because they DID have a blood transfusion.There was also a ban on vacinations at one time by that group. They were not allowed to have transplants for a time. Did people die early because of that, you bet they did. There are groups who discourage medical help and call for help from the Almighty instead. I met a young man, who you may have seen on the news 2 or 3 years ago. He relied on faith in God to bring him out of cancer. Didn't work. I would say if it was my 14 year old son I would have tried anything as well, but I would have totally exhausted medical help first. Can you think of any murderers who killed their children because God TOLD them to get them out of this wicked world. In those cases it is mental disease coming in as well, but how much of it can be traced to false religious teaching. If violent movies can lead to violent behaviors, so can false religious teaching repeated over and over lead to ridiculus acts?

I know this isn't really on topic and we can discuss this later, if you like, but I couldn't let the point relevant to our discussion go by...

You didn't seem to get the import of the Bible verse that I quoted where Jesus says that we cannot add "a single hour" to our life. The reverse is also true - vis., we cannot subtract a single hour.

:read:"The wages of sin is death"

Sin = Cause
and the
wages/death = Effect

The instances that you quoted above do not change the facts. Those people died WHEN they died because of sin and FOR NO OTHER REASON. "...it is not IN man...to direct his steps" (Jer 10:23; Prov 16:9) Or as the Westminster Confession of Faith says:

God, from all eternity, did by the most Wise and Holy Counsel of His Own Will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the Author of sin; nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.

Now, I'm not big on quoting creeds or confessions - except where they most succinctly express Biblical truths, but the Bible stands firmly against your premise.

Acts 17:26 says regarding mankind that God "hath determined the times before appointed and the bounds of their habitation." Meaning that we don't choose when we're born or when we'll die or even where we will live.

To this agrees Job 14:5 "Seeing his days are determined, and the number of his months are with Thee, Thou hast appointed his bounds that he cannot pass."

Verse 14[ adds:"...all the days of my appointed time will I wait, until my change comes."

Job had said earlier in 7:1-3: "Is there not an appointed time to man upon earth? Are not his days like the days of a hireling? As a servant earnestly desireth the shadow, and as a hireling looketh for the reward of his work..." Meaning that the servant can't wait for the sun to go down and his labor to be over and to receive his wages.

Man's days are appointed and he can do nothing to shorten or extend them because they are all bound up in the eternal purpose of God. Likewise, Jesus could not die "before" His appointed time (Lk 4:28-30; Jn 8:59).

I am not saying that people, by their sin, do not contribute to their own demise - the "liberty and contingency of second causes..." as the Westminster Confession says, but then what of those infants who are stillborn? What is the cause of their death? It is not actual sins. Is it not the wages/payment of sin upon the world? Sure our actions contribute to our own demise and that of others - "violence is [not] offered to the will of the creatures" - but neither "is it within man to direct his steps." Man is a slave to his sinful nature. Jesus told pious men of His own people that they were "OF your father, the devil, and the lusts of your father, you WILL do." How could Jesus make such an emphatic statement? "...because He knew what was IN man."

Or what say you of David when he numbered the people as recorded in 2 Sam 24:1-25 and 1 Chron 21:1-30. In 2 Sam 24:1 it says that: "...the anger of The LORD was kindled against Israel and He moved David against them to say, 'Go number Israel and Judah'." But in 1 Chron 21:17 it says that: "Satan stood up against Israel and provoked David to number Israel." And yet added to both of these is David's perspective in verse 17 of both passages: "...is it not I that commanded the people to be numbered? even I it is that have sinned and done evil..." Which is it, who's doing was it - The Lord, the devil or David? And why does it have to be either/or and not both/and? The same point could be made about The Lord and the hardening of Pharoah's heart. The Lord says He will and did harden Pharoah's heart and yet the text also says that Pharoah hardened his own heart. Rom 1:28 says that God turns people over to their own reprobate minds. He simply gives them what they want. He takes away His restraining Hand of Grace and lets them suffer the consequences of their sin, YET He retains all sovereignty over their lives and actions.

No friend, people don't die early because of their beliefs or the actions of others. People die when their appointed time is fulfilled - for whatever reasons, by whatever secondary cause; however, the primary cause is God's Sovereignty and the fact that as a fallen race we are all deserving of and under a sentence of death. That is why the "Good News" is so sublime!

Cherith

July 4th 2003, 03:16 PM

1 Cor 15 tells us first that there IS reason to believe that we will be raised to eternal life sometime. Here it also tells us about the resurrection body, the process of resurrection in a way. I guess it applies to believers AND non-believers, but I seldom think that as I read this chapter.

At any rate I see this as different because after the cross the raising of the dead occurs at death whereas prior to that there is the sleeping in the dirt situation. So I see the 'general' resurrection being somewhere near the coming of the son of Man, which is that of all those who died prior to the coming and then of course all those who die after that as a continous thing. The process of the raising of the dead is the same as I see it , but at different times.

So, essentially you don't know what you believe and can't really back up any of your assertions and you just pop-off at the mouth because you want to pick a fight with a bunch of Christians, is that it?

Let's take what you said in order of their appearance.

:duh: 1) You said: "1 Cor 15 tells us first that there IS reason to believe that we will be raised to eternal life sometime."

When is this "sometime"? Does it have a specific point in time, oh say at the Second Advent or are you advocating that men are resurrected every day, in fact at the moment they die?

:duh: 2) You said: "Here it also tells us about the resurrection body, the process of resurrection in a way."

That's a very vague statement. Does 1 Cor 15 tell us about the resurrection body or not, and what is this "also" business? What else do you think Paul is communicating?

:duh: 3) You said: "I guess it applies to believers AND non-believers, but I seldom think that as I read this chapter."

You "guess," huh? What fine apologists we have for the Kingdom! Be dogmatic man, make your bed! Are believers as well as unbelievers resurrected and WHEN?

:duh: 4) You said: "At any rate I see this as different because after the cross the raising of the dead occurs at death whereas prior to that there is the sleeping in the dirt situation."

WHEN after the Cross and what "death"?!?

Are you advocating - without Scriptural support - that the resurrection of the dead occurs AT or upon DEATH?!? What Biblical warrant do you have for that!?! I want chapter and verse, fellow and not just more of your subjective feelings. You'll not win any debates with (or heads/hearts of) God's people with non-existent exegesis. We are people of The Book!

:duh: 5) You said: "So I see the 'general' resurrection being somewhere near the coming of the son of Man..."

Is that His First Advent or His Second?

And why did you bracket the word general with quotes? Is it that you don't really believe in a general (http://print.infoplease.com/ipd/A0455080.html) resurrection?

:duh: 6) You said: "...and then of course all those who die after that [His Coming] as a continous thing."

See, here we have the truth of your erroneous beliefs coming to light... Who is there to die after Christ's Second Advent? And how is the Resurrection "a continuous thing"?!?

Please explain yourself to the Jury. :bonk:

--C

KINGDOM COMMAND:
· "Take heed HOW you hear"(Lk 8:18) and
· "Take heed WHAT you hear."(Mk 4:24)

Justme

July 4th 2003, 05:01 PM

Hi Cherith,

From your post:

No friend, people don't die early because of their beliefs or the actions of others. People die when their appointed time is fulfilled - for whatever reasons, by whatever secondary cause; however, the primary cause is God's Sovereignty and the fact that as a fallen race we are all deserving of and under a sentence of death. That is why the "Good News" is so sublime!
******************

I don't have any particular quarrel with you idea in general at all from a strict biblically correct interpretation.

However, there is the farside of the coin.

Is the death of these kids God's fault.

If it wasn't false religion that kept them from blood transfusions what was it?
If it was their doctrine then it WAS their beliefs that was responsible.

Justme

Justme

July 4th 2003, 05:34 PM

Hi Cherith,

From your post:

So, essentially you don't know what you believe and can't really back up any of your assertions and you just pop-off at the mouth because you want to pick a fight with a bunch of Christians, is that it?
**********************

Oh, I didn't know that, thank you for pointing it out.

You wrote:
When is this "sometime"? Does it have a specific point in time, oh say at the Second Advent or are you advocating that men are resurrected every day, in fact at the moment they die?
***********************

I'm not advocating anything, I am setting out what comes from the bible. That would be at the moment of death. John 11:25,26

You wrote:That's a very vague statement. Does 1 Cor 15 tell us about the resurrection body or not, and what is this "also" business? What else do you think Paul is communicating?

Let's see what I said the first time.
....1 Cor 15 tells us first that there IS reason to believe that we will be raised to eternal life sometime.
12But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?

There are other verses that say the same thing.

So in answer to your question " iDoes 1 Cor 15 tell us about the resurrection body or not.....
In my post I said...Here it also tells us about the resurrection body,

what part of that sentence are you having trouble with?

You asked:
What else do you think Paul is communicating?
******************
1 Cor 15 talks of the resurrection of christ,the resurrection of the dead, and the resurrection body.

From your post:

3) You said: "I guess it applies to believers AND non-believers, but I seldom think that as I read this chapter."

You "guess," huh? What fine apologists we have for the Kingdom! Be dogmatic man, make your bed! Are believers as well as unbelievers resurrected and WHEN?

Yes, those who slept in the dirt' both the good and the not so good were resurrected on Sept 8, 70 AD and Mother Teresa was raised on Sept 5, 1997.
Is that better? Prove me wrong.

You wrote:
Are you advocating - without Scriptural support - that the resurrection of the dead occurs AT or upon DEATH?!? What Biblical warrant do you have for that!?! I want chapter and verse, fellow and not just more of your subjective feelings. You'll not win any debates with (or heads/hearts of) God's people with non-existent exegesis. We are people of The Book!
**********************
Well, I see!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your not OldShepherd reincarnated are you? You sound like him, you act like him..oh well..

Hey, I gotta run I'll get back later.
Justme

Justme

July 4th 2003, 06:22 PM

Hi Cherith,

Back to your post where you said:
Are you advocating - without Scriptural support - that the resurrection of the dead occurs AT or upon DEATH?!? What Biblical warrant do you have for that!?! I want chapter and verse, fellow and not just more of your subjective feelings. You'll not win any debates with (or heads/hearts of) God's people with non-existent exegesis. We are people of The Book!

Not without biblical support, no.
The raising of the dead now occurs at the personal death of each individual.
Biblical support:

John 11
25Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies;

Jesus is talking to Martha and tells her that she will live even tho she dies.
She will physically die...yet she LIVES. How can that be unless her death is the natural/earthly body and she then begins the life of the spiritual/heavenly body? She dies physically, yet she LIVES. She can only LIVE as an earthy/ natural/ physical being or as a eternal/spiritual/heavenly being. That is her only two choices.

How long does this take? Well, apparently not long because Jesus says she will never die. It must be as quick as the twinkling of an eye.
If you want proof of this you would have to dig up her grave and you would find her natural physical remains (technically) there, yet she LIVES. She was raised spiritually. When: at her death according to Jesus Himself

You quoted mehere:
5) You said: "So I see the 'general' resurrection being somewhere near the coming of the son of Man..."

And you responded:
Is that His First Advent or His Second?

His first advent began in a manger so that wasn't it.

The parousia...a presence.. occurring immediately after the great tribulation.

That would the time of the 'general' resurrection. I bracket that word because I have seen others here refer to the resurrection after the great tribulation as that. Anyway it is the resurrection that Daniel talks about in Chapter 12. Whats to believe, the bible said there would be a resurrection at/near the great tribulation...what's the deal?

You wrote and am I ever glad you did:

6) You said: "...and then of course all those who die after that [His Coming] as a continous thing."

See, here we have the truth of your erroneous beliefs coming to light... Who is there to die after Christ's Second Advent? And how is the Resurrection "a continuous thing"?!?

Who is to die after His coming? Here I mean the coming of the son of man, when Jesus comes on the cloud, the parousia.
And that would include everybody that wasn't in that general resurrection.
Biblical proof:

13Then I heard a voice from heaven say, "Write: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on."

Read the rest of the chapter 14, it describes the coming on the clouds.

That can not include the sleeping in the dirt crowd because:

1 Thess 4
15According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep.

As I've showed you Martha was raised, then those who die after the coming of the son of man will be blessed, Martha was raised instantly and that was a while ago.

Now I look forward to your comments especially because of what you say here:
You'll not win any debates with (or heads/hearts of) God's people with non-existent exegesis. We are people of The Book!

Who told you I am not one of God's people? Show me this insight from the book.

Justme

Cherith

July 4th 2003, 07:26 PM

Oh, I didn't know that, thank you for pointing it out.

No problem, don't mention it. :teeth: My point stands. So far all you have done is thrown down the gauntlet and dispute the Christian position and that without Biblical evidence of any kind. And then when asked direct questions you use words like "I guess" or "I see" or "sometimes" or "somewhere near," etc. Did I not point that out clearly enough with the use of bold highlighting in your quote? DO you know what you believe? And can you defend it? That remains to be seen... However, IF it goes against orthodox Christianity then I'll wager you'll NEVER be able to prove it to God's children. "My sheep hear My Voice, and I know them, and they follow Me:"(Jn 10:27)

JustMe:I'm not advocating anything, I am setting out what comes from the bible. That would be at the moment of death. John 11:25,26

Ok, let's look at that passage. Shall we?

" Jesus said unto her, I AM The Resurrection, and The Life: he that believeth in Me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: {26} And whosoever liveth and believeth in Me shall never die. Believest thou this?" (John 11:25-26)

Now where does it say in this passage that the resurrection is "at the moment of death"?

And did you ever define death? I haven't gotten around to the rest of your initial response yet about 2 Tim. I'll have to go back and reread that.

What kind of death is Jesus speaking of in vs. 25?
What kind of death is He speaking of in vs. 26?

A correct, Biblical definition of death would solve your problem.

JustMe: what part of that sentence are you having trouble with?

The parts that I highlighted and then expounded on. You answered my question with the "at the moment of death" stuff-and-nonsense, as I had feared by the very vagueness of your post. (Heretics usually can't stand the SpotLight and the unbelieving rarely speak plainly.)

JustMe: ...those who slept in the dirt both the good and the not so good were resurrected on Sept 8, 70 AD and Mother Teresa was raised on Sept 5, 1997. Is that better? Prove me wrong.

Now you presume to know who are God's elect and who are not?!? What qualified "mother Teresa" for the Kingdom? You don't know her heart and I daresay few even knew her doctrine. She may have been an outwardly moral person and she may have even belonged to the church, but I wouldn't stake my eternal salvation on whether she were Christian or not.

Secondly, where do you get the notion that anyone was resurrected in AD 70, much less on Sept 8th!?! More bold assertions without a shred of evidence.

Thirdly, according to the rules of logic it is not up to your opponent (me) to prove your premise and especially prove something from silence! What evidence do YOU have that there was a resurrection in AD 70 or that anyone (believers included) are resurrected at the moment of death.

Ah, but see, here comes another interesting twist to your heresy - you would have God's children believe in fairy tales and mythological "spirit bodies" when we've all seen people that have been exhumed. Tell me, why was Jesus' grave empty and everyone else's is still occupied?

I've never heard of anyone named "OldShepherd," but introduce me sometime. It sounds like we might have a great deal in common.

Justme

July 4th 2003, 09:55 PM

Hi Cherith,

Now where does it say in this passage that the resurrection is "at the moment of death"?

Sorry, not again read my last posts.

If you don't have any ability to comprehend, fine I'll lay inout in Dick and Jane lanquage, but I think you're playing a rather sickening game.

Let me know what your status is so I can come to your level.
Justme

Cherith

July 5th 2003, 12:41 PM

Oh, I definitely have the ability to comprehend. Trouble is I haven't seen evidence of you having the ability to de-fend (your view, that is). :angel: Besides, I like "Dick and Jane language." The Bible is pretty clear. No need is us trying to make it harder to comprehend than it really is.

And just what is my "game"? As I said, you threw down the gauntlet. Apparently you just don't like it when it's picked up by someone not afraid of to wield the Sword of The Spirit...? :cool:

Since you won't come clean OR don't understand the meaning of life and death, I'll explain it here.

Life = a vital, spiritual union with God. (Adam, by his rebellion, lost this on the very day that he sinned against God and thus he died or to put it another way, was vitally separated from God.

Physical union of the body with the soul/spirit = Physical Life
Spiritual union with God = Spiritual/Eternal Life (Eternal Life is secured when this mortal PUTS ON immortality, "THEN will be brought to pass the saying that is written: 'Death is swallowed up in Victory'." (1 Cor 15:53-54; Rom 2:7)

And as man is a body-spirit unity it stands to reason that we are not fully alive (or "clothed" as Paul says) without our God-given, God-ordained bodies. To be bodyless is to cease being truly man. It is our body that distinguishes us from the angels; just as it is our spirit that distinguishes us from the animals.

"And this is Life Eternal, that they might know Thee The Only True God, and Jesus Christ, Whom Thou hast sent." (John 17:3)

"...I saw under The Altar the souls of them that were slain for The Word of God, and for the testimony which they held." (Rev 6:9)

"...and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for The Word of God...and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years." (Rev 20:4)

Notice that it was only their souls that are "seen" prior to the Resurrection. Those who John saw have not yet experienced "the blessed hope" of the creature nor the creation. (Tit 2:13; Rom 8:22-23)

Death = separation.

Spiritual separation from God = Spiritual Death
Physical separation of the body from the spirit = Physical Death
Spiritual & Physical separation from God for all eternity = Eternal Death.

This is why John can say "He that believeth on The Son has Everlasting Life: and he that believeth not The Son shall not see Life; but The Wrath of God abideth on him." (John 3:36)

Notice that those who believe on The Son HAVE, as a PRESENT REALITY, Eternal Life. Life is secured once a person believes (Jn 17:3; 3:36). It's not a gift that they have to wait until they are dead and buried to receive. It is a present, ongoing reality. Contrawise, those who do not believe will never "see Life." And just as they are born under the Wrath of God (Eph 2:3) so too unbelievers remain under His Wrath during their physical lives and upon death. Only after the Resurrection of the dead will they experience the full brunt of His Wrath!

Regarding your comments about Rev 14 it is clear from the context that John is speaking about the First Advent of Jesus.

Vs. 1 points out that the 144,000 are standing on the Mountain of God with "The Lamb." An obvious reference to the Messiah.

Vs. 3 points out that they are singing "a New Song." An obvious reference to Salvation and a Salvation that could only come through the Atonement promised and foreshadowed in the OT. It explicity says that they were "redeemed."

Vs. 4 repeats the fact that they've been "redeemed" - i.e. by the Atonement of The Lamb. It expressly states that they are followers of "The Lamb." Again, a direct reference to the First Advent.

Vs. 5 says that they are "without fault before The Throne of God." Again, a direct reference to Christ's Atoning Work at His First Advent.

Vs. 6 says that they have "The Everlasting Gospel to preach to [all]." This is the outgrowth and command of Christ's First Advent.

Vs. 7 calls to mind Jesus' words in John 12:31-32 "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. {32} And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men unto Me." Why does the angel command men to "fear God and give Him glory"? Well, he says why "FOR (in logic this is just another word for BECAUSE) the hour of His Judgment is come..." On what basis does God Judge mankind? Is it not, as this same John said in 17:3 and 3:36, based on belief in the Person and Nature of The Son and His Atoning Work at His First Advent?!? There is no room to believe later, at His Second Coming...

I'll skip the verses about "Mystery Babylon" for now and go on to verse 12 which says that "the saints...keep the commandments of God and The Faith..." Also a reference to Christ's First Advent.

So when you want us to skip over all of these OBVIOUS references to Christ's First Advent and believe that the next verse (13) is talking about some supposed blessing that comes upon the dead who die AFTER The Second Advent, then we have a problem. It is all the references that have gone before regarding His First Advent that make verse 13 flow logically from what's been said - viz., that BECAUSE of His Atoning Work at His First Advent that those who "die IN The Lord FROM HENCEFORTH" are blessed and will receive both a "rest" and a "reward."

Surely, even you would admit that the "coming on the clouds" imagery is AFTER the references to His First Advent and the blessing that follows from belief in His Atonement?!?

But the Text says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about a resurrection!

Your inclusion of 1 Thess 4 is another erroneous stretch. You are ASSUMING that the "Coming" mentioned in that passage is the same one mentioned in Rev 14. As the Second Person of the Godhead, the Lord can (and does) "come" in judgment whenever, wherever and however He pleases. In fact, He did at least 7 times on the churches before mentioned and none of those "comings" were in AD 70. Were they?

And finally you said:

As I've showed you Martha was raised, then those who die after the coming of the son of man will be blessed, Martha was raised instantly and that was a while ago.

Where have you "shown me" that Martha was raised from the dead? Or that she was "raised instantly." You have shown us nothing of the sort. As Alice in Wonderland and I have both said, "all stuff-and-nonsense."

As for you being "one of God's people" the Bible contradicts you on that point as well:

"If any man will do His Will, he shall know of The Doctrine, whether it be of God..." (John 7:17)

"...mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to The Doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. {18} For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple." (Rom 16:17-18)

"Take heed unto thyself, and unto The Doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee." (1 Tim 4:16)

"If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the Words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to The Doctrine which is according to godliness; {4} He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, {5} Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of The Truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself." (1 Tim 6:3-5)

"Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in The Doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in The Doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. {10} If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed" (2 John 1:9-10)

"Ye shall KNOW THEM by their fruit..." (Matt 7:16)

"...some having put away concerning faith have shipwreck[ed]...[and] blaspheme[d]" (1 Tim 1:19-20)

Heb 6:1-2 says that the doctrine of the resurrection is one of "The Principles" (or cornerstone/commencement) of faith in Jesus Christ. Without a right understanding of that doctrine "your faith is vanity (i.e. empty, profitless, idolatry); ye are yet in your sins" (1 Cor 15:17), and Christ's Life, Death and Resurrection will "profit you nothing." (Gal 5:2)

Justme

July 5th 2003, 02:42 PM

Hi Cherith,

Sorry, I have no fears of discussing the bible with you, the pope, Hal Lindsey or anybody else.

From your post:

Physical union of the body with the soul/spirit = Physical Life
Spiritual union with God = Spiritual/Eternal Life (Eternal Life is secured when this mortal PUTS ON immortality, "THEN will be brought to pass the saying that is written: 'Death is swallowed up in Victory'." (1 Cor 15:53-54; Rom 2:7)

And as man is a body-spirit unity it stands to reason that we are not fully alive (or "clothed" as Paul says) without our God-given, God-ordained bodies. To be bodyless is to cease being truly man. It is our body that distinguishes us from the angels; just as it is our spirit that distinguishes us from the animals.
**********

Well, how about this.

Have you ever seen a gopher after it has passed under the tires of an 18-wheeler. That is death. Just as the gopher was running to the place of his demise. That is life.

What you wrote above is just fine and dandy, but there is so much more.

The bible talks about life after death. That is the spiritual/heavenly life.

Paul lays out our two possibilities,

44it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

I don't know what the spiritual body looks like because the bible doesn't say. All I know is that there is a natural body and there is a spiritual body.

Now the natural body is what we are in now. It is not incorruptable, it is not immortal,it is not imperishable, and most importantly it is not invisible.

The spiritual body is all of those things and
1 Cor 15
46The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.

So when we are talking about spiritual in this context there is no overlapping.

The word spiritual, in this usage means , ghostlike, unseen, eternal.

2 Cor 4
18So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal. .......WHAT IS UNSEEN IS ETERNAL.

Is the kingdom of God eternal?
Is the kingdom of Heaven eternal?
Is eternal life eternal?

If yes, they are unseen.

Therefore, the LIVE that Jesus talked about in John 11:25,26 was the unseen LIVE of eternal life. What other choice is there?

Jesus told her she would in fact never die.
Again I tell you that Martha DID physically die, she died from this seen physical , natural life and was born again as a spiritual being. That which is unseen.

That's my story. You and Alice say it's stuff and nonsense. Well, it was actually Jesus that said it, I can't take credit for it.

If Jesus didn't say that , go ahead and point out what He did say.

You wrote:

And as man is a body-spirit unity it stands to reason that we are not fully alive (or "clothed" as Paul says) without our God-given, God-ordained bodies. To be bodyless is to cease being truly man. It is our body that distinguishes us from the angels; just as it is our spirit that distinguishes us from the animals.
******************
Okay, who said the spiritual realm is 'bodyless.' It is not. There is a natural body, there is a spiritual body...where do you get the idea that this is bodyless. The spiritual body is somehow different from the natural body, but as far as exact appearance of that body, the bible doesn't say.

You quoted:

"And this is Life Eternal, that they might know Thee The Only True God, and Jesus Christ, Whom Thou hast sent." (John 17:3)

Yes, nice verse, what do you want to do with it?

We do know from 2 Cor 4 that 'eternal' life would be unseen.

You quoted:

..I saw under The Altar the souls of them that were slain for The Word of God, and for the testimony which they held." (Rev 6:9)

Yes, john did see these souls. Where was John when he saw these souls? He was in Heaven. He was 'in the spirit.' Apparently spiriits can see other spirits.

You wrote:
Notice that it was only their souls that are "seen" prior to the Resurrection. Those who John saw have not yet experienced "the blessed hope" of the creature nor the creation. (Tit 2:13; Rom 8:22-23)
*******************
Tit 2
13while we wait for the blessed hope--the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,

What!!!!!!!The souls are in Heaven which is the eternal place and you're trying to tuck Titus 2:13 in here to say they go to some other eternal eternal. Explain, explain..How did they get into Heaven if they weren't raised?

WE wait for a glorious appearing, those souls that John saw in Heaven could just look over and watch Jesus any time they wanted.
Romans 8
22We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.

Same thing except take note of the words 'present time' just for future reference. That was then he was talking about, not 2003 or anything.

It talks about the 'seen' after that.

24For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has?

You wrote:
Spiritual separation from God = Spiritual Death
Physical separation of the body from the spirit = Physical Death
Spiritual & Physical separation from God for all eternity = Eternal Death.
*****************
Yes, as above fine and dandy.
Spiritual life and death is used with different meanings according to the context. The bible tells us if we do not believe, we are dead, or in 2 Peter 1 where it discusses being born again spiritually meaning a life of holy hope or however, would be a nice way to say it.

You wrote:

This is why John can say "He that believeth on The Son has Everlasting Life: and he that believeth not The Son shall not see Life; but The Wrath of God abideth on him." (John 3:36)

Notice that those who believe on The Son HAVE, as a PRESENT REALITY, Eternal Life.
****************

That is what it says. Meaning at physical/natural death, they will inherit the spiritual heavenly life. You can believe in God all you want, but someday you will physically die. No question about it.

You wrote:
Life is secured once a person believes (Jn 17:3; 3:36). It's not a gift that they have to wait until they are dead and buried to receive. It is a present, ongoing reality.

I don't have any great quarrel with that in the context you are saying it.

Contrawise, those who do not believe will never "see Life." And just as they are born under the Wrath of God (Eph 2:3) so too unbelievers remain under His Wrath during their physical lives and upon death. Only after the Resurrection of the dead will they experience the full brunt of His Wrath!

There is a problem here. Unbelievers can live their physical life and have good times probably easier than believers can. His wrath is not on their physical lives, no uh,uh, not even a small chance. Some can have a rotten time, but not necessarily, no not even close.

You wrote:

Regarding your comments about Rev 14 it is clear from the context that John is speaking about the First Advent of Jesus.

Now surely you don't expect me to believe that? Can't you be a bit more inventive than that?

It says:
Blessed are those who die FROM NOW ON, then it talks about Jesus coming on the clouds.
The first time Jesus showed up in a stable.

You wrote a whole bunch of stuff and nonsense about this being the first advent.

First, He didn't comer on a cloud
Second, where were the 144000 in the first advent,

Third, you quotd:
Vs. 5 says that they are "without fault before The Throne of God." Again, a direct reference to Christ's Atoning Work at His First Advent.

Explain to me how these people got 'before the throne of God' in Jesus first stretch on earth when the sacrifice that made that possible was the last day of that life of Jesus on earth.

My ,my, you are groping for straws now, aren't you?

You wrote:

So when you want us to skip over all of these OBVIOUS references to Christ's First Advent and believe that the next verse (13) is talking about some supposed blessing that comes upon the dead who die AFTER The Second Advent, then we have a problem. It is all the references that have gone before regarding His First Advent that make verse 13 flow logically from what's been said - viz., that BECAUSE of His Atoning Work at His First Advent that those who "die IN The Lord FROM HENCEFORTH" are blessed and will receive both a "rest" and a "reward."

I ain't got a problem, you have. I can drive a Mac truck thru the holes in your argument.
Let's just go with the one where you have to show me how those people all got before the throne in Heaven before Jesus even died on the Cross.

You wrote:

But the Text says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about a resurrection!

Yes, it does.
The coming of the son of man on the clouds is :

Matthew 24
' 29"Immediately after the distress of those days
" 'the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'[3]
30"At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds

The parousia is after the great tribulation.

Daniel tells us that a resurrection of the good and not so good will be at the time of the great tribulation.

There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people-everyone whose name is found written in the book-will be delivered. 2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.

You wrote:

As the Second Person of the Godhead, the Lord can (and does) "come" in judgment whenever, wherever and however He pleases.

Good, then I guess one of the times must have been in that 1 Thess 4 time.

You asked:
In fact, He did at least 7 times on the churches before mentioned and none of those "comings" were in AD 70. Were they?

Sorry, I don't understand this.

What are you trying to pull here?

You quoted part of a verse.
"If any man will do His Will, he shall know of The Doctrine, whether it be of God..." (John 7:17)

Considering what you are talking about in your post and this part quote it would indicate I wouldn't be one of God's people because I don't know the doctrine.

I'll leave it up to the readers to check this out and decide on the degree of your decietfulness.

I assume you realize that the rest of your post would also apply to you if it is you that is wrong.

It is a 50-50 thing, if it isn't me that is mis-interpreting these scripture ....it is you.

Justme

Cherith

July 5th 2003, 06:26 PM

Post#6:Further evidence that death was destroyed is in John 11:26 and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Jesus was talking to Martha. IF she wasn't going to die, THEN death must have been destroyed.

Post#21:John 11:25Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; 26and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?" Jesus plainly states that she will LIVE ater she physically dies. She dies and leaves the physical/ natural life and LIVES again in the spiritual/heavenly life. This has to be almost instant because Jesus tells her she will never DIE. The spiritual follows the physical fast enough to be termed eternal life.

I had asked you, regarding post#6: Did Jesus make this statement to Martha BEFORE or AFTER “death was destroyed”? To which you answered:

It doesn't say as far as I recall, nor does it matter. Jesus would know if she was destined to live until that time.

Oh, but you see, it does matter. Are you're saying that you don't know WHEN Jesus made this comment to Martha - whether it was BEFORE or AFTER His Atonement? Because it was BY REASON OF His Atonement that "death was destroyed." Prior to His Atonement death had not been destroyed so your conclusion doesn't follow from your premise (your IF/THEN comment). Jesus never promised Martha (like He had promised Elijah) that she would never physically die. In fact, Jesus never specifically includes Martha. He simply says "whoever." I am among the "whoever lives and believes" and yet the events of AD 70 are ancient history. Will I "die"?

Notice my question again: Where does The Text say that Martha, unlike her brother (who apparently “live[d] and believe[d]” in Christ and yet died physically, but then was supernaturally raised from the dead by that self same Saviour), “wasn’t going to die”?

My question was pretty "comprehensible" - in basic "Dick and Jane language." What part did you not understand? Let me bring it down to the level that even grade-school children can comprehend: Where does the Text specifically say that Martha "will never die"? Martha was dead PRIOR to encountering Christ, Martha (probably) died physically AFTER encountering Christ, and yet Martha is alive! In fact, old Caiaphas and Pilat are alive! They have "eternal life" too (in the sense of never-ending). As Nicodemus asked, "How can these things be?" Unless Life, like Death, is a multi-faceted thing...

2 Tim 1:10 but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.

As I understand it this was written in about 68AD. It was past tense then. There are other verses that show a future tense, but were written much earlier.

But I thought you implied that nothing about Salvation was past tense until Sept 8, 0070 and now you are saying that everything in 2 Tim is past tense because of when it was written? Well then The Revelation was past tense PRIOR to AD 70 as well, before it even happened, because it too was written prior to AD 70. Look, Jesus "destroyed Death and brought Life" by His Life and Work on the Cross (the Gospel/Good News). He brought "immortality to light" THROUGH the Gospel, meaning that He has shown His creatures the path to Immortality by the illumination of The Gospel. The word immortal means "not subject to death." We are all subject to death as Heb 9:27 says, "it is APPOINTED unto men once to die..." That is why The Revelation can speak of "the second death."

I tried to pin you down again when I had said, "Your conclusion doesn’t necessarily follow from your premise. For example, IF Enoch and Elijah weren’t going to/or didn’t die, THEN does that mean that death had already been destroyed as far back as then?"

Death could not have been destroyed back then or what was Jesus doing here in the first century and why did Paul write this in about 52 AD.

But see, that's my point, what was Jesus doing here in the first century? He was destroying death. How could God in His Holiness have allowed two unredeemed men into the court of Heaven if Jesus had not yet destroyed death. The answer is not insignificant, my friend. He could do this because the Atonement was a sure thing in His Redemptive Purposes. Those Jews who believed in a false religion couldn't have directed their steps any other way. The mighty Romans could not have resisted His Decreed Will. Even poor Judas did just as was foretold in the Old Covenant; he was powerless to do any other thing. They were slaves to their sinful natures and God used their very own sinful desires to accomplish His every Purpose! HOWEVER, prior to the ACTUAL Atonement, death had not ACTUALLY been destroyed (except in the Mind/Purpose of God) - only promised. When Jesus spoke to Martha she was in the same predicament as everyone else - she was living under the threat of death PRIOR to the ACCOMPLISHMENT of the Atonement, without which she had NO HOPE.

Since you seem enamoured with WHEN the various books in the N.T. were written, then let me ask you another TIME-RELATED question: When was 1 Cor 15 written - PRIOR TO the Atonement or AFTER? What I'm getting at is this, Paul says in 1 Cor 15 that "the last enemy TO BE destroyed is death," right? But you say that death was destroyed "by the fact that Jesus died for the sin of mankind." So why would Paul say, AFTER the Atonement, that there was still an enemy, death, TO BE destroyed? See if you can grasp this concept: death was POSITIONALLY (http://print.infoplease.com/ipd/A0596538.html) destroyed, but it was not PRACTICALLY (http://print.infoplease.com/ipd/A0598666.html) destroyed. We have Eternal Life positionally, but not yet PRACTICALLY.
A good illustration can be found here-->The Positional Aspect of Salvation (http://pw1.netcom.com/~rogh/position/).

More later, --C

Justme

July 5th 2003, 11:17 PM

Hi Cherith,

You wrote:

We have Eternal Life positionally, but not yet PRACTICALLY.

Wrong.
For the reasons I have cited.

Now I asked you a question back in post 21 and I haven't seen the answer, as I recall.
My question to you. Do you consider the great tribulation to be past or future?

Justme

Cherith

July 7th 2003, 12:34 PM

JustMe:Now I asked you a question back in post 21 and I haven't seen the answer, as I recall. My question to you. Do you consider the great tribulation to be past or future?

Ok, here's my answer: IF you don't believe in or understand the doctrine of the Resurrection, THEN you will experience "great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be!"

How's that?!?

Look, I'm a preterist too, but unlike you, I'm also an orthodox believer in the resurrection of the flesh - an essential, meat-and-potatoes, doctrine that you would do well to aquaint yourself with before trying to understand Biblical gravy-and-sauces extras. (I could help you with this - either personally or by suggesting some resources.) But, alas, you won't want to go there, will you...?

"A man's heart devises his way, but The LORD directs his steps..." so as thereby neither is God the Author of sin; nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established...

Justme

July 7th 2003, 09:28 PM

Cherith

July 9th 2003, 12:50 PM

Hi Cherith, You wrote in answer to my question about the timing of the Great tribulation. Ok, here's my answer: IF you don't believe in or understand the doctrine of the Resurrection, THEN you will experience "great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be!" How's that?!? JustMe:Well, we've all seen it before and we all know what those answers are, they are a cop out.
Who's "copping out"? I just don't waste my time with frivolities when the heart of the Gospel is being attacked. Why fight side wars that are meaningless?

Actually I knew you were a partial futurist and I knew you liked John Calvin a bit.
I said that I was a p-r-e-t-e-r-i-s-t. And where did I say that I liked John Calvin? I know next to nothing about John Calvin.

..let's just take this on a bit and see who is aquainted with this and that, but I only deal with the biblical or accepted historical fact. I don't care about tradition, early church fathers, the pope or Pat Robertson. I consider the bible to be correct and the major reference.
Same here, buddy. Just me and my Bible, as they say...

And you mention the resurrection..imagine that. God works in mysterious ways. Let's just roll out that resurrection story.
I prefer to call it The Resurrection Account or FACT, but OK, speak on...

Jesus was raised from the dead in what????33AD?????? I don't know, but somewhere around there. I think we will agree there and that will be the last time.
"THE last time" - oh... watch it! I can't believe you're so vague about the timing of Christ's Resurrection, when you are so dogmatic about Sept 8th, 0070! But continue...

Being a partial futurist you would consider the destruction of Jerusalem to be connected in some way with the Olivet Discourse.
Yes, in "some" way... :wink: And why do you hyper-prets/dispensational-prets/pantelists/Hymenaeans insist on labeling the orthodox thus? Does it help alleviate your conscience? :teeth:

If you want any flesh being resurrected you probably consider a future raising of the dead.
What "I" want is of no consequence. It's a matter of what The Bible says.

Let's lay the foundation. Five major events are predicted in the Olivet Discourse. 1)the abomination that causes desolation appears in the holy place 2) there will be a flight of the people 3)great tribulation 4) celestial light show which includes 5) the coming of the son of man. That is it isn't it?????? These are written in stone, there can be details added between, but this is the sequence and nothing can change it. (heres some of that predetermination for you)
Whoopee. (And they were probably written on parchment or some such thing...) As for "predetermination," I don't know what you're talking about... I guess you could classify me as a "determinist" in the dictionary sense: "the doctrine that all events, including human choices and decisions, have sufficient causes." Duh. Or perhaps a "necessitarian: someone who believes the doctrine that all events, including acts of the will, are determined by antecedent causes; determinism." Do I believe that mankind (and individuals in particular) have NO control over their choices? I do NOT. I am NOT a fatalist. What I believe is that man acts FREELY, but he acts OF NECESSITY. I believe it was Luther who promotoed this idea in his book, Bondage of the Will. The Stoics were determinists as was Augustine, whereas Origen has been called a predeterminist. Would you label yourself an indeterminist!?! Oh, but you railed about those "poor beknighted cultists who fell, not through their own choices, but through the false religious teachers who were brain-washing them. Psycho-manipulating the innocents." (my paraphrase of your words, of course)

There is a resurrection of those who 'sleep in the dust' sometime in connection with this great tribulation.
There goes your indecisiveness again...

NOTE: Some partial futurists and futurists would dearly love to have two great tribulations. If you are one of them, forget it, the bible is the accepted truth.
You're scary, you know that? (They say genius and insanity are separated only by a fine line. I wonder...)

Partial preterists would love to call the coming of the son of man only a judgment.????

Get it straight already man, what am I - a partial-futurist, a whole-futurist, a partial-preterist, a 3/4-Calvinist? Where is the "coming" language of God in judgment used in any other way? I would probably settle for just a couple of verses...

The bible says: Mark 13:26 "At that time men will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory." Yes, there is judgment, but this is 'parousia....presence. This is the establishment of the kingdom of God. Again some would love to not have the establishment of the kingdom of God take place back in 70 AD. If you are one of them forget it! Argue it all you want, believe it til you die, but it is biblically incorrect.
Based solely on your insuperable assertions, no doubt. Look, the Kingdom of God was NOT established in AD 70. It was established long before then. (Don't you have a Bible program or at least a good concordance?!?) And as for the "Presence of God," well that too was around long before the first-century AD... Gen 3:8 "...Adam and his wife hid themselves from The Presence of The LORD God..."; Gen 4:16 "And Cain went out from The Presence of The LORD and dwelt in the land of Nod, east of Eden."; Job 1:12, 2:7 "...so Satan went out from The Presence of The LORD."; Psa 97:5 "The hills melted like wax at The Presence of The LORD, at The Presence of The Lord of the whole earth."; Jer 4:26 "...and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at The Presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger."; etc., etc., etc...

There is a sequence of events, nothing can change that.
Yep. Deity, Virgin Birth, Life, Death/Atonement, Resurrection, Ascension, Consummation.

The resurrection connected with the great tribulation is mentioned here: Daniel 12 "There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people-everyone whose name is found written in the book-will be delivered. {2} Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt." Daniel would/will be one of those sleeping in the dirt when that resurrection occurs. Verse 12. Verse 13 "But as for you, go your way to the end; then you will enter into rest and rise again for your allotted portion at the end of the age." (The age there, I forget, how do partial preterists deal with 'aion' in the Greek scripture?)
Actually, the word 'aion,' being Greek, would not be/is not the word used in Daniel since his book was written in two other languages. The word in Daniel is "days" - "at the end of the days." And I don't have a problem with Daniel already having been resurrected. In fact, I believe it to be a fact (although I wouldn't dogmatically argue it with my closest brother), but I believe that (first-fruits, sort of) resurrection happened @ AD 33 (see Matt 27:50-53).

Now let's go to the resurrection story in Rev 20
Ok. Lead on.

Verse 6 - "Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years." Who are these holy and blessed that will not be in danger of the second death and will reign for the 1000 years.
I give, who? Mongolian, Japanese-Jewish priests descended from the lost tribe of Dan?!?!

Well, I'll tell you who it isn't: OK It isn't those that sleep in the dirt because: Oh phooey, I was hoping it was! Daniel 12:2 "Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt." They have danger of the second death.
Oh? And why is that? Please define what "the second death" is, precisely, before you go on.

That is verified in John 5:28 What is the "that" that is "verified" "Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice {29} and come out--those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned.
"come out" and "rise" from what/where? Oh, did He says "graves"!?! Imagine that!

NOTE: I am sure you are familiar with the hint of timing in John 5:25. The HAS NOW COME stuff.
Well, yes, darn-it, I am. You caught me. HOWEVER, I'm r-e-a-l-l-y familiar with the "cometh" and "now is" stuff in John 4:21 & 23. Gee, I wonder why the Holy Spirit would put that chapter right before this chapter...? Mmmm... :dazed: and :perplexed:

Another group who it is not, is the REST of the dead because they are not raised until after the 1000 years.
Oooo... You got me again! Not until AFTER the 1,000 years, you say? Mmph! I never would have imagined THAT!!!

Rev 20:5 "(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.)"
Yeah, I like that verse too. You know another one that I like? Prov 25:17 "Seldom set foot in your neighbor's house -- lest he become weary of you and hate you." Oh, no, maybe it was 26:5... Oh well, whatever the case may be... :teeth:

Another group that is NOT in the 1000 year reign with Christ are the ones who Paul was talking to in 1 Thess 4:15. "According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep."
And this is proven...how? Poor Paul and his Thessalonians. Left Behind. And poor John, "the disciple who Jesus loved," (HA!) left alone to waste away on Patmos or in Ephesus or where-ever. Never resurrected. Left here only to experience "the Presence," same as us... (I really hate sounding irreverent, but am I making my point?)

So we have Jesus of course, years before any of this. Then we have some elders and so on that is with Jesus on some mountain before any judging is done, hey the elect, the 144000 the whoever. Then we have those who were beheaded (Rev 20:4) who reigned for 1000 years, then we have the rest of the dead and then we have Paul and his friends in Thessalonia who were alive at His coming. NOTE: see the hint of the timing of the coming. No. Is it there? Really? Now don't tell me a fib and get me all excited if it's not... Then after the coming of the son of man we have this. ALL THOSE who are in Christ and pass away AFTER the coming of the son of man on the clouds will be blessed. You will remember the son of man on the clouds from Mark 13:26 "At that time men will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory." Yes, yes. How could I forget HIM! Those were stratus clouds, weren't they. Oh, no. Maybe they were cumulus... It was right after the great tribulation. Of course! :::smacking forehead::: How could I forget! It happened within that one generation that saw among other things, the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. NOTE: the hint of the timing. Yes, yes, I see it... :::Rubbing my crystal ball with my head-scarf tied on too tight and in my best Brooklyn-Jew accent:::

Yea, I know any discussion of resurrection is supposed dance around the empty tomb of Jesus and Acts 1:11, but this gets to the gravy and sause a lot quicker.
::::Cough, sputter, cough:::: Per-don? What did you say? "Any discussion of resurrection is supposed [to] dance around the empty tomb of Jesus"...!?! (And I was worried about being irreverent!)

Look, buddy, was the tomb/grave of Jesus empty or not? And if so, then why do you deny His people the same benefit of His Power and Grace? You know, I've been playing with you here, but I don't really revel in your heresies. You seem like a nice kid who's having a ball with his new toy and I can appreciate that. But this is not just theological word games here. This is deep stuff. It's the NATURE and ESSENCE and HEART of The Gospel. The Resurrection of the flesh is a MAJOR TENET of The Gospel (1 Cor 15:1-8, 11-14; 2 Tim 2:8). It is a condition of salvation (Rom 10:9). Without it we are "still in our sins" (1 Cor 15:17). That is what Christians believe. Like it or not. Believe it or not. But it's disingenuous for you to keep calling yourself a Xian when you deny THE VERY FACT that God, The Father, used to AFFIRM His Only-Begotten Son (stated no less than 5x in Acts alone). Forget the "timing" of "the great tribulation" and major on the essentials until you've grasped them, then MAYBE you can make a case for the other...

Justme

July 9th 2003, 04:19 PM

Hi Cherith,

So you're a comic too now. Congratulations.

You asked :Who's "copping out"?
Did you answer the question about the timing of the great tribulation?

YOU MERELY SAID THIS:I just don't waste my time with frivolities when the heart of the Gospel is being attacked. Why fight side wars that are meaningless?

That doesn't tell me about the timeframe of the great tribulation, does it?

YOU WROTE:
And where did I say that I liked John Calvin?

I just guessed from when you said this in a old post:
BTW, I attended an Evangelical-Free church for 3 yrs or so and really enjoyed it while I was there, but the head guy was a Calvinist and when he moved out of state the Arminian viewpoint gained more and more ground...
************
So that statement says yes AND no, but I'm kind of used to you doing that or else saying nothing.
I'm going to slip over a bit of your post here because, actually, it is senseless garbage and doesn't deserve being aired again.

I will once again write out those events from the Olive Discourse.

1)the abomination that causes desolation appears in the holy place
2) there will be a flight of the people
3)great tribulation
4) celestial light show which includes
5) the coming of the son of man

One question you asked:Would you label yourself an indeterminist!?!
*****************
No.

YOU WROTE:
Oh, but you railed about those "poor beknighted cultists who fell, not through their own choices, but through the false religious teachers who were brain-washing them. Psycho-manipulating the innocents." (my paraphrase of your words, of course)
***************
You know, the followers of Jim Jones, David Koresh and Fred Franz.

Iasked this:
There is a resurrection of those who 'sleep in the dust' sometime in connection with this great tribulation.

You responded with this:

There goes your indecisiveness again...
*************

You would have made sense except I also explained all this here:
the resurrection connected with the great tribulation is mentioned here:
Daniel 12

There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people-everyone whose name is found written in the book-will be delivered. 2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.

I used the word 'sometime' because in the verse I quoted it didn't say ...before....after...during...

You sure do like trying to be deceitful, don't you. Ususally that is a sign of somebody pushing a false religious doctrine...but I digress.

Finally you wrote something of substance here:
Look, the Kingdom of God was NOT established in AD 70.It was established long before then.
**************

Matthew 16
28I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

Here Jesus tells the boys they will actually be alive to see the Son of man coming in His Kingdom.

(Kind of hints that most others will be dead when the SEE it, don't you think)

Anyway note that they will see the SON OF MAN COMING IN HIS KINDDOM.

Mark 9
1And he said to them, "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God come with power."

Same Jesus, same guys, same event coming up, but Mark uses the term KINGDOM OF GOD.

'sam ting'

Matthew 11
11I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

28I tell you, among those born of women there is no one greater than John; yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he."

Kingdom of Heaven -kingdom of God..sam ting.

Don't you like the phrase "establishment of the kingdom of God"?
Well, we could call it something else, but it occurs after the great tribulation. Remember the sequense of events.

You listed a number verses that really impressed me, not the verses content, just the fact that you listed some.
Anyway what I was talking about was the meaning of the Greek word parousia which Strong shows as coming or presense. I didn't mean that there was no presense of God prior to that.
Further, I would agree with you that there was a massive kingdom of God prior to all this as well, but we said we were going by the book and that is what the book says.

YOU WROTE :
Actually, the word 'aion,' being Greek, would not be/is not the word used in Daniel since his book was written in two other languages. The word in Daniel is "days" - "at the end of the days." And I don't have a problem with Daniel already having been resurrected..

Yes, exactly aion is Greek. I was clear as mud there. Daniel talked about last day, age, whatever in verse 12 Chap 12 and it just occurred to me that I didn't know how partial preterists use the word describing the same thing in the Olivet Discourse.

YOU WROTE:
." And I don't have a problem with Daniel already having been resurrected. In fact, I believe it to be a fact (although I wouldn't dogmatically argue it with my closest brother), but I believe that (first-fruits, sort of) resurrection happened @ AD 33 (see Matt 27:50-53).

I see you consider Daniel to have been raised to life at the crucifixion...

Who knows, could have been.. We saw some people brought back from the dead, Lazurus, the child,and these after the cross, but I would say that is another clue that there is no physical body resurrection. First, because these people who were brought back to life did not LIVE eternally, they physiclly died again. Secondly, I think we must assume that the resurrection didn't occur at that time because if it had Paul wouldn't have been so mad at Philetus in the 2nd book of Timothy.

YOU ASKED:
Oh? And why is that? Please define what "the second death" is, precisely, before you go on.

You can die a physical death and you can die again if you screw up and Jesus gets ticked off at you. The backstroke in the sulfur pond, the eternity in Hell where theres golf courses and clubs, but no balls.

YOU WROTE:Well, yes, darn-it, I am. You caught me. HOWEVER, I'm r-e-a-l-l-y familiar with the "cometh" and "now is" stuff in John 4:21 & 23. Gee, I wonder why the Holy Spirit would put that chapter right before this chapter...? Mmmm... :dazed: and :perplexed:

21Jesus declared, "Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."

???????????????As for why chapter 4 is just before chapter 5... hard to say, but I know it happens a lot.

I wrote and quoted this:
Another group that is NOT in the 1000 year reign with Christ are the ones who Paul was talking to in 1 Thess 4:15. "According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep."

AND FOR WHATEVER REASON YOU WROTE THIS:nd this is proven...how? Poor Paul and his Thessalonians. Left Behind. And poor John, "the disciple who Jesus loved," (HA!) left alone to waste away on Patmos or in Ephesus or where-ever. Never resurrected. Left here only to experience "the Presence," same as us... (I really hate sounding irreverent, but am I making my point?)

Are you making your point...do you have a point?

So speaking of points.
If all these resurrections took place sometime around the great tribulation, and you seem to know when that great tribulation was, then we know that the resurrection is NOTa physical one because there is no Daniel walking around. This is also what is brought out in John 11 which you ducked and dodged til you hoped I'd forget.

The key IS that great tribulation which is followed by the coming of the son of man. From that time on those who die in the Lord will be blessed. Blessed by passing immediately from the physical earthly LIFE to the spiritual /heavenly LIFE and there, will forever be with the Lord. Biblically speaking.

I'll discuss the empty tomb and the hands in the wounds and the ascention of Jesus just as soon as you deal with the resurrections talked about to this point.

JUstme

Cherith

July 10th 2003, 04:51 PM

Hi Cherith, Hi. So you're a comic too now. Congratulations. Gracias. You tickle my funny bone, too! You asked :Who's "copping out"? Did you answer the question about the timing of the great tribulation? Yes. Didn't you see my answer. YOU MERELY SAID THIS:I just don't waste my time with frivolities when the heart of the Gospel is being attacked. Why fight side wars that are meaningless?

Yep. That was my answer. But remember, you started this post NOT about "the great tribulation," but about the resurrected "waltzing across Texas":

Post#1:...unorthodox teachings. This...website...talks about the dead climbing up out of graves sometime in the future and waltzing across Texas. This on a website that considers a rapture! Since this website promotes the rapture and this out of the graves/walk around/start over plan I think they should be able to back up what they are saying...

While I'm not invested in this website in any way (except that I have a friend over here), I do think it promotes orthodoxy in general. (Which in the long run is irrelevant as being a Christian demands that I "speak The Truth in love" regardless.) So when you attack the orthodoxy of The Bible, well then buddy, you're not only attacking me and my beliefs, but The LORD of Glory as well. You may have intended to debate the timing of the great tribulation, but IF so THEN you picked a pretty sore spot with me to start out on - viz., The Resurrection.

YOU WROTE: And where did I say that I liked John Calvin? I just guessed from when you said this in a old post: "BTW, I attended an Evangelical-Free church for 3 yrs or so and really enjoyed it while I was there, but the head guy was a Calvinist and when he moved out of state the Arminian viewpoint gained more and more ground... So that statement says yes AND no, but I'm kind of used to you doing that or else saying nothing.

Oh, so you were SPYING on me, huh?!? Doing a bit of research, looking for loopholes in my theology...? Very commendable. I typically do the same thing, yet I have refrained from doing so in your case (to restrain my own temper, no doubt).

I'm going to slip over a bit of your post here because, actually, it is senseless garbage and doesn't deserve being aired again.

I agree. Some of it was. You made a reference in another post to 18-wheelers (which being a trucker, I can appreciate :wink:) and truckers frequently get on the radio [CB] and "talk trash" - or in common parlance, nonsense, for Sanity's sake. Discussing the truths of Scripture with thick-headed individuals sometimes makes me a little looney. :teeth:

I will once again write out those events from the Olive Discourse. 1)the abomination that causes desolation appears in the holy place 2) there will be a flight of the people 3)great tribulation 4) celestial light show which includes 5) the coming of the son of man

Ok, so what is that supposed to do for me? Lead me to the obvious (to you) conclusion that the events in Matt 24 and Dan 12 are strictly synonomous as well as in strict chronological order? See, I don't have a problem with the "abomination that causes desolation" in Matt 24 being the event referred to in Daniel. Matthew explicitly interjects that it is. I don't even have a problem with much of the conclusions that you're trying to draw - even a resurrection; however, trying to turn A resurrection and THE Resurrection into synonomous events is where I start stumbling over your doctrine and run for Solid Ground.

For instance:

1) In Matt 27:52 A resurrection takes place BEFORE the "abomination that causes desolation" or the "flight of the people" (which, incidentally, is NOWHERE mentioned in Dan 12) which occurred closer to AD 70 than AD 33.

2) The "great tribulation" occurred AFTER the "many" of those "who [slept] in the dust...[awoke]," yet in Dan 12 it is said to occur BEFORE "those who sleep" were "awakened." And notice that the Messenger did not say "all who sleep in the dust," but rather "many." This is exactly opposite of what Jesus is trying to convey in John 5:28-29 where He says "ALL that are in the graves ... shall come forth; they that have done good, unto The Resurrection of Life; and they that have done evil, unto The Resurrection of Damnation." Your theology is flawed here too, because The Bible says that "there is none good, no not one." Seeing that this is so, how can Jesus say that those that have "done good" will be resurrected "unto Life"? - unless they already have "Life"...

3) The "celestial light show [language] which includes the coming of the son of man" also is NOT mentioned in Dan 12. "Shin like the brightness of the firmament" and "like stars" is NOT judgment language, it is blessing language. There are no "stars [falling] from heaven" or the "sun darkened" or the "moon not [giving] her light" in Dan 12...

So your conclusions do not necessarily follow from your premise; one temporal judgment may prefigure another greater Judgment, but that does not mean that they must be synonomous! In logic this is called a non-sequitur. For example (being Canadian, you should be able to appreciate this):

IF I am in Calgary[a city], THEN I am in Alberta[the province].

I am in Alberta. THUS, I am in Calgary, right?

Of course, even though the premises are true, I am really in Edmonton, Alberta!

And the panoply of Scripture belies your conception of the NATURE and TIMING of The Resurrection. That is why I said that when you go spouting doctrines like that, that I go running for Higher, Solid Ground.

Iasked this: There is a resurrection of those who 'sleep in the dust' sometime in connection with this great tribulation. You responded with this:[b]There goes your indecisiveness again... You would have made sense except I also explained all this here: the resurrection connected with the great tribulation is mentioned here: Daniel 12:1 There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people-everyone whose name is found written in the book-will be delivered. {2} Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. I used the word 'sometime' because in the verse I quoted it didn't say ...before....after...during...

The order in the Text is that first comes the "time of trouble" then 2) the deliverance of "your people ... at THAT time" and then 3) a resurrection and finally 4) the "shining" of the wise and faithful. (Notice that the word "many" is also used in v.10 where only "many" NOT "all" are "purified, made white, and refined." This too shows that it must occur BEFORE THE Resurrection, for not ALL are "purified, made white, and refined.")

You listed a number verses that really impressed me, not the verses content, just the fact that you listed some.

See, you are funny too. :wink:

Anyway what I was talking about was the meaning of the Greek word parousia which Strong shows as coming or presense. I didn't mean that there was no presense of God prior to that.

Ok, in what way is the Presence of God more significant NOW than it was then prior to AD 70? What has SUBSTANTIALLY changed?

YOU WROTE : Actually, the word 'aion,' being Greek, would not be/is not the word used in Daniel since his book was written in two other languages. The word in Daniel is "days" - "at the end of the days." And I don't have a problem with Daniel already having been resurrected... Yes, exactly aion is Greek. I was clear as mud there. Daniel talked about last day, age, whatever in verse 12 Chap 12 and it just occurred to me that I didn't know how partial preterists use the word describing the same thing in the Olivet Discourse.

Ahhh... But see, you do greatly err not knowing the difference in the Texts. In Matt 24 (the Olivet Discourse) the Greek word is [i]aion which clearly means "age," but concerning the rising of Daniel to his "inheritance" in Dan 12:13 the word is the Hebrew word yowm meaning "a day." Even you would admit that "the last days" is a phrase to denote, not the end of all days, but rather the end of a certain number of days - i.e. the time "when the power of the holy people has been completely shattered, and all these things [are] finished" (Dan 12:7).

I see you consider Daniel to have been raised to life at the crucifixion... Who knows, could have been.. We saw some people brought back from the dead, Lazurus, the child,and these after the cross, but I would say that is another clue that there is no physical body resurrection. First, because these people who were brought back to life did not LIVE eternally, they physiclly died again. Secondly, I think we must assume that the resurrection didn't occur at that time because IF it had THEN Paul wouldn't have been so mad at Philetus in the 2nd book of Timothy.

Again you try to convince the orthodox of your heresies. IF the raising of Lazarus, the widow of Nain's son (my Bible says "man" not "child"), those who "came out of the graves after His Resurrection," the seamstress Tabitha/Dorcas of Acts 9, or Eutychus, the the man who fell from the window during Paul's preaching, etc. are not "clues" that there resurrection IS physical - i.e. pertaining to the BODY, THEN what "clues" are YOU looking at, man!?! ("Clues" provided by "an angel of enlightenment," no doubt! Cp. Gal 1:8)

Secondly, as I've pointed out the panoply of Scripture belies your "interpretation" of the NATURE of The Resurrection.

Third, you can only assume and assert that those people "died again." The Text does not say. It never says. It says that the Jews "sought" to kill Lazarus, but we are not told if they ever succeeded! You are making an assumption without any facts whatsoever. Those people could have been translated like Enoch and Elijah for all we know! And since when does God resurrect anyone who does not already have (present reality) Eternal Life!?! Show me one example. Did Jesus "have" Eternal Life when He was resurrected? I speak as a fool...
No, it may be precisely BECAUSE OF the resurrection of "many" that occurred "after His Resurrection" that led Hymenaeus, Philetus, and Alexander to erroneously believe, as you do, that "The Resurrection is past already." All men will exist eternally - or "PUT ON immortality" as the Scriptures phrase it. That is not the point. The LORD does not dwell on QUANTITY, but QUALITY. Eternal Life is the QUALITY of their existence, not the LENGTH. The devil and his angels will EXIST (ontology) forever...

I had asked: "Please define what 'the second death' is, precisely, before you go on." To which you responded:

You can die a physical death and you can die again if you screw up and Jesus gets ticked off at you. The backstroke in the sulfur pond, the eternity in Hell where theres golf courses and clubs, but no balls.

Pretty good answer except for the "if you screw up and Jesus gets ticked off at you" qualifier that you inserted AFTER the person had already died. You mean God gets mad at actions committed AFTER a person dies and THEN commits them to eternity in Hell? How is that?!? (Actually, He does and that is why Hell IS eternal, but I digress...) But did you notice how you said a person can "die" and then "die" again? You used the same word, yet you obviously are giving them different connotations. Why will you not allow God the same latitude in His Language?!?

Now to my reference to John 4:21 & 23: "Jesus declared, 'Believe me, woman, A time IS COMING when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. ... {23} Yet A time IS COMING and has NOW IS when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth..." To which you retorted:

???????????????As for why chapter 4 is just before chapter 5... hard to say, but I know it happens a lot.

My point was that Jesus uses the same language in the very next chapter. John 5:25, 28-29: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour IS COMING, and NOW IS, when the dead shall hear The Voice of The Son of God: and they that hear shall live. ...{28} Marvel not at this: for the hour IS COMING, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His Voice, {29} And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto The Resurrection of Life; and they that have done evil, unto The Resurrection of Damnation."

1) Notice that He says "IS COMING and NOW IS" regarding "the dead" hearing His Voice in v.25 whereas He simply says "IS COMING" in v.28. If you've read Gary Demar then you will know that he makes the case that "seeing" or "hearing" = believing. (Of course, the Bible makes the same case...)

2) Notice that He uses the general term, "dead" for the unregenerate in v.25 as opposed to those who are regenerated or made to "live," whereas He qualifies who the "dead" are that will be resurrected in v.28 with the phrase "ALL that are in the graves." These are not simply the unregenerate, but the "living" as well who are resurrected or raised "from the dead." Check out how the Greek word mnemeion (for "graves") is used in the NT.

Here's a homework assignment for you. Look up all the references to anastasis (the Greek word for resurrection) in the Bible. Look closely as how the word is used in context - whether of the spiritually dead or of the physically dead. Note how many times the reference is followed by the qualifier "of" or "from the dead." (I've already done the homework, so you can peek at my notes here if you wish -->http://www.preterism.org/resurrection/anastasis.htm or if you really want to do your homework and find out what else I might also have to say you can check out this page as well --> http://www.preterism.org/resurrection/index.htm. It might help you in future debates with me or other Xians.)

I'm going to run for now and leave off addressing the remainder of your post. Perhaps we won't have need to come back to it... :teeth:

Adios. --C

Justme

July 10th 2003, 06:10 PM

Hi Cherith,

Hey this is the best post you've put forth.

I'll actually take some time and deal with this with deep consideration.

You're still kicking a dead horse, but at least you're putting forth some decent arguments. I'll take a minute, but I'll get back.

However, I would like you to respond to the last bit of my post if you find time.

So are you long haul or what?

Justme

Justme

July 10th 2003, 08:44 PM

Hi Cherith,

I'll start where you asked why I listed the sequence of events from the Olivet Discourse.

I laid that out because all to often people tend to want to add or take away things. This listing of these crucial events helps restrain that.

See, I don't have a problem with the "abomination that causes desolation" in Matt 24 being the event referred to in Daniel. Matthew explicitly interjects that it is. I don't even have a problem with much of the conclusions that you're trying to draw - even a resurrection; however, trying to turn A resurrection and THE Resurrection into synonomous events is where I start stumbling over your doctrine and run for Solid Ground.

Here is a problem. I consider the resurretion of the dead -all those who died before the parousia- to have been resurrected somewhere near the same time, but in some order of preference.

I do not see all this as having occured totally for all time-at one time. So some of this develops from an incorrect understanding of my meaning.

1) In Matt 27:52 A resurrection takes place BEFORE the "abomination that causes desolation" or the "flight of the people" (which, incidentally, is NOWHERE mentioned in Dan 12) which occurred closer to AD 70 than AD 33.

I would have to disagree that a 'resurrection' took place.
Some men were raised to life, just like Martha's brother, but they didn't stay alive. The resurrection of the dead leads to eternal life.
Also we still have Paul mad at Philetus for saying the resurrection had taken place. Nope, I can't buy that this was a resurrection, but I don't really think it matters other than I assume you would like to use this to illustrate that the dead are bodily drug up out of the grave so they can waltz across Texas.

2) The "great tribulation" occurred AFTER the "many" of those "who [slept] in the dust...[awoke]," yet in Dan 12 it is said to occur BEFORE "those who sleep" were "awakened."

I don't see where Daniel says more than...at that time......I agree that Jessus tells us those who sleep in the dirt will hear...but I don't agree that the bible says they would'come out' prior to the great tribulation.

And notice that the Messenger did not say "all who sleep in the dust," but rather "many." This is exactly opposite of what Jesus is trying to convey in John 5:28-29 where He says "ALL that are in the graves ...

So what are you saying? Is Daniel wrong ? Is Jesus wrong? Really,for this discussion, what difference does it make? There is a resurrection somewhere around the great tribulation. If you prefer it is before, fine, after , fine, I don't see any scripture that pins it down. Again, I don't see why it matters.

The order in the Text is that first comes the "time of trouble" then 2) the deliverance of "your people ... at THAT time" and then 3) a resurrection and finally 4) the "shining" of the wise and faithful. (Notice that the word "many" is also used in v.10 where only "many" NOT "all" are "purified, made white, and refined." This too shows that it must occur BEFORE THE Resurrection, for not ALL are "purified, made white, and refined.")

If you want, I don't really care , because as I said before it doesn't matter as far as I can see. I would guess after or maybe during, but let's go with your idea.

Do we agree that who we are talking about here are 'those who sleep in the dirt.'?

Ok, in what way is the Presence of God more significant NOW than it was then prior to AD 70? What has SUBSTANTIALLY changed?

Significance? Good question! All I can give is what comes out of my answer for the last part.

The change is that after the cross/coming the eternal life that was always promised is now available.

Ahhh... But see, you do greatly err not knowing the difference in the Texts. In Matt 24 (the Olivet Discourse) the Greek word is aion which clearly means "age," but concerning the rising of Daniel to his "inheritance" in Dan 12:13 the word is the Hebrew word yowm meaning "a day." Even you would admit that "the last days" is a phrase to denote, not the end of all days, but rather the end of a certain number of days - i.e. the time "when the power of the holy people has been completely shattered, and all these things [are] finished" (Dan 12:7).

Actually that is how I see it. The end of this age as Hebrews 8 explains here:

6But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises. are not "clues" that there resurrection IS physical - i.e. pertaining to the BODY, THEN what "clues" are YOU looking at, man!

are not "clues" that there resurrection IS physical - i.e. pertaining to the BODY, THEN what "clues" are YOU looking at, man!

As I explained I would look for a real resurrection or verses that speak of same like:

2 Cor 5:4
For while we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life.

Secondly, as I've pointed out the panoply of Scripture belies your "interpretation" of the NATURE of The Resurrection.

I hope there was never any doubt as to my understanding of resurrection .

Third, you can only assume and assert that those people "died again." The Text does not say. It never says. It says that the Jews "sought" to kill Lazarus, but we are not told if they ever succeeded! You are making an assumption without any facts whatsoever.

Oh, it's a pretty safe assumption. Do you have anything to prove they DIDN'T die? They don't show up in my phone book anyway.

Those people could have been translated like Enoch and Elijah for all we know!

Yes, they could, but how come we know bits and pieces about Enoch, but not these other guys. And that ain't much to base a doctrine on.

And since when does God resurrect anyone who does not already have (present reality) Eternal Life!?! Show me one example.

Well, actually now, everyone is supposed to have eternal life. Some raised to good, some to not so good.

No, it may be precisely BECAUSE OF the resurrection of "many" that occurred "after His Resurrection" that led Hymenaeus, Philetus, and Alexander to erroneously believe, as you do, that "The Resurrection is past already."

Boy, this is hard to follow.

There were 'many' that were resurrected before Hymenaeus said this, but yet Hymenaeus was wrong. How does this work. Either the resurrection wasn't before they said it, or they were right. Which is it?

All men will exist eternally - or "PUT ON immortality" as the Scriptures phrase it. That is not the point. The LORD does not dwell on QUANTITY, but QUALITY. Eternal Life is the QUALITY of their existence, not the LENGTH. The devil and his angels will EXIST (ontology) forever...

Yes, biblically correct.

Pretty good answer except for the "if you screw up and Jesus gets ticked off at you" qualifier that you inserted AFTER the person had already died. You mean God gets mad at actions committed AFTER a person dies and THEN commits them to eternity in Hell? How is that?!?

Not biblical correct....I badly constructed da poor sentence !!!!!!!

But did you notice how you said a person can "die" and then "die" again? You used the same word, yet you obviously are giving them different connotations. Why will you not allow God the same latitude in His Language?!?

Yes, different meanings, I assumed you and the readers understood.

???????????????As for why chapter 4 is just before chapter 5... hard to say, but I know it happens a lot.

Ah, com'on nobody could have resisted that!!!

These are not simply the unregenerate, but the "living" as well who are resurrected or raised "from the dead." Check out how the Greek word mnemeion (for "graves") is used in the NT.

Tell me what you mean by unregenerate.

Jesus is refering to those who sleep in the dirt, are in the graves, who will hear His voice and come out/be resurrected. Some will be raised to Heaven and some are headed for Hell.

What is left is to determine from biblical evidence if this resurrection is a physical/natural waltz across Texas kind of a resurrection or is it a spiritual /heavenly/invisible resurrection of an invisible to mortal man kind of resurrection occurring only in the spiritual /heavenly realm.

Why I jumped at the chance to discuss the resurrection situation is that it is another easy way to show that souls were raised starting 2000 years ago. The natural bodies of those are still in the grave, hence no waltzing across Texas.
Dealing with a preterist there is no need to spend days outlining the timeframe of the great tribulation.

You have agreed that some have been resurrected before the resurrection, therefore, there has to be some empty graves and tombs somewhere AND there isn't.

Justme

Bib Lit Major

July 11th 2003, 01:20 AM

/ot JustME...check your PMs please.

Cherith

July 11th 2003, 02:45 PM

Hi Cherith, Hey this is the best post you've put forth. I'll actually take some time and deal with this with deep consideration. You're still kicking a dead horse, but at least you're putting forth some decent arguments. ... So are you long haul or what?

Thanks. Your condescension AND praise has me overwhelmed. No, I'm not presently driving long haul, but I miss those l-o-n-g West Coast runs... :dreaming:

I must warn you that based on what you had to say that I'm about fed up with your "reasoning" (or lack thereof) and seriously doubt that I can continue to entertain your gnostic notions. I shall endeavor to keep my temper in check as I respond, because contrary to the brilliantly illuminating exegesis and reasoning that you think you have shown, I haven't seen one good Biblical argument to believe anything you say. In fact, I haven't been able to comprehend much of what you are trying to say!

Here is a problem. I consider the resurretion of the dead -all those who died before the parousia- to have been resurrected somewhere near the same time, but in some order of preference. I do not see all this as having occured totally for all time-at one time. So some of this develops from an incorrect understanding of my meaning.

I haven't a clue what you just said. Is "all those who died before the Parousia" your definition of "the resurrection of the dead"?!? What DO you MEAN when you use the word "resurrection"? (Since you don't seem to think that they are physically revived and yet you link their revivification with their physical death!)

I had said: "1) In Matt 27:52 A resurrection takes place BEFORE the "abomination that causes desolation" or the "flight of the people" (which, incidentally, is NOWHERE mentioned in Dan 12) which occurred closer to AD 70 than AD 33." To which you responded:

I would have to disagree that a 'resurrection' took place. See, there you go again... Some men were raised to life, just like Martha's brother, but they didn't stay alive. The resurrection of the dead leads to eternal life.

So, in your OPINION, resurrection is not restoration of physical life, but being made alive spiritually? Because that's regeneration, my friend, NOT resurrection. Resurrection unto Life presupposes regeneration having already occurred.

Also we still have Paul mad at Philetus for saying the resurrection had taken place.

So why is Paul mad? Are you saying that he's not concerned with the NATURE of the Resurrection, but only it's TIMING? Because the Parousia hasn't taken place yet (ie AD 70 in your mind)? You would have Paul delivering these guys over to the adversary, ready to pronounce them heathens and heretics, blasphemers, enemies of The Faith and destroyers of people's lives, based simply on TIMING!? Wow! I wonder how he or the Lord Jesus feel about people that have the NATURE of the Resurrection all screwed up!?!

Nope, I can't buy that this was a resurrection, but I don't really think it matters other than I assume you would like to use this to illustrate that the dead are bodily drug up out of the grave so they can waltz across Texas.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink... I couldn't care less whether you can "buy" it or not (Rev 18:11), the point is what the Bible has to say about the NATURE and TIMING of The Resurrection. And you have failed to provide one shred of evidence to the contrary!

I don't see where Daniel says more than...at that time......I agree that Jessus tells us those who sleep in the dirt will hear...but I don't agree that the bible says they would 'come out' prior to the great tribulation.

Another nonsensical statement. WHERE does Jesus say that those "who sleep in the dirt" will hear. He says "the dead" shall hear - the "dead" are NOT dead PHYSICALLY! They are dead spiritually. They have been separated from God through sin - that is what death is, SEPARATION!

I'll try this one more time. In the ACTUAL sequence of events we have the "many" raised in Matt 27:52. That occurred CHRONOLOGICALLY prior to the events of AD 70. However, in Dan 12 the PROPHESIED sequence of events is that "the time of trouble" would occur BEFORE the "many" being raised/resurrected. And thirdly, there is NO RESURRECTION in the entire Olivet Discourse. Not a single mention, not even a hint!

Cherith: "And notice that the Messenger did not say "all who sleep in the dust," but rather "many." This is exactly opposite of what Jesus is trying to convey in John 5:28-29 where He says "ALL that are in the graves ..." So what are you saying? Is Daniel wrong ? Is Jesus wrong? Really, for this discussion, what difference does it make? There is a resurrection somewhere around the great tribulation. If you prefer it is before, fine, after , fine, I don't see any scripture that pins it down. Again, I don't see why it matters.

I know you don't! And that's the point! No, Daniel is not wrong and no, Jesus is not wrong. Did you ever for once in your life stop and think that they may have been talking about different things!?! The promised resurrection in Daniel was A LIMITED resurrection - a 'first-fruits' TYPE. This is shown by the qualifier "many" and NOT by the qualifier "all" that Jesus uses in John 5:28-29! It was NOT THE Resurrection that the entire panoply of Scripture promises - that Jesus promises in John 5:28-29 and elsewhere - it was a TYPE, a model, a foreshadowing or taste of what THAT Resurrection will be like - i.e. PHYSICAL!!!

Cherith: The order in the Text is that first comes the "time of trouble" then 2) the deliverance of "your people ... at THAT time" and then 3) a resurrection and finally 4) the "shining" of the wise and faithful. (Notice that the word "many" is also used in v.10 where only "many" NOT "all" are "purified, made white, and refined." This too shows that it must occur BEFORE THE Resurrection, for not ALL are "purified, made white, and refined.") If you want, I don't really care, because as I said before it doesn't matter as far as I can see. I would guess after or maybe during, but let's go with your idea. Do we agree that who we are talking about here are 'those who sleep in the dirt.'?

You know, the enemy sometimes attacks the side flanks - minor points where the Commander usually has his weakest troops, but usually the enemy is always looking for or thrusting toward the main center of the conflict - i.e. the very heart of the Commander's troops and thus the Commander himself. It is like this with the doctrine of the resurrection. You are trying to make the "great tribulation" the end all and be all of the Gospel, and the Gospel is MUCH MORE concerned with the NATURE and TIMING of the Resurrection. It was the Resurrection that vindicated Jesus and His Ministry - the Gospel that He was proclaiming! Paul says that it is the Resurrection that PROVES that God will Judge the world by The Man Who He has appointed! It was the NATURE of the Resurrection that Paul preached to Gov. Felix (Acts 24:21) and subsequent Judgment to come that made him tremble (v.25).

As for "sleep in the dirt," I only see that language in Dan 12:2 (and once in Job if you want to get technical), so I have no idea what you want me to "agree" on "here"? Where?!?

I had asked: "Ok, in what way is the Presence of God more significant NOW than it was prior to AD 70? What has SUBSTANTIALLY changed?" To which you responded:

Significance? Good question! All I can give is what comes out of my answer for the last part. The change is that after the cross/coming the eternal life that was always promised is now available.

The Justice of God was satisfied at The Cross by The Atonement and that is the BASIS upon which Jesus SECURED Eternal Life for His people; however, that was not what I asked you and I fail to see how His "coming" in AD 70 SUBSTANTIALLY changed His PRESENCE. Take a look at what I asked you again. The events of AD 70, like the Resurrection, vindicated Jesus' Testimony and His Holiness - His demand for Justice, but how did it effect His Eternal PRESENCE through The Spirit?

As I explained I would look for a real resurrection or verses that speak of same like: 2 Cor 5:4 For while we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life.

How is the verse in 2 Cor any different or "real" from the other 200+ verses that speak of resurrection!?!

I hope there was never any doubt as to my understanding of resurrection.

I can honestly say with Paul, "I stand in doubt of you - every hour" (Gal 4:20 w/1 Cor 15:30)

Cherith:Third, you can only assume and assert that those people "died again." The Text does not say. It never says. It says that the Jews "sought" to kill Lazarus, but we are not told if they ever succeeded! You are making an assumption without any facts whatsoever. Oh, it's a pretty safe assumption. Do you have anything to prove they DIDN'T die? They don't show up in my phone book anyway.

IT IS NOT UP TO [i]ME TO PROVE YOUR ASSUMPTIONS!

Cherith: And since when does God resurrect anyone who does not already have (present reality) Eternal Life!?! Show me one example. Well, actually now, everyone is supposed to have eternal life. Some raised to good, some to not so good.

The Scriptures NEVER refer to those resurrected to damnation as having "life" - ESPECIALLY "Eternal Life"!!! "And THIS is Life Eternal, that they might KNOW Thee - The Only True God, and Jesus Christ, Whom Thou hast sent." (John 17:3) Eternal Life is referred to as our "inheritance"; since when do the damned, sons of the devil, inherit anything from The King. Jesus said: "It is not right to take The Children's bread and cast it unto the dogs!"

Your whole theology is screwed up because of your adoration of the damnable doctrines of the Hymenaean gnostics!

:flaming: I just can't go on right now. I'm too angry! :flaming: :argh: :flaming:

:stop:"BE ye ANGRY, and sin not" ... "but judge righteous judgment.":stop:

Justme

July 11th 2003, 08:56 PM

Hi Cherith,

I'm going to change formats here for a post and let you calm down a tad.

You are using terms for death and life and resurrection and so on that you have become accustomed to in your interpretation of the bible.

I thought we understood each others meanings, but we do not.

I talk of physical death and mean just that , the cessation of physical life of any individual-remember the gopher and the 18-wheeler.

I speak of second death and mean that it is possible to experience the physical death of his natural body and then, if faced with condemning judgment, that same person can experience a second death which I would consider the separation from God thing. The hell of of it all.

I talk of life and mean the physical natural life that you and I are enjoying as we speak.

I also talk of a spiritual life or being 'raised to life' as the life after physical death or the heavenly eternal life that is the promise of the NT.

The resurrection of the dead is just that. This resurrection does not contain one person with a heartbeat. The resurrection is people who have physically died, left their natural bodies and started their eternal spiritual/heavenly life in the spiritual realm. They remain in that spiritual realm forever. They do not come back to any natural/visible state that will allow them to step foot on planet earth at any time. There is no resurrection/revival/second chance for physical life...ever. The resurrection is spiritual and remains in the spiritual realm.

Now I will tell that same story again using scripture.

Man dies...every man dies(physically)

1 Cor 15
22For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

Hebrews 9
27Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment,

Hell is a problem...........

Matthew 5:29

If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.

There is eternal life.......

John 10

27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand.

What is eternal life for the righteous...........

17After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.

Romans 5:21
so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in[ 6:23 Or through] Christ Jesus our Lord.

There are two phases of 'life' the natural and the spiritual.................

1 Cor 15
44it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

the natural is first.......then AFTER that

1 Cor 15
46The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.

There is no such thing as the natural body being alive and somehow being the spiritual body because the bible clearly states the natural comes frst and AFTER THAT the spiritual.

Where do we spend this eternity.......

Collossians 1:5

the faith and love that spring from the hope that is stored up for you in heaven and that you have already heard about in the word of truth, the gospel

John 14

2In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you.

More about that eternity in His Father's house.........

2 Cor 4:18

So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

The eternal is unseen or invisible, not at all like physical/natural.

Eternal life is invisible in the spiritual realm of Heaven in the presense of God.

That is something of the quality of eternal life or the life after physical death.

You are also concerned about the timing of that eternal life.

As far as when eternal life was available for common man it would be set out by this verse among many others.

1 Thess 4
15According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep.

..it began at/near the coming of the Lord. As a preterist you would say that was after the great tribulation which as a preterist would be in 70 AD.

Again that would be biblical proof that the resurrection of the dead occurs only in the spiritual realm unless graves are empty or Daniel walks the earth.

Why is the tomb of Jesus empty.......

Because He was resurrected to life eternal. Jesus was God.

Jesus, when resurrected, showed His wounds to THomas.

Man, when resurrected will be made new again......

Jesus walked through walls, Jesus left on clouds, Jesus went to Heaven where the invisible, spiritual are, Jesus returned to have a talk with Paul on the road to Damascus...nobody saw Him they only heard His voice.

However, none of this matters because Acts 1:11 tells us He will return to us on the clouds, nothing about the state of His body.

We will be like angels in Heaven

We will be like Jesus in Heaven...how was He on the road to Damascus?

The final story of the bible.........

Note where Jesus is, note where the paradise is and note that outside are the dogs and the immoral, but also:

11Let him who does wrong continue to do wrong; let him who is vile continue to be vile; let him who does right continue to do right; and let him who is holy continue to be holy."
Revelation 22.

Justme

Cherith

July 14th 2003, 03:25 AM

as him who WILLs himself not to see...

I'm going to change formats here for a post and let you calm down a tad.

Who says that I will?

You are using terms for death and life and resurrection and so on that you have become accustomed to in your interpretation of the bible.

Yes, I am. Terms that are clear, plain and logical. Terms that are understood by every thinking person.

I thought we understood each others meanings, but we do not.

Oh, I have understood you perfectly, and that's the problem.

I talk of physical death and mean just that , the cessation of physical life of any individual-remember the gopher and the 18-wheeler.

Same view here. My problem comes in when you don't know which "death" is being spoken of - the physically dead or the spiritually dead.

I speak of second death and mean that it is possible to experience the physical death of his natural body and then, IF faced with condemning judgment, THEN that same person can experience a second death which I would consider the separation from God thing. The hell of of it all.

No argument there either. (Except that the Bible teaches that those who EXPERIENCE this "second death" will do so in their resurrected bodies - the resurrection unto damnation thing. The "appear before The Judgment seat of Christ" thing "that EVERYONE may receive the things done in his BODY, according to what he hath done, WHETHER it be GOOD or BAD." --2 Cor 5:10).

I talk of life and mean the physical natural life that you and I are enjoying as we speak.

And this is where your definition also falls short. Life is MORE than JUST physical life. The Bible, not just me, talks about "the living" (e.g. Eccl 7:2) in a sense - whether they are physically alive or not. Example:
Mark 12:26-27: "And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in The Book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? {27} He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

Now, I know you don't want to accept this or admit this, but the FACTS are self-evident to anyone willing to see them - Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had long been physically dead when Jesus said this. However, when He expounds on The Resurrection He "calls those things that be not as though they were" (Rom 4:17), because in the Plan and Purpose of God they are as good as accomplished. Note too that He uses the term "living" to describe believers PRIOR TO the Atonement, Resurrection, Ascension and even "Parousia" of AD 70!

I also talk of a spiritual life or being 'raised to life' as the life after physical death or the heavenly eternal life that is the promise of the NT.

Here again is a premise that you cannot defend Biblically. NOWHERE in the NT are the words "raised" and "life" used in juxaposition to regeneration (i.e. receiving spiritual life) - they are ONLY used in reference to PHYSICAL RESURRECTION!

The resurrection of the dead is just that. This resurrection does not contain one person with a heartbeat. The resurrection is people who have physically died, left their natural bodies and started their eternal spiritual/heavenly life in the spiritual realm. ...

And yet the Bible says that the damned, children of the devil, will be resurrected! Imagine that! What kind of "spiritual" or "heavenly" LIFE do they have!?!

...They remain in that spiritual realm forever. They do not come back to any natural/visible state that will allow them to step foot on planet earth at any time. There is no resurrection/revival/second chance for physical life...ever. The resurrection is spiritual and remains in the spiritual realm.

And you've PROVED that FROM SCRIPTURE, where? Rom 8:23: "...we groan within ourselves, waiting for The Adoption, to wit, The Redemption of our BODY." Notice that Paul says "our" body, not "a" body or our "spirit" but "our BODY"!!!

Now I will tell that same story again using scripture. Man dies...every man dies (physically) 1 Cor 15:22 "For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive."

Paul is qualifying who the "all" are who will be "made ALIVE" - i.e. it is those who are "IN Christ." Proceed.

Hebrews 9:27 "Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment"

The Text says "appointed" not "destined" and, I believe - I'll have to check, that the definite article is before judgment making it "THE Judgment."

Hell is a problem........... Matthew 5:29 If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.

I'm surprised you still believe in Hell. Most cultists do away with it in their theology eventually...

There is eternal life....... John 10:27 "My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand."

Yes, I would readily grant that there is Eternal Life... My problem is not with the fact that there IS Eternal Life, but rather you applying this phrase to unbelievers in the "after-life" (for lack of a better description; those who continue to exist after physical death)!

What is eternal life for the righteous........... 17 "After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever."
Romans 5:21 "so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in[ 6:23 Or through] Christ Jesus our Lord."

The passage in Thessalonians doesn't use the phrase "eternal life." Paul is talking about PHYSICALLY DEAD believers (see vv.15, 16) being PHYSICALLY RESURRECTED. He is not concerned so much with the LENGTH OF TIME believers will share with their LORD, but with the fact that they will not simply cease to exist - or that they will remain disembodied, NON-PHYSICAL, spirits. In fact, given that it simply says "alive," I'm surprised that you don't misconstrue this verse like you seemingly do with verses that simply use the word "dead."

There are two phases of 'life' the natural and the spiritual................. 1 Cor 15:44 "... it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is also a spiritual body, ." the natural is first.......then AFTER that

:duh:First, the Bible NEVER refers to the life of the damned after physical death as "spiritual" and yet they are also raised/resurrected.

:duh:Second, what is the "it" that is "sown" and "raised"? Is it not a BODY?!?

:duh:Third, the word you prefer to translate "spiritual" actually means SUPER-NATURAL in the Greek. (I discussed this before. Weren't you reading?)

:duh:Fourth, what can Paul possibly think is "raised" if he is not talking about THE BODY!?!

:duh:Fifth, NO WHERE in the Original is the word "also" (as in "too" or "another") used in connection with our Resurrection bodies. That is something you've added. It is not that we have THIS natural body, and we'll receive ANOTHER, different, spiritual body. THIS body that we do have will be reunited with OUR spirit and made SUPER-NATURAL, free from death and the curse.

1 Cor 15:46 "The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual." There is no such thing as the natural body being alive and somehow being the spiritual body because the bible clearly states the natural comes frst and AFTER THAT the spiritual.

No Christian in his right mind has ever advocated that! The Text does not advocate that! Christians believe in The Resurrection of the flesh. We don't believe that our natural body - the body we received "by nature" (i.e. through pro-creation) - is our SUPER-NATURAL body while we are still "in the flesh" and "in the world," but rather that OUR natural body will die and decay and in The Resurrection IT will be reunited with OUR natural body by The Supernatural Power of God! As a certain radio commentator says: "there is a one-to-one correllation between the body that dies and the body that rises." In Paul's illustration the seed dies and it is from the genetic material of that self-same seed that a "new" body is formed. The old body is the seed, but the new body is the plant. However, it is not a corn seed that produces a stalk of wheat. Or a black-eyed pea that produces a cherry tree. The Lord set up the natural order to come forth "after their KIND," remember...?

Where do we spend this eternity....... Collossians 1:5 "the faith and love that spring from the hope that is stored up for you in heaven and that you have already heard about in the word of truth, the gospel" John 14:2 "In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you."

More about that eternity in His Father's house......... 2 Cor 4:18 "So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal." The eternal is unseen or invisible, not at all like physical/natural. Eternal life is invisible in the spiritual realm of Heaven in the presense of God.

So you're saying that EVERYONE who is resurrected spends eternity "IN Heaven"? Even the damned? Or is eternity not eternal for them? Are they not in The Presence of God in Hell? Do they somehow get to escape His Omni-Presence in Hell?

Name one thing on this earth that we can see with our eyes that is NOT "temporary" (i.e. of or pertaining to TIME). Paul's point is not that just because something is invisible (i.e. "unseen") that somehow it is eternal - air is invisible, yet it is not eternal; angels are unseen/invisible, yet they are not "eternal" (from everlasting to everlasting). He is telling believers not to get wrapped up in this world and rely ONLY on the physical senses for their faith/comfort.

:ill:Now to the crux of your heresy. Is JESUS presently PHYSICAL or NON-PHYSICAL? :::bracing myself for your blasphemy::::ill:

Why is the tomb of Jesus empty.......

Because He was resurrected to life eternal. Jesus was God.

Jesus, when resurrected, showed His wounds to Thomas.

Man, when resurrected will be made new again......

Jesus walked through walls, Jesus left on clouds, Jesus went to Heaven where the invisible, spiritual are, Jesus returned to have a talk with Paul on the road to Damascus...nobody saw Him they only heard His voice.

However, none of this matters because Acts 1:11 tells us He will return to us on the clouds, nothing about the state of His body.

We will be like angels in Heaven

We will be like Jesus in Heaven...how was He on the road to Damascus?

:flaming: And you think that [i]I should be calm!?! :flaming:

Justme

July 14th 2003, 11:39 AM

Hi Cherith,

You wrote:
No Christian in his right mind has ever advocated that! The Text does not advocate that! Christians believe in The Resurrection of the flesh.
********************

The Miracle Channel (promoter of fleshy resurrection, etc) the other day quoted a survey that said 6% of Canadians are followers of evangelical groups. I assume that must be of declared denominations, but it ddn't say.
They believe in a fleshy ressurrection I guess. The Jehovah witnesses believe in a fleshy resurrection as do Mormans??? I think.

Anyway all of those combined do not total the number of people who attend the United Church of Canada and they don't talk about Waltzing across Texas.

Christianity has not been seen by some muslims as being believers in fleshy resurrection either as you can see from this:
**********************
Heres a bit from a paper by Ali Al-Timimi. I only know the name I can't give any other information than that.It is from an Islamic website.

This person writes:

What about belief in the Last Day, do the Christians believe in the Last Day? No. Why donâ€™t they believe in the Last Day? Because they believe the resurrection will be the resurrection only of the spirits. They donâ€™t believe that this body, this flesh, these bones, and flesh, and blood, and so forth will actually be in Paradise. They think only your soul will be in Paradise. ......................

The last day as I gather is the last day of the world, but there may be more to it than that.
*****************

So I think maybe you should re-think your statement about 'christians in their right minds' stuff.

I don't consider the 6% of Canadians who believe in a fleshy resurrection to be out of their minds, just biblically wrong.

Back to the bible...Yes the text does talk of heavenly eternity.

John 14
2In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. 3And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am.

Where is Jesus going?
To His Father's house/
Where is His Father's house?
In Heaven.

Jesus is going there to prepare a room for you....

Is that room only temporary?

It says without any doubt that you will be where He is.
Jesus says He will come back and take you to be where He is.

Where is Jesus?
He is in Heaven.

Comments?

Justme

Justme

September 21st 2003, 03:03 PM

Hi John,

You may have seen Dee Dee's post saying she doesn't want a discussion on flesh-spirit resurrection to get out of hand on the language forum.

I have some questions of a person with knowledge of the NT Greek and the Hebrew if you can spare the time.

Daniel 12:13

NASB
3 "But as for you, go your way to the end; then you will enter into rest and rise again for your allotted portion at the end of the age."

KJV
13 But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.

Is the Hebrew meaning of the word 'age' or 'days' here the same as say this in Hebrews 9
26Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Justme

dizzle

September 21st 2003, 05:17 PM

In other thread:

Dee Dee Warren:

Now this is an interesting verse, and one that deals a mortal blow to any kind of nonphysical, non empty tombs resurrection...

Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, 52 and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

This is not speaking of "grave" as the spiritual abode of the dead, it is speaking of literal graves where literal dead bodies were lain. They were split open and the the "bodies" were raised out of the graves. This is undeniable, and is done concurrently with Christ's resurrection as a demonstration, a foretaste of the Last Day for Jesus said the same words:

Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice 29 and come forth— those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.

People come forth out of their graves. Of course Jesus also provided an object lesson for this when He told Lazarus "Come forth" which is what He will say to each and every one of us, and we will.

No matter what verses might be reasonably interpreted to mean a nonphysical resurrection, they also might be interpreted to mean physical, ie they are ambiguous (and I am being generous) - these are some examples of ones which place the evidence squarely on the side of the orthodox confession. Of course I add to his amongst others Paul's confession while on trial.

Justme:

Hi Dee Dee,

I'm a bit surprised you would use those that came up out of the graves at the crusifixion. Wouldn't that be considering a resurrection which Paul wouldn't be happy about.

Hey, could that be what Paul actually was talking about in the letter to Timothy?

Actually I can't think of verses anywhere which clarify what those bodies came out of the grave to prove.

Justme

Paul wouldn't be happy about it? Was Paul a liar? He told the Pharisees that his hope of the resurrection was exactly like their hope, and it is well documented what the Pharisees believed. This is a nail in the coffin (pun intended) of any denial of the bodily resurrection confessed by orthodoxy. Paul either affirmed an empty grave resurrection (which is why the Jews didn't cremate by the way) - or he lied. I choose the option that does not make Paul a liar.

John Reece

September 21st 2003, 05:40 PM

Hi Justme,

I’m Happy to oblige:

Hebrews 9

26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages (epi sunteleia twn aiwnwn) to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. (ESV)

Daniel 12

13 But go your way till the end (LXX: sunteleiaV). And you shall rest and shall stand in your allotted place at the end of the days (LXX: sunteleian hmerwn)." (ESV)

Your question is, “Is the Hebrew meaning of the word 'age' or 'days' here the same as say this in Hebrews 9?”

The NT book of Hebrews is not written in Hebrew, so I don’t see how I can compare the Aramaic (most of Daniel is in Aramaic rather than Hebrew) of Daniel to the text of Hebrews. The best I can do is to compare the Greek version of Daniel (LXX) to the Greek version of Hebrews.

Hebrews uses the word “ages” (aiwnwn).

Daniel uses the word “days” (hmerwn).

Of course the two words are not the same.

But it is interesting to note that both Hebrews and the LXX of Daniel accompany the two respective words (ages, days) with the word sunteleia = consummation, completion)."

Let me know if I may be of further service to you.

Blessings,

John

Justme

September 21st 2003, 08:24 PM

Hi Dee Dee,

Concerning those who came out of the graves/tombs/whatever in 33 AD, I just want to put forth the statement that they are not resurrected in any form at that time and I gather that you agree technically.
whether they are a foretaste or sample of things to come is speculation .

I was also making reference to the point that Paul didn't appreciate Hymeneas and Phili..whoever saying the resurrection was over sometime prior to 68 AD.

You mentioned that Paul had the same hope as the Pharisees.

Acts 23
"My brothers, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee. I stand on trial because of my hope in the resurrection of the dead."

8(The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither angels nor spirits, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all.)

The Pharisees aknowledge spirits and angels.

Paul said:
15and I have the same hope in God as these men, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

I have that idea as well, but not any physical natural body grave emptying resurrection.

Let's have a quick look at that resurrection of the dead.I've used this before, but there was never any response so I'll lay it out again.

From Daniel 12 we know that Daniel himself would physically die and 'sleep in the dust' until the resurrection at the end of the days. Daniel 12 tells us that the resurrection will be at the time of the great tribulation.

1 Thess 4 tells us more of this.
14We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him.

These people will be raised BEFORE those who are alive at the coming.(parousia)This firmly nails down the timeframe.

15According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep.

So here we have up to the parousia taken care of --those alive at the time of the parousia will not precede the rest of the dead such as Daniel who were to sleep in the dust til the time of the great tribulation which is immediately before the parousia. However, before they can come to life the 1000 year reign with Christ has to be over. Irregardless of where anybody wants to place that parousia the 1000 year reign is over before the parousia occurs, therefore if anyone is going to reign WITH Christ it would be in Heaven because that is where Jesus is prior to His parousia. That requires a spiritual realm situation.Invisible to the mortals. The 'first resurrection of Rev 20 is a spiritual heavenly event. If THEY are spiritually raised to 'life' that would be your foretaste of things to come for the rest.

I guess the main proof that the resurrection is spiritual is that the resurrection of the dead is over with the great tribulation, there isn't really any way around that. If it is over it was in the spiritual realm because nobody saw it and of course the graves AREN'T EMPTY.

Justme