No one dies and goes to heaven...

[LifeHiscost]

 

so you have to read into the verse what you want it to say

That's a good way to develop, "Whatsoever thou wilt" as a perishing foundation of life. 

 

 

  Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law

Aleister Crowley’s “law” is psychopathic when you think about it. If everybody went around doing whatever they “wilt” without any other laws to protect people that would be tantamount to letting psychopaths rule the world which seems to be exactly where we are today. 

 

…25"And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded on the rock. 26"Everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not act on them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27"The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and it fell-- and great was its fall."....Matthew 7

 

God is Love!  Jesus saves! 

[8thdaypriest]

Scuba said,

"we know Elijah was still one earth after he was transported by the Spirit of God to another location on earth and we know the dead, such as King David, are in their graves awaiting the resurrection so the vision is just what it was, a vision.

 

I'm assuming you are referring to "the letter". 

 

2 Chronicles 21:12 Then a letter came to him [King Jehoram] from Elijah the prophet saying, "Thus says the LORD God of your father David, 'Because you have not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat your father band the ways of Asa king of Judah, (NAU)

 

Elijah was translated aprox 4 years before this letter was delivered to King Jehoram of Israel.  Elijah did NOT deliver the letter Himself.  Elijah was a PROPHET, which means the LORD could have given him this message for Jehoram BEFORE he was translated.  The letter is NOT PROOF that Elijah was simply moved from one place to another. 

 

(Jehoram married to a daughter of Ahab who was a priestess of Baal.  Killed his six brothers and several others.  He left only his youngest son, and finally died of incurable disease.  The people were not even sad, and he was not buried in the tombs of the kings.)  j

[8thdaypriest]

You know as well as I do, that the word translated as "earth" is the SAME WORD that is translated as "land".

 

The ancient people of Israel did not expect they would inherit the WHOLE EARTH. 

[8thdaypriest]

Good debate Scuba.  We can agree to disagree. 

 

I've got to take some time out.  Had surgery on my neck.  Can't sit and look at computer for too long at a time. 

Thanks

[Scuba]

You know as well as I do, that the word translated as "earth" is the SAME WORD that is translated as "land".

 

The ancient people of Israel did not expect they would inherit the WHOLE EARTH. 

 

Israel only saw a little piece of the puzzle, we have more pieces.

[Scuba]

Good debate Scuba.  We can agree to disagree. 

 

I've got to take some time out.  Had surgery on my neck.  Can't sit and look at computer for too long at a time. 

Thanks

 

That stinks, I hope you feel better soon.

[Scuba]

CJB and NIV quote Jesus as saying, "Tell no man what you have seen."  They don't use the word "vision" in their translation.

 

After He was raised, Jesus simply "appeared" in the upper room.  He didn't come "up" or "down". 

He also simply "vanished from their sight". 

It seems persons with "spiritual bodies" can move between the spiritual dimension, and the physical dimension. 

 

The word used in Matthew 17:9 is the Greek word, ὅραμα, and it means; a sight divinely granted in an ecstasy or in a sleep, a vision. This is more than just something seen, it was a vision and visions should not be used to form a doctrine.

[Sojourner]

Why don't you call Christians, Jewish, when they keep the Sabbath? Why don't you call people, Watchtower Society, when they believe Jesus is Michael? So why do you call me Christadelphian? Is it because I study and do my research? Don't get mad when your proven wrong, just make the changes to be right, that's what I had to do so many times in my walk. I can't help it if our modern day Bibles have been tweaked to fit a preconceived mindset. Do your research on Isaiah 26:19 and get back to me.

 

You study and do your research with your own preconceived ideas, you constantly quote to us from the Bible in one breath yet in the next tell us that the translation of it is incorrect and cannot be trusted... 

2 Tim 3:16 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness".

 

Revelation 22:19 "If any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life and out of the holy city and from the things that are written in this book". 

 

Yet you put yourself in a position where you openly take away Scripture that does not agree with your theology. You cannot reconcile the fact that the dead were raised to life at the moment that the curtain was torn in two, so according to you it must be a false account and never happened... 

 

There is another translation of the Bible, its called "the Queen James Bible" in it the GBLTQ movement have deleted all verses of Scripture that talk about Sodomy or anything else that conflicts with their theology. I don't see a difference between what they are doing and what the Christadelphian movement are doing in taking away from Scripture because it does not agree with their theology. 

 

As per 2 Tim, you either accept Scripture in its entirety or you do not. There is no middle ground to simply pick and choose what you like based on what appears to agree with your own theological ideas. The translation of the Bible is no accident and there are no secret conspiracy theories to hide anything. Theological colleges openly challenge belief, they don't support falsehoods because they have to maintain some type of conspiracy to change the Bible.. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Scuba]

You study and do your research with your own preconceived ideas, you constantly quote to us from the Bible in one breath yet in the next tell us that the translation of it is incorrect and cannot be trusted... 

2 Tim 3:16 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness".

 

Revelation 22:19 "If any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life and out of the holy city and from the things that are written in this book". 

 

Yet you put yourself in a position where you openly take away Scripture that does not agree with your theology. You cannot reconcile the fact that the dead were raised to life at the moment that the curtain was torn in two, so according to you it must be a false account and never happened... 

 

There is another translation of the Bible, its called "the Queen James Bible" in it the GBLTQ movement have deleted all verses of Scripture that talk about Sodomy or anything else that conflicts with their theology. I don't see a difference between what they are doing and what the Christadelphian movement are doing in taking away from Scripture because it does not agree with their theology. 

 

As per 2 Tim, you either accept Scripture in its entirety or you do not. There is no middle ground to simply pick and choose what you like based on what appears to agree with your own theological ideas. The translation of the Bible is no accident and there are no secret conspiracy theories to hide anything. Theological colleges openly challenge belief, they don't support falsehoods because they have to maintain some type of conspiracy to change the Bible..

By two or three witnessespecially we confirm a truth. One verse in the NT is not enough for me to build a whole doctrine especially when our contradicts the rest of God's plan.

[Kevin H]

Just a couple of thoughts that I hope you find useful:

 

Eccl 9:5, we tend to turn to it as a "Proof Text" however while not an exhaustive study I did a very intense study of Mrs. White's use of the text. While she uses it a lot, I have not found her using it as a "proof Text." In every case that I read she uses the words for a summery but if she wants to build an argument she goes to the other texts.
 

This is wise because in the end of Eccl. there is a chiastic poem. The middle line says that all this will come under judgment. What the poem means is that the writer of Eccl intended his book to be a book of warning of false ideas that are out there. It is a book telling us what not to believe. Eccl 9:5 is the idea that there is absolutely no afterlife, that this life is all there is. And the author is warning us that this is a heresy to avoid. Thus while the words can be used in a literary sense out of context as a summery statement. It is not the best proof text.

 

[Kevin H]

The 24 elders:

 

We find the throne of God, surrounded by the 24 elders and the four living beasts.
 

If we study out the beasts they were the four sides of the Israelites going through the wilderness on their way to the promised land. (note: The stones on the high priests breastplate was not how they are usually pictured as rows, but they were around an empty area I the middle. It represented the children of Israel in the exodus when they camped around the sanctuary).

 

We are currently God's people traveling in our exodus to heaven. So we are the four living beasts. The throne communicates with us through the 24 elders.

 

The trial of Jesus had 24 Sadducee elders who gave a false witness of Jesus. Now John sees 24 elders who give the truth about Jesus. They are the testimony of the 12 tribes and the 12 apostles, or the Old and New Testament.

 

[8thdaypriest]

You want to use the “weight” of Scripture - right?  

The one verse, “No one has ascended” (John 3:13), has to be weighed against all the other verses that speak of Enoch, Elijah, and Moses.  For me the “weight” tilts heavily towards these specific men being granted “life” - SO THAT - they could later be sent to strengthen Jesus before His suffering.  

The other passages that tell of the heavenly chariot ride for Elijah, and the argument over the corpse of Moses - were they simply inserted to explain how these men could appear to Jesus on the Mount ?  I don’t believe so.  

In 2 Kings 2:11, Elijah “went up” “into heaven”.  “Went up” is the definition of ascended.  So Elijah ascended into heaven.  Your argument is that it was not THE heaven of heavens.  It was only into the atmosphere - to be deposited at another earthly location.  

The simple interpretation of John 3:13, is that no one then living on the earth, had ever ascended to heaven AND RETURNED to tell of it.  

If you want to compare verses, Jesus later said of Himself, “I have not yet ascended to My Father” (Jn 20:17).  But THAT would negate His other statement in John 3:13, that no one has ascended EXCEPT the Son of Man.  

    Most understand Jesus statement in John 3:13, to refer to His pre-incarnate existence with the Father, in Heaven, (at a specific location) but I think there may be another type of “ascended” - a spiritual ascending into the heart and mind of the Father.  “No one has seen (fully understood) God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him” (John 1:18 NAU).  So the verse may have a double meaning.
 

[8thdaypriest]

I did a little searching thru my Bible program on the word translated in the KJV as "vision".

 

In Acts 7:31, the same word is translated as "the sight".  Stephen is describing the experience of Moses, who "saw" the burning bush. 

 

"When Moses saw it, he marveled at the sight; and as he drew near to observe, the voice of the Lord came to him" (Act 7:31 NKJ).

 

So I guess we have to believe that Moses did NOT actually "see" the burning bush.  He only "saw" it in a "vision".

Now that's a new thought. 

 

The Greek word ὅραμα ("horama" - Strong's #3705) can also mean "that which is seen" .
as opposed to a figment of the imagination.

 

 It really DOES NOT MATTER whether it was a "vision" or not.  The point is that Jesus was dialoging with DEAD MEN (men you believe were dead) - something expressly FORBIDDEN in the Torah.  The Torah did not say, "Unless it's in a vision.  Then it's OK."  

 

Every version says that Moses and Elijah "appeared to" the 3 disciples also.  Peter's response was:  "Lord, it is good for us to be here; if You wish, I will make three tabernacles here, one for You, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah." (Mat 17:4 NAU).  So all 3 disciples saw the SAME VISION.  And why would Peter offer to build 3 physical Tabernacles, if he believed it was only a "vision" - and not something REAL?

 

I don't believe there is another recorded incidence of 3 men simultaneously experiencing the SAME VSISION, where a 4th man is actually taking part IN the vision. 

 

Respectfully,

Rachel Cory

Prophecy Viewpoint
 

[8thdaypriest]

2 Tim 3:16 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness".

 

The word "is" - is in italics, meaning it is an added word - added by the translators. 

 

The verse actually says, "All Scripture given by inspiration of God" is profitable for doctrine.  Once words were added into the Scriptures by translators, the waters begin to get muddy. 

 

EVERY translation IS AN INTERPRETATION.  

 

The translators made very effort to convey the true meaning of each passage, but even the translators had differences among themselves.

 

The Septuagint Greek translation, differs in some places from the ancient Hebrew.  Just consider how they translated the Hebrew "sheol" (the abode of the dead) to the Greek "hades" (the hot place under the earth in Greek mythology, where only the bad people go).  THAT has caused considerable confusion!

 

And considering the pressure exerted by Constantine and later Catholic ruling powers on New Testament translators, it is no wonder that a few additions and omissions crept in. 

Catholicism absolutely controlled almost all of the "church" for 1000 years. 

 

That is why I try to look at a passage in several different translations.  And I usually take the ones based upon the oldest existing manuscripts. 

My prayer is that even older/earlier manuscripts will one day be found, and they will shed more light on some of these passages. 

 

Look at what happened after the Dead Sea Scrolls were found only 66 years ago. 

[Gregory Matthews]

Rachel has overall posted some good comments which are of value.

 

Just making some minor comments on post # 17.

 

There are three (3) Important words that should be understood in this study: Apocrypha, Deuterocanonical & Pseudepigrapha.

 

Deuterocanonical is a word that is more often used by Catholics to refer to what Protestants often call the Apocrypha.

 

Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha  in the beginning had some specific meanings.  With the passage of time they have taken on a multiplicity of common usage meanings and are sometimes used to represent the same things.

 

Apocrypha has  often been used to represent the writings found in Bibles of Catholic background and often located between the Old Testament and the New Testament.  But, even in these cases, parts of these writings may be integrated directly into OT books such as the Book of Daniel.

 

As the meanings of these words have developed in common usage, there are multiple dozens of writings that may be described as part of the Apocrypha and/or Pseudepigrapha.

 

In post # !7, Rachel is using the more classical meanings, which is what I prefer to do.  But, I have had to come to the place where I have to recognize how in common usage, these words have expanded in meaning beyond how I like to use them.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

one thing bothers me about the subject of this thread, "No one dies and goes to heaven" -- is it really of salvational importance? (maybe it is - I don't know)..

 

the reason I ask is because so many people draw comfort from the idea that their deceased relatives are "watching over" them from heaven, and the idea that they are in a "better place"...

 

is it really wrong, i.e., sinful, for those people to believe something that gives them so much comfort?  Does it really behoove Adventists to take away that bit of comfort from someone?  

[LifeHiscost]

 

is it really wrong, i.e., sinful,

I'm not sure about sinful but I am satisfied that believing one can, as occasion demands, put stock in our dear departed ones not really dying but just transitioning to a different form of life, must then accept Satan's lie and deny what our Father in heaven declared.

 

…16The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."....Gen 2

 

 

1Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

2The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’ ”

4“You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5“For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”....Gen 3

 

God is Love!  Jesus saves! 

[Sojourner]

Hi Scuba, I just wanted to apologise for sounding flippant with some of my points, i did not mean to be rude, sometimes when I type stuff does not come out how I might say it to someone face to face and I don't want to come across as being rude or arrogant, because that is not my intention my friend! 

[Scuba]

Hi Scuba, I just wanted to apologise for sounding flippant with some of my points, i did not mean to be rude, sometimes when I type stuff does not come out how I might say it to someone face to face and I don't want to come across as being rude or arrogant, because that is not my intention my friend! 

 

It seems to me that you are always mad because if you weren't you'd look like this...

[Scuba]

You study and do your research with your own preconceived ideas, you constantly quote to us from the Bible in one breath yet in the next tell us that the translation of it is incorrect and cannot be trusted... 

2 Tim 3:16 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness".

 

The only Scriptures that were inspired were the original writings in their original language. All others are subject to tweaking to fit whatever doctrinal position was being pushed by it's translators. A good example are the use of commas and capital letters.

 

The important thing that I do when trying to form doctrines is to interpret the Bible with God's plan in mind. If what I say contradicts God's plan I go back to the drawing board. Another important thing to keep in mind is to not use verses to interpret the Bible, but rather, use the Bible to interpret the verses.

 

God's plan is to make all things new including the heaven and earth and to have a people who keep His commandments that He can call His own and they can call Him theirs.

 

There are many doctrines out there that contradict God's plan, as well as, the Scriptures. For example, if someone says man has an immortal soul that teaching contradicts God's plan, as well as, the Scriptures and we can see that most of the world believes man has an immortal soul so we can't use what the majority believe as a test for truth. If we find Bible verses that teach this we have to research the verses to find out if they have been tweaked. 

[8thdaypriest]

one thing bothers me about the subject of this thread, "No one dies and goes to heaven" -- is it really of salvational importance? (maybe it is - I don't know)..

 

the reason I ask is because so many people draw comfort from the idea that their deceased relatives are "watching over" them from heaven, and the idea that they are in a "better place"...

 

is it really wrong, i.e., sinful, for those people to believe something that gives them so much comfort?  Does it really behoove Adventists to take away that bit of comfort from someone?  

In a youth class one Sabbath, I asked them what they would want to happen when they die.  Would they want to go straight to Heaven?  Would they want to reincarnate?  Would they want to sleep?  Would they want their essence to join the cloud of "collective consciousness"? 

 

Well - they debated the various choices for the 40 minutes.  They liked the idea of reincarnation, until I told them that they would have to pay for any sins in this life by coming back as something lower - like a pig, or a cripple.  They talked about going to Heaven, and then pestering the angels for any word of their loved ones left behind.  Finally they decided that the best option would be sleep.  So that it would seem only a moment, and it would all be over, and they WOULD be with Jesus. 

 

They liked the idea of sleep, because they did NOT LIKE the idea of someone they loved suffering continuing conscious torment in a place called "HELL".

 

The LORD says "love me with all your heart, soul, and mind."  I don't think I could "love" unreservedly, an all powerful Being that I thought capable of torturing me for 5 minutes - much less for eternity.  That one is a crazy-maker! 

 

My mother always had a terrible time sleeping.  She LONGED for a good nap.  I think of her - finally having that GREAT NAP that she always wanted.