• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

New Heaven and New Earth

Discussion in 'General Theology' started by Hervey, Jan 15, 2002.

  1. Jim1

    Jim1 Regular Member

    263
    +6
    Christian
    Dear Hervey,


    Hervey:

    I said , that your replies, even this last post, is showing an overcoming, as a form of making death a friend , instead of an enemy , which it is !


    Jim:


    Not a friend, an advantage.

    Then cometh the end … For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. – 1 Corinthians 15:24-26

    According to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by death. For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not. For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart [from the body], and to be with Christ; which is far better [for Paul]: Nevertheless to abide [continue] in the flesh [in the body] is more needful for you. – Philippians 1:20-24

    And God shall wipe away all tear from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. – Revelation 21:4

    The word “gain” in Philippians 1:21 is rendered from the Greek word transliterated “kerdos” (click here), which means a gain or an advantage.

    What is an advantage is not necessarily a friend. For instance, in Philippians 1:14-18, Paul says, “And many of the brethren in the Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to speak the word without fear. Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will: The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds: But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel. What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.” Some people preached Christ in order to add affliction to Paul. These people were not Paul’s friends; they desired to hurt him. However, what was meant to hurt Paul turned to an advantage, causing Paul to rejoice; Paul was just happy that Christ was being preached, even if it was being preached from evil motives. Thus, the act of an enemy that was intended to hurt Paul actually and inadvertently resulted in Paul’s rejoicing.

    Similarly, though death is the enemy of the human race, it actually turns to an advantage (kerdos, 2771) for those who are saved; death allows the souls/spirits of those who are saved to be with Christ in heaven. This advantage is the result of what Christ did on the cross. The Blood of Christ removes sin from the souls/spirits of those who are saved. Thus, with the sting of death (sin) removed (1 Corinthians 15:56-57), death actually becomes an advantage, or “gain.”


    Hervey:

    By this type of believing [that death is an advantage for those who are saved] , we see the same thing that Satan told the woman - "ye shall not surely die".


    Jim:

    The serpent’s false statement, “Ye shall not surely die,” in Genesis 3:4 was a denial of God’s true statement, “In the day that thou eatest thereof [of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil] thou shalt surely die,” in Genesis 2:17. It was a denial of the divine truth that the consequence of sin is death. With the sting of death (sin) removed, death actually becomes an advantage, or “gain,” to those who are saved. This fact is not a denial that the consequence of sin is death. It is a confirmation of the victory over sin that the Blood of Christ gives to those who are saved.

    Those who are unsaved die in sin; therefore their souls/spirits do not go to be with Christ in heaven; they instead go to hell to await judgment. In contrast, those who are saved do not die in sin, as the Blood of Christ removes their sin; therefore their souls/spirits go to be with Christ in heaven. To say that the same thing happens to the souls/spirits of both those who are saved and those who are unsaved at the deaths of their physical bodies is to say that the Blood of Christ makes no difference. According to Paul, the Blood of Christ does make a difference; it turns what is otherwise a disadvantage into an advantage, or “gain.”


    Hervey:

    You are making death a type of life.


    Jim:

    No, I’m not. Death is still the consequence of sin. The Blood of Christ does not remove sin from the physical body. As Paul says in Romans 6:6, “Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed [2673, katargeo, to render idle or to inactive: click here], that henceforth we should not serve sin.” and in Romans 8:10, “And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.” Thus, the same thing happens to the physical body whether one is saved or unsaved.

    However, the Blood of Christ does remove sin from the souls/spirits of those who are saved:
    Consequently, when the physical body dies, what happens to the souls/spirits of those who are saved differs from what happens to the souls/spirits of those who are not saved. The souls/spirits of those who die in sin (Ephesians 2:12) go to hell, where they continue to be separated from God as they await their judgment. In contrast, because of the victory that the Blood of Christ gives to those who are saved, who therefore do not die in sin, their souls/spirits go to be with Christ in heaven (2 Corinthians 5:8 and Philippians 1:23), where they await their judgment (1 Corinthians 4:5).


    Hervey:

    … you are indeed implying that there is no death, and that you are not really dying, only going to a better place.


    Jim:

    The believer’s physical body of sin dies. The believer’s soul/spirit, which is cleansed of all sin by the Blood of Christ, lives with the author of his or her salvation in heaven (2 Corinthians 5:8, Philippians 1:23 and Hebrews 5:9).


    Hervey:

    Even Jesus Christ was dead for three days and three nights.


    Jim:

    While Christ’s body was in the sepulchre (John 19:40-42), His soul was in hell (Acts 2:25-31), in the center of the earth (Matthew 12:40, Romans 10:6-7 and Ephesians 4:9).

    Christ did not die for His own sins but for ours. As Paul says in Romans 4:25, “[Christ] was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.” Christ was on a mission. The proof that He accomplished his mission was His resurrection. If He had had any sin of His own and had thus failed to fully pay the penalty for our sins, He would not have risen. Christ’s resurrection was the proof that He was the Lamb of God and that He had accomplished His mission to take away the sin of the world. The disembodied souls/spirits of the beneficiaries of His mission would thereafter be free of sin and therefore free to await their judgment in the presence of their Lord in heaven instead of in the depths of the earth, where the non-beneficiaries of Christ’s mission await their judgment.

    END OF PART ONE. PLEASE GO TO PART TWO.
     
  2. Jim1

    Jim1 Regular Member

    263
    +6
    Christian
    PART TWO


    Hervey:

    The Word of God tells us that David has not ascended up into the heavens, and his grave is still with us. You might say that he was not a Christian, and I would agree. But my point is this, even though he is not a Christian, he has to wait. And what you fail to see, is that Christians, when they die, have to "wait" also, until Christ come to gather up the Church.


    Jim:

    This is what Peter says:
    Peter’s point in stating that David’s body still lay in its sepulchre was to prove that what David had prophesied in the Old Testament quote regarded Christ’s physical resurrection, not his own; and his point in stating that David had not ascended into the heavens was likewise to prove that what David had prophesied in the Old Testament quote regarded Christ’s physical ascension, not his own. There is nothing in this passage that indicates that the soul/spirit of David, a beneficiary of Christ’s mission, is not present with His Lord and Savior in heaven right now.


    Sincerely,
    Jim
     
  3. Hervey

    Hervey Member

    481
    +0
    Hi Jim:

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Acts 2:25 For David speaketh concerning him [concerning Christ], I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: 26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. 28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he [David] is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Peter’s point in stating that David’s body still lay in its sepulchre was to prove that what David had prophesied in the Old Testament quote regarded Christ’s physical resurrection, not his own; and his point in stating that David had not ascended into the heavens was likewise to prove that what David had prophesied in the Old Testament quote regarded Christ’s physical ascension, not his own. There is nothing in this passage that indicates that the soul/spirit of David, a beneficiary of Christ’s mission, is not present with His Lord and Savior in heaven right now.


    Jim:

    The answer was right under your nose in Acts 2:31 and you did not see the proof that the soul is with the body , when you are in the grave. This prophecy of David's in this verse , tells us that Christ was in the grave, and also was his body and his soul.

    I still think that you are forgetting, that the words "grave" and "hell" are the exact same words, translated from the exact same Greek word ! ! If you see the word "hell" in the NT it means the "grave".

    Love IN Christ - Hervey
     
  4. Jim1

    Jim1 Regular Member

    263
    +6
    Christian
    Dear Hervey,


    Peter:

    Acts 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that [1] his soul was not left in hell, [2] neither his flesh did see corruption.


    Hervey:

    The answer was right under your nose in Acts 2:31 and you did not see the proof that the soul is with the body , when you are in the grave. This prophecy of David's in this verse , tells us that Christ was in the grave, and also was his body and his soul.


    Jim:

    Acts 2:31 says two things: (1) Christ’s soul was not left in hell. (2) His flesh did not see corruption. There is nothing in this passage that either requires or implies that the soul does not leave the body at death. Your conclusion here is based solely on your unscripturally narrow definition of the word “hell.”

    Your chosen definition of the word “hell” (86, hades) is incompatible with the scriptural fact that while Christ’s body was in the sepulchre (John 19:40-42), His soul was in hell (Acts 2:25-31), in the heart of the earth (Matthew 12:40, Romans 10:6-7 and Ephesians 4:9).


    Hervey:

    I still think that you are forgetting, that the words "grave" and "hell" are the exact same words, translated from the exact same Greek word ! ! If you see the word "hell" in the NT it means the "grave".


    Jim:

    Here are the definitions of the word “hades” (86) and the eleven uses of this word in the New Testament: click here.

    Your interpretive decision to give the minority definition of this word universal application in the New Testament is not scripturally feasible. There is no more reason to think that the meaning of the word “hell” (86, hades) is restricted to the grave in Acts 2:31 than there is in Matthew 16:18, where Christ says, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it;” or in Luke 10:15, where Christ says, “And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted to heaven, shalt be thrust down to hell;” or in Luke 16:23, where Christ says, “And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.”


    Sincerely,
    Jim
     
  5. camaro540

    camaro540 Regular Member

    318
    +0
    Messianic
    Opps
    Jims on it...

    :)
     
  6. Hervey

    Hervey Member

    481
    +0
    Hi Jim:

    It is obvious that you think that the "same" Greek word for "hell" and "grave" have more than one meaning. That in itself is ludicrous.

    Used differently yes, but the definition of "hades" still remains the "same", and it is the "grave".

    Acts 2:27 - "thou wilt not leave my soul in "hell" = the grave !

    Hell is not a place out into some unknown place, like outerspace. And there is no such place as purgatory. Either you , as a Christian, go to Heaven or you go to the New Earth. Or, if your name is not in the book of life - the second death awaits those, which is called the Lake of fire.

    The phrase of not leaving my soul in "hell" in Acts 2:27 tells us where a soul "could" be left, but that the promise will not leave the soul in "hell".

    Rev. 1:18 tells us that he has the keys of "hell" and death. When you die, you go to the grave. Hell is the grave. The keys of "hell" is the "pit" , which is the Lake of fire, and it takes "keys" to open and close this pit, which is the "grave" , called the second death forever and ever. This "hell" called the second death, is the "grave", and that is why it is called the "pit" in the book of Revelation.

    Jim, you said >
    Acts 2:31 says two things: (1) Christ’s soul was not left in hell. (2) His flesh did not see corruption. There is nothing in this passage that either requires or implies that the soul does not leave the body at death. Your conclusion here is based solely on your unscripturally narrow definition of the word “hell.”

    Jim: Where then, do you think "hell" is ? ? If the soul is not left in hell, we have to ask ourselves where or what 'hell' is then ! !

    You have "never" given an explanation for "where" and "what" hell is then ! ! Where is "hell", Jim, and what is "hell, Jim ? ?

    I say "hell" is the grave , and is to be understood both literally and figuratively.

    What and where do you say hell is ????

    Love IN Christ - HErvey
     
  7. Hervey

    Hervey Member

    481
    +0
    Hi Jim:

    I wanted to also tell you, that the word "hell" is nothing more than a slang word, which first was used , sometime around the 13th or 14 the centuries. This slang word crept into the KJV translation, and has been used ever since. The truth is, is that it is not a real word. It is a slang word, which is to express "evil".

    In Matthew 23:33 - "how can ye escape the damnation of hell" In this verse , the word "hell" is the greek word - "geenna". Not "hades". But, the prefix "ge" is translated - earth - 188 times and ground - 18 times, and land - 42 times and world - once.

    This slang word was used so much, that it has been misused to imply something that it is not !

    The "grave" does not mean literally "earth", because some who have died in the sea, then that becomes their grave.

    The word 'grave' is associated with what is known of , as the "unseen", or a place where you are , but can not see. That is because you are dead !

    Your "soul" goes to the "grave" with you, when you die !

    The promise of God, was to not leave his soul in the "grave" ! Acts 2:27.

    Every place you see the word "hell" in your bibles, you can cross them out and put the word "earth" or "grave" , depending on which greek word is associated with this word "hell". If it is the greek word "hades" , then cross out the word hell, and put the word "grave" in its place. If it is the greek word "geenna" , then cross out the word "hell" and put in its place the word "earth".

    Matthew 5:22 is a great example of this greek word "geenna".

    At the end of this verse it tells us, that one shall be in danger of "hell fire" if they say "thou fool" (read the whole verse to get the meaning).

    What is "hell fire" ?

    Hell fire - properly translated is - "earth fire", which means that one would stand in danger of the wrath of God period, when this "earth" shall be destroyed with fire and brimstone.

    This slang word should have been realized by those who handle the Word of God , a long time ago. But because of blindness, they fail to see, or understand, that there is no such place, or such word , as "hell" !!

    This word is nothing more than a slang word !!

    Love IN Christ - Hervey
     
  8. Jim1

    Jim1 Regular Member

    263
    +6
    Christian
    Dear Hervey,


    Hervey:

    It is obvious that you think that the "same" Greek word for "hell" and "grave" have more than one meaning. That in itself is ludicrous. … Where then, do you think "hell" is? If the soul is not left in hell, we have to ask ourselves where or what 'hell' is then! You have "never" given an explanation for "where" and "what" hell is then ! ! Where is "hell", Jim, and what is "hell, Jim?


    Jim:

    You apparently didn’t click where I said “click here,” because in Strong’s, the grave is only one definition of “hades” (86):
    In John 19:40-42, we’re told that Christ’s body was located in “a sepulchre.” However, in Matthew 12:40, we’re told that Christ descended into “the heart of the earth;” in Romans 10:6-7, we’re told that Christ descended “into the deep;” in Ephesians 4:9, we’re told that Christ descended “into the lower parts of the earth.”

    The same word that is used in Romans 10:6-7 is also used in Revelation 11:7 and 17:8:
    Thus, it appears that whereas the grave is a receptacle for dead bodies, hell is, as Strong’s says, a receptacle for disembodied souls/spirits; it is the underworld, the netherworld, and it is the bottomless pit. It is located in the depths of the earth. Prior to the fulfillment of Christ’s mission, all souls/spirits of the dead went to the depths of the earth, whether they were good or evil. This underworld apparently had different sections. Whereas Christ spent three days and nights in the heart of the earth (Matthew 12:40), He and the repentant thief went to a section called “Paradise” on the day that they died (Luke 23:43). Paradise is not the grave. This is probably where Abraham and Lazarus were in Luke 16:23. There apparently were also lower, hotter sections, such as the one where the rich man was in Luke 16:23. According to Strong’s, fallen angels are imprisoned in the deepest, hottest section of this underworld, a section called Tartarus, rendered "hell" in the KJV (2 Peter 2:4).

    Prior to the fulfillment of Christ’s mission, the souls/spirits of the dead did not leave this underworld anymore than their bodies left the grave, although 1 Samuel 28 describes an exception to this rule, when the soul/spirit of Samuel was summoned to Saul by the medium at Endor. In Acts 2:25-36, Peter quotes David, saying, “Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption [2:27].” In verse 2:31, Peter explains that this was a specific reference to the resurrection of Christ: “He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.”

    After the fulfillment of Christ’s mission, things apparently changed. Whereas Paradise had been located inside of the earth, in the underworld (Matthew 12:40 and Luke 23:43), it apparently came to be located in heaven (2 Corinthians 12:2-4). As Stephen was being martyred, first he, being “full of the Holy Ghost,” declared seeing Christ in heaven with His Father, then he said, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit,” indicating the expectation that his soul/spirit would go to be with Christ in heaven at the death of his body (Acts 7:55-60). Then of course there are Paul’s references to his departure to be with Christ (Philippians 1:23 and 2 Timothy 4:6-7) and to the Christian norm of the soul/spirit being present with the Lord when absent from the body (2 Corinthians 5:6-8).

    In Ephesians 4:8, Paul quotes David from Psalms 68:18, saying, “When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive …” Some people believe that this is an allusion to the transfer of the location of Paradise from the underworld to heaven at the fulfillment of Christ’s mission, after which only the souls/spirits of the unsaved continued to descend into the underworld, or hell, at the deaths of their bodies, where they await judgment without hope.

    The presence in heaven of the pre-resurrection, disembodied souls/spirits of those who are saved is depicted in Revelation, chapters 6-19.


    Sincerely,
    Jim
     
  9. Hervey

    Hervey Member

    481
    +0
    Hi Jim:

    You are totally avoiding what I am saying, and asking, and at the same time implying that "hell" is some "other place" for the soul to go. You are also claiming that the greek word "hades" has more than one meaning, and that is just ludicrous ! You claim what Stong's is saying, and you throw a whole bunch of verses out there that do not solve the problem of "where" and "what" is "Hell". Please answer the question Jim ! And I don't mean for you to guess, and then give me your best guess !

    There is not one place in the Word which shows the soul being "disembodied" from the body ! ! This is "all guess work" (conjecture), and there is no place for guessing (conjecture) when it comes to the Word of God ! And to be honest, I am tired of your private interpretations, and guesswork (conjecture).

    You said >

    After the fulfillment of Christ’s mission, things apparently changed. Whereas Paradise had been located inside of the earth, in the underworld (Matthew 12:40 and Luke 23:43), it apparently came to be located in heaven (2 Corinthians 12:2-4). As Stephen was being martyred, first he, being “full of the Holy Ghost,” declared seeing Christ in heaven with His Father, then he said, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit,” indicating the expectation that his soul/spirit would go to be with Christ in heaven at the death of his body (Acts 7:55-60). Then of course there are Paul’s references to his departure to be with Christ (Philippians 1:23 and 2 Timothy 4:6-7) and to the Christian norm of the soul/spirit being present with the Lord when absent from the body (2 Corinthians 5:6-8).

    In Ephesians 4:8, Paul quotes David from Psalms 68:18, saying, “When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive …” Some people believe that this is an allusion to the transfer of the location of Paradise from the underworld to heaven at the fulfillment of Christ’s mission, after which only the souls/spirits of the unsaved continued to descend into the underworld, or hell, at the deaths of their bodies, where they await judgment without hope.


    Jim: This is off the wall conjecture, and is worthless ! I am not sure where you are getting this information, but one thing I do know. You are not getting this information from the Word of God ! !

    Love IN Christ - Hervey
     
  10. camaro540

    camaro540 Regular Member

    318
    +0
    Messianic
    2Cr 5:8

    We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the
    body, and to be present with the Lord.
     
  11. Jim1

    Jim1 Regular Member

    263
    +6
    Christian
    Dear Hervey,


    Please consider the following passages:

    If the soul of Christ did not leave his body when He died, then His soul should have spent three days and nights in the sepulchre (John 19:42). Why then did Christ say that He would spend three days and nights in the heart of the earth in Matthew 12:40? And why did Paul say that Christ descended into the deep and into the lower parts of the earth in Romans 10:7 and Ephesians 4:9?

    If the soul of Christ spent three days and nights in the sepulchre with His dead body, why did Christ say to the repentant malefactor, “To day shalt thou be with me in paradise?” Is Paradise the grave? If Paradise is the grave, then wasn’t Christ stating the obvious? And of what comfort or of what remembrance would be the statement, “To day shalt thou be with me in the grave?” Wouldn’t that be just as true of the unrepentant malefactor? Wouldn’t that be just as true if Jesus were a common criminal?

    If Christ spent three days and nights in the heart of the earth (Matthew 12:40), and if He and the repentant malefactor were in Paradise together on the very day that they died (John 19:42), then wouldn’t the location of Paradise have to be in the depths, or heart, of the earth? And if Paradise was located in the depths, or heart, of the earth when Christ died (John 19:42), but it was located in the third heaven when Paul visited it (2 Corinthians 12:2-4), when did it’s location change? Did its location change when Christ ascended to heaven?


    Sincerely,
    Jim
     
  12. Hervey

    Hervey Member

    481
    +0
    Hi Jim:

    Sometimes I feel we are still going in circles, but here goes anyway >

    You asked me to look and consider these verses , and My reply is under each verse >


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Matthew 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

    "heart of the earth" is a figurative statement, and only means in the earth somewhere - the sepulchre qualifies !

    Luke 23:42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. 43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

    There are no comma's in the original Greek texts. Put the comma after the word "To day", and then read this verse ! The word "To day" is a twofold word , which can mean #1 - this day or #2 - a future day. Do a word study and you will find this to be true ! This verse is saying - "I say unto you To day" (this day) , thou shalt be with me in paradise" . The thief is going to his grave and so is Jesus Christ, and they are "not" going to paradise that very day . If you do not like where I put the comma, then the word "To day" means future, "another day". None the less, this verse , is saying, that when Jesus Chrsit comes into his kingdom, then this man who was a theif, and believed that his death was justified, will be with Jesus Christ in paradise - which is the New Earth.

    John 19:40 Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury. 41 Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid. 42 There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews' preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.

    It was 'in' the earth !

    Romans 10:6 But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) 7 Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.)

    Throw out any and all statements made with a parenthises around them. They are commentaries from the translators, and are not words, of the Word of God.

    2 Corinthians 12:2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven. 3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) 4 How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

    This was a revealing = Revelation

    Ephesians 1:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. 9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?

    Anywhere in the earth , is the lower parts of the earth. The lower parts of the earth is not a special place. However, there are devil spirits in chains , in the earth awaiting the Lake of fire. It is a type of prison , Jude 6 and II Peter 2:4. <-- This darkness and their chains puts them in the earth, which they can not escape from, and they will not be loosed until they are cast into the Lake of fire. All other devil spirits are in the earth also, but can come above the earth, as we can find many records of them doing so.

    Revelation 2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

    How does this verse fit into the topic at hand ? We are talking about the "soul", and if it goes to the grave or not with the dead body ! The paradise of God is -- The New Earth.

    Love IN Christ - Hervey
     
  13. Apologist

    Apologist 2 Tim. 2:24-26

    +10
    Christian
    Hervey,

    That doesn't fit with what Paul says in 1 Cor 5:8- We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.

    Paul is teaching that we go directly to be with God when we pass from this life. There is no soul sleep.

    God Bless
     
  14. Apologist

    Apologist 2 Tim. 2:24-26

    +10
    Christian
    Here is Strong's for the word 'To Day' used in this verse:
    4594 semeron { say’-mer-on}

    neuter (as adverb) of a presumed compound of the art. 3588 and 2250, on the (i.e. this) day (or night current or just passed); TDNT - 7:269,1024; adv

    AV - this day 22, to day 18, this + 3588 1; 41

    GK - 4958 { shvmeron }

    1) this (very) day)
    2) what has happened today
    Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.

    I think it's pretty clear that the context means, "This very day."

    God Bless
     
  15. Jim1

    Jim1 Regular Member

    263
    +6
    Christian
    Dear Hervey,


    Hervey:

    Throw out any and all statements made with a parenthises around them. They are commentaries from the translators, and are not words, of the Word of God.


    Jim:

    Parentheses are punctuation used to set off text that explains or comments on the rest of the text. These explanations or comments are coming from the original author; they are not coming from the translators.

    The KJV uses italicization to identify words or phrases of significant impact that its translators have added to the text.

    The Interlinear Bible (click here) correlates the rendered English text with the Greek source text. The page that displays Romans 10:6-7 (type “Romans 10:6-7" in the search box and press [enter] to display those verses) correlates the English text enclosed in the parentheses in these two verses with the Greek from which it is rendered.


    Hervey:

    There are no comma's in the original Greek texts [regarding Luke 23:43].


    Jim:

    Fair enough. From what I’ve just read on the web regarding Luke 23:43, there appears to me at this time to be convincing argument on both sides of this issue. Unless the spelling of the adverb “semeron” (4594, this day) can conclusively identify it with either the verb “lego” (3004, to say) in the first clause or with the verb “esomai” (2071, to be) in the second clause, it appears to me that the intended meaning of this verse cannot be determined from this verse alone with any degree of certainty.


    Hervey:

    "heart of the earth" is a figurative statement, and only means in the earth somewhere - the sepulchre qualifies ! … [The sepulchre] was 'in' the earth ! … Anywhere in the earth , is the lower parts of the earth. The lower parts of the earth is not a special place.


    Jim:

    Anytime we run into something in the Bible that doesn’t agree with our views, the easiest thing we can do is to simply ignore it by calling it figurative. In this instance, one must ignore all three passages that speak of Christ descending into the depths of the earth (Matthew 12:40, Romans 10:6-7 and Ephesians 4:8-9). As far as I know, aside from Acts 2:25-36, which we’ve already discussed, and aside from 1 Peter 3:18-20, which is controversial, these three passages are the only New Testament passages that discuss what became of Christ when He died.

    In order to conclude that Christ’s soul remained with His body in the sepulchre, we must dismiss all three of these passages as not meaning what they say despite the fact that they all confirm one another and despite the fact that they are all in agreement with the view of death espoused by Christ Himself in His parable of Lazarus and the rich man (Luke 16:19-31).

    Then we must dismiss the fact that Paul uses the same word (abussos, 12) in association with where Christ went when He died in Romans 10:6-7 that John uses in association with where the beast will have gone in Revelation 11:7 and 17:8. (As stated earilier, the words inside the parentheses in Romans 10:6-7 are just as much the words of Paul as the words outside the parentheses are.)

    That’s a lot of dismissing to do.


    Sincerely,
    Jim
     
  16. Hervey

    Hervey Member

    481
    +0
    Hi Jim:

    Under your theory, yes, that would be a lot of dismissing. But not under my understanding, because there would be nothing to dismiss.

    One thing you do not see in my explanations, is when I tell you that what is written in the "oringinals" , and what is not written in the originals, and that which is written in the translation with parenthises, shows that what is in parenthises is a man made addition to the original Word of God. The "Greek" is "Not" the originals ! The "Greek" is one of many translations, from one of the "many" manuscripts that they come from.

    Now, you more than likely are asking yourself, how can I say such a thing , when there are no originals to give us that comparison. It comes down to a simple form of looking for contraditions.

    I am not talking about apparent contradictions , which can be solved by way of understanding. I am talking about total contradictions from all of the scriptures.

    The correct way to read Romans 10:6 & 7 is without the parenthises. It would read like it should read - like this > Verse 6 & 7 ---- "Who shall ascend into heaven ? Or, who shall descend into the deep ? "

    If you read it like this, it fits perfectly within the rest of the context in Romans chapter 10, but if you add the parenthises, it then brings in contradiction into the context.

    Verse 6 tells us --- "Say "not" in thine heart" Who will ascend up into heaven and or who will descend down into the deep (abussos) --> which is the bottomless pit ---> which is the Lake of fire ----> whose names are not written in the book of life !

    That is what these two verses are saying. Don't talk about ! Say not in thine heart ! Don't think anything about it !

    The words in the parenthises, are nothing more than man made additions that "just do not fit" into the context of these verses, nor with the whole context of the Word of God !

    Jim: I know that you are an intelligent person. And I have a book that I would like to suggest you get and read. The words in the book are from a very educated person who uses his words from his higher education, to give his explanations. It is not a book for just anyone, but this book will explain many, many things, that would take me hours to explain . I believe that you would be able to read and understand his words, and this will help you understand many things about how we got our scriptures throughout history. He is a highly recognized writer, and his works are highly recognized and used in some higher education seminaries.

    His name is "Bart D. Ehrman" and the book I am suggesting is -- "The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture" --- Get back to me on this , would you Jim ?

    Love IN Christ - Hervey
     
  17. Hervey

    Hervey Member

    481
    +0
    Apologist:

    Go and read my thred titled - "To die is gain". I answer everything in that thread.

    The word "To day" always means "this day". The context of the verse or verses , lets us know as to whether or not the "this day" is now or the future.

    The theif on the cross is "not" going to be with Christ in paradise that very day ! That very day Christ went to the grave (heart of the earth) for three days and three nights ! And that is "not" where the paradise of God is ! The paradise of God is in the New Earth ! <--- Future. This verse was talking about the "future" !

    If you want a comma in this verse, put it after the word "To day" instead of in front of this word. Then there is no contradiction from the comments that were made !

    Love IN Christ - Hervey
     
  18. Jim1

    Jim1 Regular Member

    263
    +6
    Christian
    Dear Hervey,


    Hervey (previous post):

    There are no comma's in the original Greek texts. … Throw out any and all statements made with a parenthises around them. They are commentaries from the translators, and are not words, of the Word of God.


    Hervey (last post):

    One thing you do not see in my explanations, is when I tell you that what is written in the "oringinals" , and what is not written in the originals, and that which is written in the translation with parenthises, shows that what is in parenthises is a man made addition to the original Word of God.

    The "Greek" is "Not" the originals ! The "Greek" is one of many translations, from one of the "many" manuscripts that they come from.

    It comes down to a simple form of looking for contraditions.


    Jim:

    As you correctly pointed out in your previous post, Greek does not use punctuation. Whereas word position and punctuation are crucial to grammar in English, word form (how words are spelled) dictates grammar in Greek.

    If you are claiming that Romans 10:6-7 was rendered from an illegitimate source material, then (if you wish to be convincing) you need to offer a more compelling basis for such a claim other than that these verses conflict with your view.

    However, if you are claiming that parentheses in the rendered text differentiate source materials, you are mistaken. The purpose of parentheses is no different than the purpose of any other punctuation mark in the rendered text; all punctuation serves to clarify communication in the English text. A parenthesis does not signal a change in source material anymore than a comma, semicolon, colon, dash or period does.

    The claim that parentheses differentiate source materials has no more valid application to the Biblical text than it has to my own text above, where I say, “… then (if you wish to be convincing) you need to offer a more compelling basis for such a claim …” I assure you that the same person authored all of the text in this quoted clause.

    Your claim that “contradictions” are the key to determining which parts of the Biblical text are legitimate and which parts are not legitimate is no more valid than the claim that the correct interpretation of the Biblical text is the one that makes sense. Contradictions to what? Makes sense in relation to what?

    The conclusion to which either of these two axioms leads depends entirely on the preconception that serves as the point of reference (the “what” in relation to which an interpretation either makes sense or does not make sense, or the “what” to which a part of the Biblical text either is or is not a contradiction).

    To my knowledge, David Koresh believed that he was Christ. With this belief as his preconceived point of reference, according to these two axioms, he would have concluded that whatever interpretation of the Biblical text did not identify him as Christ would not have made sense and would have therefore been an incorrect interpretation, and he would have concluded that whatever part of the Biblical text did not identify him as Christ would have been a contradiction and would have therefore not been a legitimate part of God’s Word.

    Thus, these two axioms are only as valid as their preconceived point of reference is. In my opinion, just as the belief that David Koresh was Christ is not a valid point of reference, likewise the assumption that a religious view or an interpretation of the Biblical text that deviates from the literal text is correct is not a valid point of reference either.

    The Biblical text literally says what it literally says. That’s the only thing that is certain. The correctness of a less-than-literal interpretation of the Biblical text is not as certain. Therefore, the only truly valid point of reference in the application of either of these two axioms is what the Biblical text actually, literally says. Thus, the legitimacy of a given part of the Biblical text would be validly evaluated only by whether or not it contradicted what other parts of the Biblical text literally said regarding the same subject; and the correctness of an interpretation of a given Biblical text would be validly evaluated only by whether or not it made sense in relation to what the rest of the Biblical text literally said regarding the same subject.

    Now let’s take another look at Romans 10:6-7. Is there anything in these two verses that contradicts your views or your interpretations of the Biblical text? Yes. The parenthetical portion of these verses contradicts your views and your interpretations of other parts of the Biblical text that address the death of Christ. Does this contradiction matter? No. It doesn’t matter because your views and your interpretations do not constitute a valid point of reference in evaluating whether or not a portion of the Biblical text is legitimate. The only valid point of reference is what the Biblical text actually, literally says.

    Is there anything in the literal text of Romans 10:6-7 that contradicts what other portions of the Biblical text actually, literally say regarding Christ’s death? No. What Romans 10:6-7 literally says regarding Christ’s death and what the rest of the Biblical text literally says regarding Christ’s death are in complete agreement:
    The literal texts of all of these passages are in agreement. There is no contradiction. (I included John 16:23-29 to show that the view of “hell” [86, hades] that Christ himself espoused literally agrees with the rest of these passages. The same word [“hell,” rendered from 86, “hades”] is used in both John 16:23-29 and Acts 2:27-31.)

    Thus, there is no contradiction in what the Biblical text actually, literally says. Contradiction is introduced by your views and interpretations. The only thing that this contradiction proves is that your views and interpretations are in conflict with the Biblical text. That’s all it proves.

    Since I started corresponding with you, your position has always been that your interpretive thoughts supersede the actual, literal Biblical text. You should rethink that position. The Biblical text is not in conflict with itself; your views and interpretations are in conflict with the Biblical text.


    Sincerely,
    Jim
     
  19. Hervey

    Hervey Member

    481
    +0
    Hi Jim:

    You said >

    Since I started corresponding with you, your position has always been that your interpretive thoughts supersede the actual, literal Biblical text. You should rethink that position. The Biblical text is not in conflict with itself; your views and interpretations are in conflict with the Biblical text.

    Jim: You are not a good listener !

    Never have I used "my beliefs" to substanciate as to whether or not something should remain or be taken out of the translations we read !!!!

    You on the other hand go off on these tangents, and it is almost impossible to bring you back from your tangents .

    I told you plain and simple, that those words in the parenthises do not "fit" in the context of those verses "right there in this chapter of Romans 10 !!!! It is 'you' that is trying to make them fit !! When in fact , if left, they are like an ingrown toenail.

    Luke 16:23 - 29 is a parable --- Not a literal !!!! In "fact" - the parable starts at verse 19 and ends at verse 31. This parable is to convey a message to the hearer. In this parable, it does not tell us that the soul is somewhere else while the body is dead in the grave !

    A poor man dies

    A rich man dies

    The rich man is in hell (grave) in "torment" <-- The "only" place in the Word dealing with "torment", with an understanding, is the Lake of fire, called the second death. This hell (grave) is where he ended up after he found out his name was not in the book of life.

    He "sees" in this hell (grave) , where as if it was a literal grave (hell) he would not see, nor would he understand, nor would he realize, because there is no realization in the grave of this earth, that we are put into after we die. In Psalms 6:5 it plainly tells us , that there is no "remembrance" in death !! The only grave(hell) that has torment, and remembrance, is the grave - hell ---> is the Lake of fire - the second death.

    This rich man that went to hell - grave, thought his brothers would believe if one would rise from the dead and persuade them. But the parable tells us, that they did not hear Moses and the prophets (speaking about what has been written in the OT) (and the promises made in the OT), they also will not be persuaded if one rises from the dead either !

    Jim : The parable is talking about total blindness, and that there is nothing one can do , if one does not want to believe what is written ! ! You are still trying to put your right shoe on your left foot, and your left shoe , on your right foot. :D

    Love IN Christ - Hervey
     
  20. Jim1

    Jim1 Regular Member

    263
    +6
    Christian
    Dear Hervey,


    Hervey:

    I told you plain and simple, that those words in the parenthises do not "fit" in the context of those verses "right there in this chapter of Romans 10 !!!! It is 'you' that is trying to make them fit !! When in fact , if left, they are like an ingrown toenail


    Jim:

    What you’ve said here is consistent with my previous statement that your position has always been that your interpretive thoughts supersede the actual, literal Biblical text. Here you’re faced with a passage that you don’t understand, and what’s you reaction? Do you conclude that you’re just missing what Paul is saying here, and that you should study and/or pray to better understand this passage? No. You conclude that part of this passage cannot be the word of God, thus demonstrating that you have greater respect for your own thoughts than you do for the Biblical text. As long as I’ve corresponded with you, you’ve consistently subjugated the Biblical text to your will. Your conclusion regarding Romans 10:6-7 is just the latest expression of this behavior.

    In Romans 10:5, Paul appears to be quoting Leviticus 18:5. In verses 10:6-9, he appears to be blending a quotation from Deuteronomy 30:11-14 with the Gospel message. He appears to take the central thought that is applied to the law in Deuteronomy 30:11-14 and apply it to the Gospel in Romans 10:6-9.

    The central thought in Deuteronomy 30:11-14 appears to be that God has given Israel the law. They don’t have to go looking for it, as it has already been given to them; what they have to do is act on it. Paul appears to be applying this same thought to the Gospel in Romans 10:6-9. He appears to be saying that Israel does not have to go looking for their Messiah, as He has already come; what they have to do is act on what He has done for them and believe.

    In Deuteronomy 30:11-14, Moses writes, “For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.”

    In Romans 10:6-9, Paul appears to blend a quotation of this passage with the Gospel message, saying, “But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach. That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”

    Israel was looking for their Messiah to come. In Luke 7:16-23, John the Baptist sent two of his disciples to ask of Christ, “Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?” In response, Christ sent them back to John to tell him of the miracles and preaching that they witnessed as proof of His identity. In Acts 2:25-36, Peter quotes Psalms 16:9-11 and 110:1, stating that these prophecies regarding the Messiah for Whom Israel was looking, which speak of His soul not being left in hell and of His ascension into heaven, were already fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

    However, most of Israel did not believe. In Romans 9:31-33, Paul says, “they stumbled at the stumblingstone.” They stumbled in two ways: (1) They sought righteousness through the law, which doesn’t work, instead of through faith. (2) Their Messiah had come, and they didn’t believe; in unbelief, they continued to look for their Messiah to come.

    In verses 10:1-5, Paul expresses his desire to see Israel saved, and he describes their misplaced zeal. Then in verses 10:6-9, Paul appears to apply the central message of Deuteronomy 30:11-14 and the prophecies of Psalms 16:9-11 and 110:1 to Israel’s need to stop looking, saying, “Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.)” and to their need to start believing, saying, “But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach. That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”

    Israel’s Messiah had already come, had already descended into the deep (Psalm 16:10) and had already ascended into heaven (Psalm 110:1). All that was left to be done was to believe. To continue to look for their Messiah in unbelief was to in a sense bring Christ down from above and bring Him up again from the dead, as if He hadn’t descended into the deep and hadn’t ascended into heaven. The word of faith says not to do that, as there is not going to be another Messiah. The word of faith says to confess the Lord Jesus and believe that God raised Him from the dead.

    Verses 10:10-15 continue to describe Gospel doctrine. The rest of chapter 10 reiterates Israel’s failure to respond to the Gospel.

    Thus, in my opinion, what Paul says in Romans 10:6-7 fits right in with its surrounding verses, and it makes perfect sense.


    Sincerely,
    Jim
     
Loading...