PDA

View Full Version : What kind of afterlife do you belive in?



Zorgblar
Sep 22nd 2007, 09:53 AM
I have been reading through various posts on here and the two main ideas I keep getting are this:
Soul Sleep:when you die you don't have a spirit that flys into heaven or hell,your spirit is a life force there no such thing as a conscious afterlife heaven and hell come later and the only way for you to resurrected is for god to put this life force into a new body that he will make just for you.
Immortal Spirit:When you die you DO have a spirit that flys into heaven or hell,judgment comes right after death.
Which one of these views do you most agree with?I agree mostly with the second one but i want to see what ever body else thinks.:D

enarchay
Sep 22nd 2007, 10:05 AM
Soul Sleep:when you die you don't have a spirit that flys into heaven or hell,your spirit is a life force there no such thing as a conscious afterlife heaven and hell come later and the only way for you to resurrected is for god to put this life force into a new body that he will make just for you.I advocate what many label "soul sleep," but I've explained why I think that phrase is a poor title to describe what I believe. Those who advocate a position similiar to mine, like Steven3, do in fact believe the ruach/pneuma, the "breath" or "spirit," returns to God who gave it. But we take a stance similar to N.T. Wright and do not believe the spirit is conscious; instead, the "life force," as you called it, returns to God who gave it, the body to the dust, and the soul, unable to survive without the connection of the breath of life and the dust of the Earth, dies with the body and enters the grave until resurrection.



Immortal Spirit:When you die you DO have a spirit that flys into heaven or hell,judgment comes right after death. There is a distinction between "spirit" and "soul" in Scripture. Most who advocate one goes to Heaven or Hell at death do not refer to the part of man that goes there as a "spirit," but "soul." The immortality of the "soul" seems to be a popular doctrine. It's all very Platonic. However, I have argued, as well as N.T. Wright, that from a Biblical perspective, neither the spirit or soul survives death, and afterlife or no afterlife, it is unwise to theorize from a modern perspective what "part" of man survives death. If we enter God's presence after death, it will not be our "soul" or our "spirit." Frankly, I have no idea what part of us would enter God's presence after death, but all things are possible with God; how exactly it would happen is not really important.


Which one of these views do you most agree with?I agree mostly with the second one but i want to see what ever body else thinks.:DI believe when you die you are fully dead until resurrection.

If there is some sort of afterlife (which I really doubt there is), I would argue it is conditional and for the believer only. It would be intermediate and not the final hope. The final hope would continue to be bodily resurrection. The unbelievers would go to the same place everyone has always gone to before Jesus, sheol, which certainly is not the place of torment "hell" describes to the modern believer of today.

Serve-N-Protect
Sep 22nd 2007, 10:10 AM
Soul sleep (if you will) was for those who lived B.C., and immortal spirit is for those A.D. like us.

We will be conscious and waiting to reunite with a perfect body.

Serve-N-Protect
Sep 22nd 2007, 10:18 AM
I think of Samuel who was awoken by Saul through the Seuthsayer.

enarchay
Sep 22nd 2007, 10:18 AM
Soul sleep (if you will) was for those who lived B.C., and immortal spirit is for those A.D. like us.

Like I said, it's unwise to theorize that we obtain an "immortal spirit" by coming to Jesus. N.T. Wright explains, "Where we find a glimmer of hope like this [for an afterlife in God's presence], it is based not on anything in the human make-up (e.g. an 'immortal soul'), but on YHWH and him alone" (The Ressurection of the Son of God, Wright 107).

Despite what little glimmers of hope (if that's what they may be) Wright sees in the Old Covenant writings, even after Jesus' resurrection, Paul acknowledges that hades has power even over the believer, and will be defeated only through resurrection (1Co 15:52-55).

Peter cites David's declaration that his soul would not be left in hades and says David was actually speaking of Jesus (Act 2:27, 31) and that David remained dead and buried (Act 2:29).

Hades had hold over Jesus in death until his resurrection in the same way it has hold over us in death until our resurrection.

Serve-N-Protect
Sep 22nd 2007, 10:29 AM
Like I said, it's unwise to theorize that we obtain an "immortal spirit" by coming to Jesus.I never said that. Coming to Jesus or not, we are born with an immortal soul.



Even after Jesus' resurrection, Paul acknowledges that hades has power even over the believer, and will be defeated only through resurrection (1Co 15:52-55).Yes. THE RESURECTION OF JESUS defeats death and the power of Hades, not our resurrection.

Samuel was awoken by Saul (B.C.). Jesus raised a little girl from the dead (Body and all A.D.)

Heaven opened for the sleeping upon Jesus' resurrection. We are now going to be resurrected per this event.

All people for all time are awoke now and conscious in heaven. Upon the second coming we will receive new bodies of light. From Adam on.

enarchay
Sep 22nd 2007, 10:39 AM
I never said that. Coming to Jesus or not, we are born with an immortal soul.

There is no evidence whatsoever of this. Adam was kicked out of the garden of Eden and denied immortality. If we do gain some form of immortality, it is by coming to Jesus and by coming to Jesus only. We certainly are not "born with an immortal soul." That's my opinion, anyway.


Yes. THE RESURECTION OF JESUS defeats death and the power of Hades, not our resurrection.

Jesus' resurrection defeated the power of death and hades over himself and is a type of what is to come for us. In the same way hades had power over Jesus when he died, so also does it have power over us when we die; however, so also was hades defeated when Christ was resurrected, so also will hades be defeated when we are resurrected. Hades is not totally defeated until after resurrection and the destruction of death and hades; this is why Paul sees the prophecy about the sting of hades as future (cf. 1Co 15:26).


Jesus raised a little girl from the dead (Body and all A.D.)

So? She died again later.



All people for all time are awoke now and conscious in heaven.

Peter didn't seem to think so. He was quite crude when he said Jesus, not David, defeated hades, whereas the former remained both dead and buried.

Serve-N-Protect
Sep 22nd 2007, 11:15 AM
This is way to intellectual for me. I'm having a hard enough time dealing with the issues of my day and daily life in Christ.

So I respectfully bow out of the conversation.

May God bless you all.

Debra R
Sep 22nd 2007, 01:15 PM
I have been reading through various posts on here and the two main ideas I keep getting are this:
Soul Sleep:when you die you don't have a spirit that flys into heaven or hell,your spirit is a life force there no such thing as a conscious afterlife heaven and hell come later and the only way for you to resurrected is for god to put this life force into a new body that he will make just for you.
Immortal Spirit:When you die you DO have a spirit that flys into heaven or hell,judgment comes right after death.
Which one of these views do you most agree with?I agree mostly with the second one but i want to see what ever body else thinks.:D

:) Hi Zorgblar,
I believe the Scriptures to say that when we are absent from the body that we are present with our Lord Jesus.

Philippians 1:23 But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better;

2 Corinthians 5:8 we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.

John 12:26 "If anyone serves Me, he must follow Me; and where I am, there My servant will be also; if anyone serves Me, the Father will honor him.

Acts 7:55 But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God;

56 and he said, "Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God."

57 But they cried out with a loud voice, and covered their ears and rushed at him with one impulse.

58 When they had driven him out of the city, they began stoning him; and the witnesses laid aside their robes at the feet of a young man named Saul.

59 They went on stoning Stephen as he called on the Lord and said, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!"

60 Then falling on his knees, he cried out with a loud voice, "Lord, do not hold this sin against them!" Having said this, he fell asleep.


Blessings :)

Paul_born_again
Sep 22nd 2007, 01:54 PM
I personally don't believe in a Soul sleep.

Along with some of the other verses that have already been posted that I feel back this up, I would like to add:

Revelation 6:9-11 - When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. They called out in a loud voice, "How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?" Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and brothers who were to be killed as they had been was completed.

Doesn't sound to me like they are sleeping :hmm:

RogerW
Sep 22nd 2007, 03:03 PM
I have been reading through various posts on here and the two main ideas I keep getting are this:
Soul Sleep:when you die you don't have a spirit that flys into heaven or hell,your spirit is a life force there no such thing as a conscious afterlife heaven and hell come later and the only way for you to resurrected is for god to put this life force into a new body that he will make just for you.
Immortal Spirit:When you die you DO have a spirit that flys into heaven or hell,judgment comes right after death.
Which one of these views do you most agree with?I agree mostly with the second one but i want to see what ever body else thinks.:D

Greetings Zorblar,

This is a good discussion because it is obvious through the various posting of this subject much confusion abounds.

I wonder if discovering the difference between sheol, hades (hell), gehenna, and the lake of fire might be helpful? Translators haven't been consistent in translating these, and have caused confusion.

Every human being upon physical death goes bodily into hell (sheol, hades). Hell, sheol, hades simply means the grave. There is no eternal torment or suffering in hell. Hell is that place where the physical body remains until the fullness of time. Eternal torment comes in the fullness of time when unbelievers are judged and cast into the lake of fire.

Christ sometimes likens hell (grave) to the lake of fire, and speaks of great suffering, and agony to those who go there. When He does this He is making a distinction between those who go bodily to the grave after being born again, and those who go there in unbelief. For the one going to hell (the grave; sheol, hades) in unbelief, it is the same as being cast into the lake of fire because once we die in unbelief all hope of reigning eternally with the Lord is lost forever, and it is certain that the unbeliever will be cast into the eternal flames in the fullness of time, on Judgment Day.

The one who dies in unbelief has never been made spiritually alive in Christ. He/she has no surviving spirit from God that would go to be with the Lord at the moment of physical death. Without spiritual life there is nothing of the unbeliever that survives physical death, so his/her body returns to the dust from whence it came, and remains until the fullness of time, when Christ resurrects the body once more to stand before the Judgment Throne of God.

The fate awaiting those who die in Christ is far different. Believers have been resurrected to spiritual life already, so we (believers) have already been raised to be with the Lord even in physical life. It is true that our physical bodies, just like that of unbelievers goes into hell (the grave) at death, and our bodies return to the dust from whence it came, but our living spirit never dies. It is the new, living spirit we received at the moment we were born again, and this living spirit is empowered by the Holy Spirit, Who is giving it life. That is why Paul says to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.

Do we know what a living spirit is like, or how this living spirit in the presence of the Lord manifests itself? Not really! But, we have God's eternal promise that when we believe we have eternal, everlasting, never ending life, and since every human being dies in the body the only conclusion we can draw from this promise is that Christ has already made His own alive through His Spirit, and therefore brothers and sisters in Christ, we will never truly die. For even in death we are alive spiritually and reigning with Him always.

Many Blessings,
RW

Debra R
Sep 22nd 2007, 03:31 PM
:) I am also reminded of the appearance of Moses and Elijah at the transfiguration.

(NASB) Luke 9:28 Some eight days after these sayings, He took along Peter and John and James, and went up on the mountain to pray.

29 And while He was praying, the appearance of His face became different, and His clothing became white and gleaming.

30 And behold, two men were talking with Him; and they were Moses and Elijah,

31 who, appearing in glory, were speaking of His departure which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem.

32 Now Peter and his companions had been overcome with sleep; but when they were fully awake, they saw His glory and the two men standing with Him.

Blessings :)

Steven3
Sep 23rd 2007, 09:02 AM
Hi Paul born again :)

I personally don't believe in a Soul sleep.Souls "die", men "sleep".
Along with some of the other verses that have already been posted that I feel back this up, I would like to add:

Revelation 6:9-11 - When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. They called out in a loud voice, "How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?" Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait (Greek = rest) a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and brothers who were to be killed as they had been was completed.

Doesn't sound to me like they are sleeping :hmm: It's only a symbolic vision, there aren't really souls under an altar in heaven.

Besides in Greek, the verb for "rest (http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G373&Version=kjv) a little longer" is also used for sleeping the sleep of the dead. See Rev14:13. And remember Moses was told to "rest" with his fathers, when he was buried. Which is why Jesus says that the "vision" of Moses and Elijah was an orama - it wasn't real.
God bless
Steven

Naphal
Sep 23rd 2007, 09:56 AM
Besides in Greek, the verb for "rest (http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G373&Version=kjv) a little longer" is also used for sleeping the sleep of the dead. See Rev14:13. And remember Moses was told to "rest" with his fathers, when he was buried. Which is why Jesus says that the "vision" of Moses and Elijah was an orama - it wasn't real.
God bless
Steven

There is nothing in the definition that suggests an "orama" isn't real.

3705
3705 horama {hor'-am-ah}

from 3708; TDNT - 5:371,706; n n

AV - vision 11, sight 1; 12

1) that which is seen, spectacle
2) a sight divinely granted in an ecstasy or in a sleep, a vision



It certainly was real.


Acts 7:30 And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sina an angel of the Lord in a flame of fire in a bush.
Acts 7:31 When Moses saw it, he wondered at the sight: and as he drew near to behold it, the voice of the Lord came unto him,

Was this real?


Acts 9:10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.
Acts 9:11 And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth,
Acts 9:12 And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight.
Acts 9:13 Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:
Acts 9:14 And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.
Acts 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
Acts 9:16 For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.
Acts 9:17 And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.

Certainly this vision was real, and prophetic.

There are many examples but the point is that when God gives a vision, it is quite real.

Certainly Moses and Elijah were really there and were real and Christ did speak with them, and they him.

enarchay
Sep 23rd 2007, 10:50 AM
Altar + soul = blood on an altar; a poetic image of sacrifice.

“And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar [thusiasteriou, a place of sacrifice] the souls [psychas] of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held” (Rev 6:9).

“But flesh with the life [psyches, LXX] thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat” (Gen 9:4).

“And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground” (Gen 4:10).

Vision = not always reality, like a dream.

“And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision [horama] to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead” (Mat 17:9).

“And he went out, and followed him; and wist not that it was true which was done by the angel; but thought he saw a vision [horama]” (Act 12:9).

Naphal
Sep 23rd 2007, 10:57 AM
“And he went out, and followed him; and wist not that it was true which was done by the angel; but thought he saw a vision [horama]” (Act 12:9).

Why underline that? God isn't saying the vision wasn't true. Peter simply wasn't sure if it was or not but indeed it was true.

Also, there is a huge difference between something not being true and not being real.

We know from context that it was real and true.

enarchay
Sep 23rd 2007, 11:00 AM
Why underline that? God isn't saying the vision wasn't true. Peter simply wasn't sure if it was or not but indeed it was true.

To show you how Peter understood "vision:" something that he saw but was not real.

Naphal
Sep 23rd 2007, 11:05 AM
To show you how Peter understood "vision:" something that he saw but was not real.

Except that's not what God says about the event. You are taking Peter initial thoughts and wrongly applying them. Peter was wrong. It was all real and true unless you deny what that passage of scripture says...

Do you deny the angel came and the chains came off and Peter was freed?


Acts 12:11 And when Peter was come to himself, he said, Now I know of a surety, that the Lord hath sent his angel, and hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews.

Perhaps you should re-read this verse. When Peter "was come to himself" which means when he was thinking more clearly he knew it was true.

Your position is weak to use something Peter at first thought but later knows was true all along.

Sadders
Sep 23rd 2007, 11:06 AM
Long Sleep In After Life Until Judgement Day!

enarchay
Sep 23rd 2007, 11:07 AM
Except that's not what God says about the event. You are taking Peter initial thoughts and wrongly applying them. Peter was wrong. It was all real and true unless you deny what that passage of scripture says...

You are misunderstanding me. I'm not saying what Peter saw was a vision or that it was not real; I am saying Peter thought it was a vision and not real. The whole point was to show you one definition of "vision."


Do you deny the angel came and the chains came off and Peter was freed?

No. But Peter wasn't so sure.

Naphal
Sep 23rd 2007, 11:09 AM
You are misunderstanding me. I'm not saying what Peter saw was a vision or that it was not real; I am saying Peter thought it was a vision and not real. The whole point was to show you one definition of "vision."


I never said no vision is false. My position is that none from God are false. Thus, the vision where Moses and Elijah were seen was real.

Debra R
Sep 23rd 2007, 01:34 PM
Which is why Jesus says that the "vision" of Moses and Elijah was an orama - it wasn't real.
God bless
Steven

Hi Steven3,
may I ask where Jesus says this?

Here is the account in Mark, Matthew and Luke.........


New American Standard Bible

Mark 9:2 Six days later, Jesus took with Him Peter and James and John, and brought them up on a high mountain by themselves. And He was transfigured before them;

3 and His garments became radiant and exceedingly white, as no launderer on earth can whiten them.

4 Elijah appeared to them along with Moses; and they were talking with Jesus.

5 Peter said to Jesus, "Rabbi, it is good for us to be here; let us make three tabernacles, one for You, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah."

6 For he did not know what to answer; for they became terrified.

7 Then a cloud formed, overshadowing them, and a voice came out of the cloud, "This is My beloved Son, listen to Him!"

8 All at once they looked around and saw no one with them anymore, except Jesus alone.


Matthew 17:1 Six days later Jesus took with Him Peter and James and John his brother, and led them up on a high mountain by themselves.

2 And He was transfigured before them; and His face shone like the sun, and His garments became as white as light.

3 And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with Him.

4 Peter said to Jesus, "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."

5 While he was still speaking, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and behold, a voice out of the cloud said, "This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased; listen to Him!"

6 When the disciples heard this, they fell face down to the ground and were terrified.

7 And Jesus came to them and touched them and said, "Get up, and do not be afraid."

8 And lifting up their eyes, they saw no one except Jesus Himself alone.


Luke 9:28 Some eight days after these sayings, He took along Peter and John and James, and went up on the mountain to pray.

29 And while He was praying, the appearance of His face became different, and His clothing became white and gleaming.

30 And behold, two men were talking with Him; and they were Moses and Elijah,

31 who, appearing in glory, were speaking of His departure which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem.

32 Now Peter and his companions had been overcome with sleep; but when they were fully awake, they saw His glory and the two men standing with Him.


Blessings :)

Steven3
Sep 23rd 2007, 02:17 PM
Hi Debra :)
Hi Steven3,
may I ask where Jesus says this? Matt 17:9, orama always means "a vision", not just "what you have seen". As Enarchay discusses above, Peter gets confused the other way around in Act 12:9 when the angel opened the door:

"Peter did not know that it was real (http://cf.blb.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=227&version=KJV), but thought he saw a vision (http://cf.blb.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?strongs=3705) "

Same word as Matt 17:9. See also Martin Luther on the soul (http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/8936/SOULREFM.HTM).
God bless
Steven

Steven3
Sep 23rd 2007, 02:20 PM
Hi Naphal
I never said no vision is false. My position is that none from God are false. Thus, the vision where Moses and Elijah were seen was real.It was a real vision, but they weren't really there at that time ;). Hebrews 11 says Moses is "dead" and "did not receive what was promised", and "cannot" without us. John 3:13 rules out Elijah being in heaven. So it can only be "real" if it is a vision of the future after Moses and Elijah have been resurrected.
God bless
Steven

Debra R
Sep 23rd 2007, 03:16 PM
Originally Posted by Debra R http://bibleforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?p=1390491#post1390491)
Hi Steven3,
may I ask where Jesus says this?



Hi Debra :)Matt 17:9, orama always means "a vision", not just "what you have seen". As Enarchay discusses above, Peter gets confused the other way around in Act 12:9 when the angel opened the door:

"Peter did not know that it was real (http://cf.blb.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=227&version=KJV), but thought he saw a vision (http://cf.blb.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?strongs=3705) "

Same word as Matt 17:9. See also Martin Luther on the soul (http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/8936/SOULREFM.HTM).
God bless
Steven

Hi Steven, I guess I should have looked at the next verse in Matthew. :D

Anyway I looked this up.....

o¸rama
1. that which is seen, spectacle
2. a sight divinely granted in an ecstasy or in a sleep, a vision

oºra/w
1. to see with the eyes
2. to see with the mind, to perceive, know
3. to see, i.e. become acquainted with by experience, to experience
4. to see, to look to
1. to take heed, beware
2. to care for, pay heed to
5. I was seen, showed myself, appeared

Even if it was a vision it was still real. God allowed them to see this.

Blessings :)

Steven3
Sep 23rd 2007, 03:42 PM
Hi Debra

Even if it was a vision it was still real. It was a real vision of something not really there then :) Do you know of any other "visions" in the Bible which are straightforward seeing of real events?

In the NT the only vision that later turned out to be "real" was Paul seeing Ananias coming, but it was a vision of the future. The other "visions" are all events beyond the realm of normal physical reality.

Besides - how did Peter, James and John know who the two men Jesus was talking to were? This is in the days before photos. ;)

If Christ had meant "that which you have seen", which says nothing about whether it was a vision or not, he could have done so - in fact he did in Mark and Luke. But Matthew has "vision". What you consulted, the Strongs appendix, is not a real dictionary, it just tells you how the word is used in the KJV, right or wrong. ORAMA very rarely means a normal "sight" in classical Greek, only if it is something very spectacular. In Jewish Greek, in the Septuagint, ORAMA means a supernatural vision. There are about 60 visions in the OT, most of them translated with the same Greek word ORAMA in the Greek OT, but is a single one of them "real"?

The bottom line is, whatever they "saw" on the mountain, Jesus said "no one has gone up into heaven" (John 3:13), so we know that Elijah and Moses are not in heaven. How could they be? They were mortal. Ps 6:5
God bless
Steven

Debra R
Sep 23rd 2007, 05:23 PM
Hi Debra
It was a real vision of something not really there then :) Do you know of any other "visions" in the Bible which are straightforward seeing of real events?


I will have to research that. :)



In the NT the only vision that later turned out to be "real" was Paul seeing Ananias coming, but it was a vision of the future. The other "visions" are all events beyond the realm of normal physical reality.




Besides - how did Peter, James and John know who the two men Jesus was talking to were? This is in the days before photos. ;)


Hmmm, I imagine they heard Jesus call them by name. There had to be some way they knew or else it would not have been recorded.



If Christ had meant "that which you have seen", which says nothing about whether it was a vision or not, he could have done so - in fact he did in Mark and Luke. But Matthew has "vision". What you consulted, the Strongs appendix, is not a real dictionary, it just tells you how the word is used in the KJV, right or wrong. ORAMA very rarely means a normal "sight" in classical Greek, only if it is something very spectacular. In Jewish Greek, in the Septuagint, ORAMA means a supernatural vision. There are about 60 visions in the OT, most of them translated with the same Greek word ORAMA in the Greek OT, but is a single one of them "real"?




The bottom line is, whatever they "saw" on the mountain, Jesus said "no one has gone up into heaven" (John 3:13), so we know that Elijah and Moses are not in heaven. How could they be? They were mortal. Ps 6:5
God bless
Steven


I can't explain John 3:13. I did look up a few commentaries and thought I would share them. :)

Coffman commentaries John 3
Verse 13
And no one hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended out of heaven, even the Son of man who is in heaven.
Here Jesus claimed his unique office as God's messenger who descended to man out of heaven, and yet, in a sense, who was still in heaven. This verse, admittedly difficult, has led to the view that heaven is a state rather than a place, and that Jesus could say the Son of man was in heaven even while he was on earth. Another view supported by this is that during the personal ministry of Christ he continued in the full possession of his heavenly attributes. Still another concept that finds support is the doctrine of the ubiquitousness of Jesus. Dogmatism is out of order here, due to the textual questions regarding this verse. Westcott wrote that these words were "omitted by many very ancient authorities, and appear to be an early gloss bringing out the right contrast between the ascent of a man to heaven and the abiding of the Son of man in heaven." F15 In the International Version, this place reads: "No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven, the Son of man."

The New John Gill Exposition
John 3:13
And no man hath ascended into heaven…
Though Enoch and Elias had, yet not by their own power, nor in the sense our Lord designs; whose meaning is, that no man had, or could go up to heaven, to bring from thence the knowledge of divine and heavenly things; in which sense the phrase is used in (Deuteronomy 30:12) (Romans 10:6) , and which may be illustrated by (John 1:18) ; wherefore inasmuch as Nicodemus had acknowledged Christ to he a teacher come from God, our Lord, would have him know, that he was the only teacher of heavenly things, as being the only person that had been in heaven, and in the bosom of the Father; and therefore, if he, and the rest of the Jews, did not receive instructions from him, they must for ever remain ignorant; for there never had been, nor was, nor could be, any mere man that could go up to heaven, and learn the mysteries of God, and of the kingdom of heaven, and return and instruct men in them:

but he that came down from heaven;
meaning himself, who is the Lord from heaven, and came from thence to do the will of God by preaching the Gospel, working miracles, obeying the law, and suffering death in the room of his people, and thereby obtaining eternal redemption for them. Not that he brought down from heaven with him, either the whole of his human nature, or a part of it; either an human soul, or an human body; nor did he descend locally, by change of place, he being God omnipresent, infinite and immense, but by assumption of the human nature into union with his divine person:

[even] the son of man which is in heaven;
at the same time he was then on earth: not that he was in heaven in his human nature, and as he was the son of man; but in his divine nature, as he was the Son of God; see (John 1:18) ; though this is predicated of his person, as denominated from the human nature, which was proper to him only in his divine nature; for such is omnipresence, or to be in heaven and earth at the same time: just as on the other hand God is said to purchase the church with his blood, and the Lord of glory is said to be crucified, (Acts 20:28) (1 Corinthians 2:8) , where those things are spoken of Christ, as denominated from his divine nature, which were proper only to his human nature; and is what divines call a communication of idioms or properties; and which will serve as a key to open all such passages of Scripture: and now as a proof of our Lord's having been in heaven, and of his being a teacher come from God, and such an one as never was, or can be, he opens and explains a type respecting himself, in the following verse.

Barnes' Notes on the New Testament
Verse 13. And no man hath ascended into heaven. No man, therefore, is qualified to speak of heavenly things, John 3:12. To speak of those things requires intimate acquaintance with them--demands that we have seen them; and as no one has ascended into heaven and returned, so no one is qualified to speak of them but He who came down from heaven. This does not mean that no one had gone to heaven or had been saved, for Enoch and Elijah had been borne there (Genesis 5:24; comp. Hebrews 11:5; 2 Kings 2:11), and Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and others were there; but it means that no one had ascended and returned, so as to be qualified to speak of the things there.

But he that came down, &c. The Lord Jesus. He is represented as coming down, because, being equal with God, he took upon himself our nature, John 1:14; Philippians 2:6,7. He is represented as sent by the Father, John 3:17; 34; Galatians 4:4; 1 John 4:9; 10.

Blessings :)

Naphal
Sep 23rd 2007, 08:40 PM
Hi NaphalIt was a real vision, but they weren't really there at that time ;). Hebrews 11 says Moses is "dead" and "did not receive what was promised", and "cannot" without us. John 3:13 rules out Elijah being in heaven. So it can only be "real" if it is a vision of the future after Moses and Elijah have been resurrected.
God bless
Steven

I totally disagree. There is no reasons againt Moses soul being fully alive within a spiritual body nor Elijah alive in a human or translated spiritual body and standing there in a real vision ie: something seen.

3705
3705 horama {hor'-am-ah}

from 3708; TDNT - 5:371,706; n n

AV - vision 11, sight 1; 12

1) that which is seen, spectacle
2) a sight divinely granted in an ecstasy or in a sleep, a vision

Naphal
Sep 23rd 2007, 08:46 PM
The bottom line is, whatever they "saw" on the mountain, Jesus said "no one has gone up into heaven" (John 3:13), so we know that Elijah and Moses are not in heaven. How could they be? They were mortal. Ps 6:5
God bless
Steven

John 3:13 does not imply no one goes to heaven after they die. It means something completely different which is explained elsewhere:



Romans 10:5 For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them.
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:)
Romans 10:7 Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead)


So read the verse with what Paul said in mind:


John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

threebigrocks
Sep 23rd 2007, 11:51 PM
Guys, I'm sorry I didn't catch this one sooner, but it is more suited for Bible Chat - hashing out the meaning and doctrine. Moving it there for continued discussion.

NightWatchman
Sep 24th 2007, 05:58 AM
Hi Paul born again :)
Souls "die", men "sleep". It's only a symbolic vision, there aren't really souls under an altar in heaven.

Besides in Greek, the verb for "rest (http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G373&Version=kjv) a little longer" is also used for sleeping the sleep of the dead. See Rev14:13. And remember Moses was told to "rest" with his fathers, when he was buried. Which is why Jesus says that the "vision" of Moses and Elijah was an orama - it wasn't real.
God bless
Steven

You seem to think of everything as symbolic. You seem to be saying that John the disciple can't be trusted to be writing real things down in Revelation regarding the altar.

Jesus didn't say the Transfiguration was a vision in any of the Gospel accounts.

Naphal
Sep 24th 2007, 06:09 AM
Jesus didn't say the Transfiguration was a vision in any of the Gospel accounts.

He did but saying that must mean it was not a true vision or was composed of images and things not really happening is a bit of a stretch to put it very lightly.


Matthew 17:9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.

enarchay
Sep 24th 2007, 06:23 AM
You seem to think of everything as symbolic. You seem to be saying that John the disciple can't be trusted to be writing real things down in Revelation regarding the altar.

I explained the image of the alter quite well, I think. Did you read my post?

I think people read the souls as depicted as talking (in the same way Abel's blood is depicted) and skip right over the detail about the altar, a place of blood sacrifice.

Naphal
Sep 24th 2007, 07:25 AM
I explained the image of the alter quite well, I think. Did you read my post?

I think people read the souls as depicted as talking (in the same way Abel's blood is depicted) and skip right over the detail about the altar, a place of blood sacrifice.


Revelation 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
Revelation 6:10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?


This differs quite a bit from the figure of speech of someone's blood crying out and here where we have literal words and a loud voice.


Revelation 6:11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

Not only that but they are spoken back to, and are given white robes to wear, and told to rest (wait) for a little longer. These souls are clearly alive and are not bodiless so these are living people in heaven.

Steven3
Sep 24th 2007, 09:24 AM
Hi Nightwatchman :)
You seem to think of everything as symbolic. You seem to be saying that John the disciple can't be trusted to be writing real things down in Revelation regarding the altar.Why "can't be trusted"? It's not a moral issue whether someone uses symbolic language. Can Zechariah "not be trusted" to write about four horsemen? Can Daniel "not be trusted" to write of an image with a head of gold? These are symbols, prophecies, not real. Yes I'd say everything in Revelation is symbolic, unless there's very good confirmation otherwise in the Gospels or Epistles.
Jesus didn't say the Transfiguration was a vision in any of the Gospel accounts.I'm afraid that he did, please see the Greek of Matt17:9.
God bless
Steven

Steven3
Sep 24th 2007, 09:36 AM
Hi Naphal :)
Revelation 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
Revelation 6:10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?

This differs quite a bit from the figure of speech of someone's blood crying out and here where we have literal words and a loud voice.But souls can't literally "cry out" any more than blood. Souls aren't literally stored under a literal altar. Is the woman in the basket in Zech 2 literal? Does the beast literally have 10 horns?


Revelation 6:11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

Not only that but they are spoken back to, and are given white robes to wear, and told to rest (wait) for a little longer. These souls are clearly alive and are not bodiless so these are living people in heaven.
How can they have literal bodies in heaven when Paul teaches the resurrection of the body? Again this is the Revelation tail wagging the dog - the other 65 books. Why should anything in any vision be literal?

Revelation 6
6:1 Now I watched when the (literal?) Lamb opened one of the (literal?) seven seals, and I heard one of the (literal?) four living creatures say with a voice (literally?) like thunder, “Come!” 2 And I looked, and behold, a (literal?) white horse! And its (literal?) rider had a (literal?) bow, and a (literal?) crown was given to him, and he came out conquering, and to conquer.

3 When he opened the (literal?) second seal, I heard the second (literal?) living creature say, “Come!” 4 And out came another (literal?) horse, (literally?) bright red. Its (literal?) rider was permitted to take peace from the earth, so that people should slay one another, and he was given a (literal?) great sword.
5 When he opened the (literal?) third seal, I heard the (literal?) third living creature say, “Come!” And I looked, and behold, a (literal?) black horse! And its (literal?) rider had a (literal?) pair of scales in his hand. 6 And I heard what seemed to be a voice in the midst of the four living creatures, saying, “A quart [1] of wheat for a denarius, [2] and three quarts of barley for a denarius, and do not harm the oil and wine!”
7 When he opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the (literal?) fourth living creature say, “Come!” 8 And I looked, and behold, a (literal?) pale horse! And its rider's name was (literally?) Death, and (literal?) Hades followed him. And they were given authority over a (literal?) fourth of the earth, to kill with sword and with famine and with pestilence and by (literal?) wild beasts of the earth.
9 When he opened the (literal?) fifth seal, I saw under the (literal?) altar the (literal?) souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne. 10 They (literally?) cried out with a loud voice, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” 11 Then they were (literally?) each given a (literal?) white robe and told to (literally?) rest a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants [3] and their brothers [4] should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been.
12 When he opened the (literal?) sixth seal, I looked, and behold, there was a g(literal?) reat earthquake, and the (literal?) sun became (literally?) black as sackcloth, the (literal?) full moon became like blood, 13 and the stars of the sky (literally?) fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. 14 The sky (literally?) vanished like a scroll that is being rolled up, and every (literal?) mountain and (literal?) island was removed from its place. 15 Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave [5] and free, (literally?) hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, 16 calling to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, 17 for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”

It's an apocalyptic vision. Not objective reality.

God bless
Steven

Naphal
Sep 24th 2007, 09:48 AM
Hi Naphal :) But souls can't literally "cry out" any more than blood.

Of course they can. 8 souls were saved by water and we know those were 8 people. The word soul is used for many things in scripture and one usage is for a person whether human or heavenly.



Souls aren't literally stored under a literal altar. Is the woman in the basket in Zech 2 literal? Does the beast literally have 10 horns?

The beast's horns are explained. Rev contains literal things and symbolic. I see nothing symbolic about the souls of those that were matyred. They are alive in heaven, speak and are spoken to.



How can they have literal bodies in heaven when Paul teaches the resurrection of the body?

There are many different forms of resurrection. How can they wear robes if they don't have bodies?



Why should anything in any vision be literal?

Why would visions never be of literal things? By definition a vision is something seen, not something thought to be seen. It leans more to normally being literal than not.





It's an apocalyptic vision. Not objective reality.


Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

602 apokalupsis {ap-ok-al'-oop-sis}

from 601; TDNT - 3:563,405; n f

AV - revelation 12, be revealed 2, to lighten + 1519 1,
manifestation 1, coming 1, appearing 1; 18

1) a laying bear, making naked
2) a disclosure of truth, instruction
2a) concerning things before unknown
2b) used of events by which things or states or persons
hitherto withdrawn from view are made visible to all
3) manifestation, appearance

Steven3
Sep 24th 2007, 10:11 AM
Hi Naphal :)
Of course they can. 8 souls were saved by water and we know those were 8 people. The word soul is used for many things in scripture and one usage is for a person whether human or heavenly.Precisely my point - in the Bible "souls" are what happens when you add breath to dust - they are corporeal, they don't hide under altars in heaven. Noah and those other 7 souls had bodies, they were alive.


The beast's horns are explained. Rev contains literal things and symbolic. I see nothing symbolic about the souls of those that were matyred. They are alive in heaven, speak and are spoken to.You don't think they could symbolically represent the blood of dead martyrs buried on earth sleeping until the resurrection? You're absolutely 100% certain that Rev6 is literal and Isaiah 38:18 Ps 6:5 and all the other "dead know nothing" verses from the OT are not to be taken literally? Why then does Paul in 1Co15 say "if there is no resurrection... then those that sleep have perished"?


There are many different forms of resurrection. How can they wear robes if they don't have bodies?Perhaps because they are symbolic robes on symbolic souls under a symbolic altar in a symbolic vision ;). What else would symbolic souls wear? ;)

Looking at a concordance there are only two forms of resurrection 1. figurative antitypical, baptism. 2. literal, a body that can eat fish and show nail marks. Paul says three times that our bodies will be like Christ's. When he comes.


Why would visions never be of literal things? By definition a vision is something seen, not something thought to be seen. It leans more to normally being literal than not.Does it? :) I don't think it does. Please give me an example from the OT of something real being seen in a vision -- with the exception of future events, such as Paul seeing Ananias coming to his house.


Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

602 apokalupsis {ap-ok-al'-oop-sis}

from 601; TDNT - 3:563,405; n f

AV - revelation 12, be revealed 2, to lighten + 1519 1,
manifestation 1, coming 1, appearing 1; 18

1) a laying bear, making naked
2) a disclosure of truth, instruction
2a) concerning things before unknown
2b) used of events by which things or states or persons
hitherto withdrawn from view are made visible to all
3) manifestation, appearance

None of these say "using literal objects". Apocalypsis, then as now, in a literary sense meant an apocalyptic text - compare the many dozens of other (uninspired) Jewish apocalypses which have been preserved. Daniel itself is apocalyptic. So are parts of Zechariah.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalyptic_literature

None of these books are objective journalism.
God bless
Steven

RogerW
Sep 24th 2007, 05:29 PM
Hi Debra
It was a real vision of something not really there then :) Do you know of any other "visions" in the Bible which are straightforward seeing of real events?

In the NT the only vision that later turned out to be "real" was Paul seeing Ananias coming, but it was a vision of the future. The other "visions" are all events beyond the realm of normal physical reality.

Besides - how did Peter, James and John know who the two men Jesus was talking to were? This is in the days before photos. ;)

If Christ had meant "that which you have seen", which says nothing about whether it was a vision or not, he could have done so - in fact he did in Mark and Luke. But Matthew has "vision". What you consulted, the Strongs appendix, is not a real dictionary, it just tells you how the word is used in the KJV, right or wrong. ORAMA very rarely means a normal "sight" in classical Greek, only if it is something very spectacular. In Jewish Greek, in the Septuagint, ORAMA means a supernatural vision. There are about 60 visions in the OT, most of them translated with the same Greek word ORAMA in the Greek OT, but is a single one of them "real"?

The bottom line is, whatever they "saw" on the mountain, Jesus said "no one has gone up into heaven" (John 3:13), so we know that Elijah and Moses are not in heaven. How could they be? They were mortal. Ps 6:5
God bless
Steven

Greetings Steven,

I have presented this argument to you before, and won't do so again here. But in the other posts you ignore how Elijah and Moses and every other Old Testament saint are NOW reigning spiritually with the Lord. They could not ascend to be with the Lord prior to the cross, but the argument has been made, and you have ignored it that after the cross they could and did ascend into heaven spiritually. Since the cross every believer upon physical death ascends spiritually to be with the Lord. I have also made the argument that Jo 3:13 speaks of a time before the cross, not after, which again you do not respond to.

The transfiguration is a real vision where both Elijah and Moses could be seen bodily because they had not yet ascended into heaven. It is similar to Saul calling Samuel up from the grave. If Samuel already gone into heaven then he would not have been raised up, but called to come down.

But, once again, this is before the cross of Christ. Those saints from the OT died in faith not having received the promise, but after the cross they too, just like every NT believer received the seal of the HS (Rev 7) enabling them to ascend unto heaven via the Spirit, spiritually.

Blessings,
RW

RogerW
Sep 24th 2007, 05:55 PM
Revelation 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
Revelation 6:10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?

This differs quite a bit from the figure of speech of someone's blood crying out and here where we have literal words and a loud voice.

Revelation 6:11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

Not only that but they are spoken back to, and are given white robes to wear, and told to rest (wait) for a little longer. These souls are clearly alive and are not bodiless so these are living people in heaven.

Greetings Naphal,

I wondered why Rev 6 speaks of those martyred for faith as being "under the altar" if they are in heaven. I have come to believe that this language signifies not being specifically in heaven, but rather being destined as those OT saints who will go to heaven after the cross. I view these souls, also the 144,000 of Rev 7 and Rev 14 as symbolizing the Church in the OT, or the remnant saved from the OT era. We see these martyred for the faith again in Rev 20, only there they are before the throne of God.

Altar signifies the place of sacrifice, and since these are 'under' the altar is seems to speak as those being under the sacrificial atoning blood of the Lord. Under comes from another Greek word that means inferior (locally, of Hades):--lower. Eze 9 shows us a picture of those from the OT being marked as those who cry out to God, and then in Rev 7, just prior to the gospel going unto all the world, these same OT saints are sealed with the HS, being made alive through the Spirit thereby enabling them to ascend unto heaven after the cross.

All of these OT saints have physically died and gone into the grave (hell), but all of them also ascended into heaven after the cross. This is the distinction Steven3 and Enarchay fail to see. The cross changed the way the Holy Spirit operates, where He once dwelt with or among His people, He now (since the cross) dwells in them. This makes death impossible for those who are in Christ, indwelt by the Holy Spirit. It is the Spirit that gives us life, and this life is eternal. Our physical bodies wear out, or become sick, old, and die, but the Spirit that has quickened our spirits to life assures everlasting, eternal, never ending life in the Spirit, and in the fullness of time everlasting, eternal, never ending life in both body and spirit.

Blessings,
RW

Steven3
Sep 24th 2007, 06:16 PM
Hi Roger :)
every other Old Testament saint are NOW reigning spiritually with the Lord. No, I don't think so. They may "live to God" but they are still dead, and the dead cannot praise, or reign, but know nothing. Please show me the Bible reference you have in mind. The "reign" verses come after the resurrection:

Luke 1:33 and he will reign (future) over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”

1 Co 15:23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then (future) at his coming those who belong to Christ. 24 Then (future) comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.

2 Timothy 2:12 if we endure, we will (future) also reign with him; if we deny him, he also will deny us;


They could not ascend to be with the Lord prior to the cross, but the argument has been made, and you have ignored it that after the cross they could and did ascend into heaven spiritually. Since the cross every believer upon physical death ascends spiritually to be with the Lord. Based on what evidence? If that's true why does Paul say (25 years after the ascension) "if the dead are not raised... then they are perished" (1Co15). If they are alive in heaven he's talking claptrap.




I have also made the argument that Jo 3:13 speaks of a time before the cross, not after, which again you do not respond to. Because the only verse to support this idea is "led captivity captive" and that's clearly not what it means.
The transfiguration is a real vision where both Elijah and Moses could be seen bodily because they had not yet ascended into heaven. It is similar to Saul calling Samuel up from the grave. If Samuel already gone into heaven then he would not have been raised up, but called to come down.Are we supposed to have faith in Christ, in his cross, in his sacrifice, in his being "firstbegotten" from the dead, or do we have faith in the 'reality' of a medium producing a ghost Saul couldn't see, and a "vision" - which like Paul's vision of Ananias could well simply be a window into the future?
But, once again, this is before the cross of Christ. Those saints from the OT died in faith not having received the promise, but after the cross they too, just like every NT believer received the seal of the HS (Rev 7) enabling them to ascend unto heaven via the Spirit, spiritually. Sorry. I don't wish to be difficult but I need Bible evidence please.

Again, why does Paul say he wants to "attain to the resurrection", why does Paul show no knowledge whatsoever of souls/spirits going to heaven? Why did his pupil Clement not know that Abraham and the patriarchs are in heaven? Why did the writer to Hebrews say that Abraham and co had "not receieved what was promised" and could not do so without "us" (Heb 11:39-40). Why does the Apostles' Creed not contain any mention of heaven-going?

In short why does the Bible teach resurrection not heaven-going?
God bless :)
Steven

Naphal
Sep 24th 2007, 11:11 PM
Greetings Naphal,

I wondered why Rev 6 speaks of those martyred for faith as being "under the altar" if they are in heaven. I have come to believe that this language signifies not being specifically in heaven, but rather being destined as those OT saints who will go to heaven after the cross.


I believe most of Rev is occurs after the cross so I can't agree with that.


To be under the alter just means to be worshipping before it IMO.



Altar signifies the place of sacrifice, and since these are 'under' the altar is seems to speak as those being under the sacrificial atoning blood of the Lord.

Actually it more implies that THEY were the sacrifices since their blood was shed. They are NT saints that died for the testimony of Christ.






Under comes from another Greek word that means inferior (locally, of Hades):--lower. Eze 9 shows us a picture of those from the OT being marked as those who cry out to God, and then in Rev 7, just prior to the gospel going unto all the world, these same OT saints are sealed with the HS, being made alive through the Spirit thereby enabling them to ascend unto heaven after the cross.

All of these OT saints have physically died and gone into the grave (hell), but all of them also ascended into heaven after the cross. This is the distinction Steven3 and Enarchay fail to see. The cross changed the way the Holy Spirit operates, where He once dwelt with or among His people, He now (since the cross) dwells in them. This makes death impossible for those who are in Christ, indwelt by the Holy Spirit. It is the Spirit that gives us life, and this life is eternal. Our physical bodies wear out, or become sick, old, and die, but the Spirit that has quickened our spirits to life assures everlasting, eternal, never ending life in the Spirit, and in the fullness of time everlasting, eternal, never ending life in both body and spirit.


Thank you for that. I do not accept the Preterist views of Revelation so I disagree about this being about the OT saints. I agree with you about the power and change of the cross.

RogerW
Sep 25th 2007, 12:54 AM
I believe most of Rev is occurs after the cross so I can't agree with that.

To be under the alter just means to be worshipping before it IMO.

Actually it more implies that THEY were the sacrifices since their blood was shed. They are NT saints that died for the testimony of Christ.

Thank you for that. I do not accept the Preterist views of Revelation so I disagree about this being about the OT saints. I agree with you about the power and change of the cross.

Greetings Naphal,

I don't want to take the op to far off so I'll briefly comment on a couple things. In Rev 6 there is no testimony of Christ mentioned. The passage tells us they died for the word of God and the testimony they held. This is one of the reasons I believe these are pre-cross, or pre-Christ martyrs. But in Rev 20 where the martyrs are again mentioned it says they are beheaded for the witness of Jesus and the word of God. I believe there is no mention of Christ in Rev 6 because Christ had not yet come, so there is not yet any witness to the cross of Christ.

This is not what Preterists believe. Neither do I hold to a Preterist interpretation of Scripture. I also believe that our view of the book of Revelation is far too limited if we attempt to force much of the book into a time after the cross. The book is the Revelation of Jesus Christ throughout redemptive history. This redemptive history begins at creation, and the visions John is given also begin with John seeing redemptive history from the perspective of eternity past, or from God's view when making a covenant (Counsel of Peace Zech 6:13) in heaven before the world began. The book in mo repeats the same vision of an end of the OT era of law, and a beginning of the NT era of grace as time progresses. The chapters are not chronological, but of greater detail in each progressive vision.

One of the most powerful truths missed by those who fail to see the fulfillment of the old and the beginning of the new in Revelation is the undeniable power and strength of the cross, and grace as well as weakness in the law.

Blessings,
RW

Naphal
Sep 25th 2007, 01:55 AM
Greetings Naphal,

I don't want to take the op to far off so I'll briefly comment on a couple things. In Rev 6 there is no testimony of Christ mentioned.

No but they do die for the testimony they held and I submit that must be the testimony of Christ. Besides, the book is the Revelation of Christ and therefore pertains to the knowledge of him.



The passage tells us they died for the word of God and the testimony they held. This is one of the reasons I believe these are pre-cross, or pre-Christ martyrs.

That would more likely point to being Martyrs in Christ not before Christ. Exactly what testimony did they die for if not for Christ?




But in Rev 20 where the martyrs are again mentioned it says they are beheaded for the witness of Jesus and the word of God. I believe there is no mention of Christ in Rev 6 because Christ had not yet come, so there is not yet any witness to the cross of Christ.

I fail to equate the lack of the name of Christ to mean they died before Christ. The entire part about dying for their testimony testifies that it is Christ related.




This is not what Preterists believe. Neither do I hold to a Preterist interpretation of Scripture.

That's well and good but that is a Preterist view of scripture.




I also believe that our view of the book of Revelation is far too limited if we attempt to force much of the book into a time after the cross.

Christ was revealed during his lifetime and of course his death. That's is what the gospel is about and that's what the Revelation of Christ pertains to. I see it as almost entirely post cross. I believe only Rev 12 that i recall addresses any time before Christ's birth and then only briefly.

enarchay
Sep 25th 2007, 01:55 AM
Actually it more implies that THEY were the sacrifices since their blood was shed. They are NT saints that died for the testimony of Christ. I actually agree with your first statement. However, Andrew Perriman holds the view that these are not Christian martyrs, but pre-Christ Jewish martyrs. He points out how they make their robes white, perhaps an allusion to Christ's blood atonement for even those who lived before his death and resurrection.

Naphal
Sep 25th 2007, 02:00 AM
I actually agree with your first statement. However, Andrew Perriman holds the view that these are not Christian martyrs, but pre-Christ Jewish martyrs. He points out how they make their robes white, perhaps an allusion to Christ's blood atonement for even those who lived before his death and resurrection.

They don't make the robes white. They are given white robes to wear.

I don't believe Revelation is about pre-Christ anything but full about the revelation of Christ especially things that were to "shortly occur" meaning after his death.

enarchay
Sep 25th 2007, 02:05 AM
I'll type up Andrew Perriman's points later since he makes them better than I can.

RogerW
Sep 25th 2007, 02:14 AM
Hi Roger :)No, I don't think so. They may "live to God" but they are still dead, and the dead cannot praise, or reign, but know nothing. Please show me the Bible reference you have in mind. The "reign" verses come after the resurrection:

Luke 1:33 and he will reign (future) over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”

1 Co 15:23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then (future) at his coming those who belong to Christ. 24 Then (future) comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.

2 Timothy 2:12 if we endure, we will (future) also reign with him; if we deny him, he also will deny us;

Yes, the reign verses do come after resurrection. What you fail to acknowledge is that there is more than one resurrection. Rev 20 makes this apparent when it speaks of those who have part in the first resurrection, which is resurrection to spiritual life. Those who have part in this first resurrection live and REIGN with Christ the thousand years. In Rev 5 God has made the redeemed kings and priests, who REIGN on the earth.

Remember "the life of the flesh is in the blood" (Lev 17:11). But Christ says those who have received grace and righteousness are reigning in life (flesh) through the One, Jesus Christ. How are we reigning in life except through the Spirit, spiritually reigning? By grace we are reigning through righteousness through Jesus Christ, and this reigning in life (zoe) is forever (eonian life).

Ro 5:17 For if by the offense of the one, death reigns through the one, much rather, those obtaining the superabundance of grace and the gratuity of righteousness shall be reigning in life [zoe] through the One, Jesus Christ.
Ro 5:21 that, even as Sin reigns in death, thus also Grace should be reigning through righteousness, for eonian life [zoe], through Jesus Christ, our Lord.



Based on what evidence? If that's true why does Paul say (25 years after the ascension) "if the dead are not raised... then they are perished" (1Co15). If they are alive in heaven he's talking claptrap.

Steven, it seems you are stuck in the OT law. You seem to be unable to see the change in the operation of the Holy Spirit after the cross. You cannot stand on passages of Scripture that speak of the bodily resurrection in the fullness of time and ignore passages that speak of being made alive in Christ at the moment we become saved. Of course Paul, and every believer longs to be free of the corruptible mortal flesh, and to put on incorruption, and immortality of the new glorified bodies we receive when Christ comes again. But this yearning to be fully (body & spirit) united with Christ does not mean we are not reigning with Him through the Spirit in this life, or that when our bodies die this same Spirit giving us spiritual life ceases to continue to be spiritually alive in Christ after our bodies have died.



Again, why does Paul say he wants to "attain to the resurrection", why does Paul show no knowledge whatsoever of souls/spirits going to heaven? Why did his pupil Clement not know that Abraham and the patriarchs are in heaven? Why did the writer to Hebrews say that Abraham and co had "not receieved what was promised" and could not do so without "us" (Heb 11:39-40). Why does the Apostles' Creed not contain any mention of heaven-going?

Yes Scripture does say that all those OT saints who died in faith did not immediately go to be with the Lord. I have stated this time and again. But Scripture also shows us how these OT saints dying in faith were able to spiritually ascend to the Lord after the cross. But you have to come out of the OT law to see the truth of how we receive Spiritual life in Christ through the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This is how we can have the Lord’s assurance that He will never leave us nor forsake us, not even in death. We need never fear death in the body, because death in the body does not separate us from Christ.

Heb 13:5-6 In manner not fond of money, being sufficed with what is present for He has declared, “Under no circumstances may I be lax, Neither may I be abandoning you by any means.” So that we have courage to say, “The Lord is my helper, and I shall not be afraid of what man shall be doing to me!”

Let me ask you once again, does Scripture speak of more than one resurrection? The Sadducees, not quite like you, say there is no resurrection. They tell Christ that Moses taught that someone dying with no children his brother shall marry his wife to raise up seed to him. After presenting a case where seven brothers had died and taken the same wife they ask Him, “In the resurrection, then, of which of the seven will she be the wife? For they all have had her?” His answer to them is very helpful because He says they are deceived not knowing the Scriptures, neither the power of God. For in the resurrection they are as angels of God in heaven. This is very telling because angel messengers are spirit beings, who do not possess a body as humans do. So clearly the resurrection Christ is speaking of is spiritual resurrection, not bodily. Humans die and like the angels of heaven are there in spirit only. If Christ were speaking of the bodily resurrection why would He liken those dying as becoming as angels in heaven? That makes no sense. Then speaking of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Christ says, “He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” Clearly Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had long ago died, and yet Christ speaks as though they are living. This is because they are alive in Him Spiritually, and as soon as He conquers death, and ascends into heaven they will spiritually ascend to be with Him through spiritual life, just like all NT believers.

Mt. 22:29-32 Now answering, Jesus said to them, “You are deceived, not being acquainted with the scriptures, neither the power of God. For in the resurrection they are neither marrying nor giving in marriage, but are as messengers [angels] of God in heaven. Now concerning the resurrection of the dead, did you not read that which is declared to you by God, saying, ’I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”



In short why does the Bible teach resurrection not heaven-going?
God bless :)
Steven

The Bible in the above passage certainly teaches heaven-going through spiritual resurrection.

Blessings,
RW

Steven3
Sep 25th 2007, 10:54 AM
Hi Roger :)
Yes, the reign verses do come after resurrection. What you fail to acknowledge is that there is more than one resurrection. Rev 20 makes this apparent when it speaks of those who have part in the first resurrection, which is resurrection to spiritual life. Those who have part in this first resurrection live and REIGN with Christ the thousand years. In Rev 5 God has made the redeemed kings and priests, who REIGN on the earth.Very sorry :), but as I said, we shouldn't need to go to a vision in Revelation to establishing nuts and bolts basics about life and death. :)


Remember "the life of the flesh is in the blood" (Lev 17:11). But Christ says those who have received grace and righteousness are reigning in life (flesh) through the One, Jesus Christ. How are we reigning in life except through the Spirit, spiritually reigning? By grace we are reigning through righteousness through Jesus Christ, and this reigning in life (zoe) is forever (eonian life).The life isn't literally in the blood otherwise blood banks would have to chain their fridges shut ;). Yes I know that there are many passages in John where he that believes "has" (present tense) eternal life, eonian life, but again Jesus also says that Abraham lives "to God". His name is written in the book of life - but Abraham was not in heaven in 28AD when Jesus said that, and there's no evidence Abraham ascended in 30AD. Heb 11:13 still says Abraham died and did not receive what he was promised.


Steven, it seems you are stuck in the OT law. Mortality isn't part of the Law, it dates from Gen3:3,19.


You seem to be unable to see the change in the operation of the Holy Spirit after the cross. You cannot stand on passages of Scripture that speak of the bodily resurrection in the fullness of time and ignore passages that speak of being made alive in Christ at the moment we become saved.Yes I can ;) And I'll tell you why - because there are two creations in the Bible. Those passages in John are figurative - when Christ breaths the Holy Spirit into the disciples in John 20:22 they weren't mortal one minute, immortal the next, Christ is acting out Gen 2:7 in relation only to a new creation - with eternal life itself dependent on all the resurrection passages in John.
John 5:21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will.

John 6:39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.

John 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”

John 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

John 6:54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.


Of course Paul, and every believer longs to be free of the corruptible mortal flesh, and to put on incorruption, and immortality of the new glorified bodies we receive when Christ comes again. But this yearning to be fully (body & spirit) united with Christ does not mean we are not reigning with Him through the Spirit in this life, or that when our bodies die this same Spirit giving us spiritual life ceases to continue to be spiritually alive in Christ after our bodies have died. If we "reign with Him through the spirit in this life" (which Romans 5:17,21 doesn't say but I have no particular objection) then it refers to the living. It doesn't prove that "those that sleep" reign with Christ before their resurrection.

Ro 5:17 KJV For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall (future) reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) ........21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so grace might (subjunctive) reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

Grace might, should reign through righteousness into, unto eternal life, but these verses aren't proof that the moment someone is baptised/converted (which yes is spiritual resurrection Col 3:1) they go from being a mortal soul to an immortal soul. As someone comes out of the Col.3:1 water, raised, what happens that creates an immortal soul where the soul was previously mortal?


Yes Scripture does say that all those OT saints who died in faith did not immediately go to be with the Lord. I have stated this time and again. But Scripture also shows us how these OT saints dying in faith were able to spiritually ascend to the Lord after the cross.Evidence? :confused


death in the body does not separate us from Christ.Because we "sleep". Are we separated from Christ by sleep every night, because we are not conscious? If literal sleep is not separation, why should the sleep of death be counted separation. What's the difference apart from 8 hours vs 8, 80, or 800 years? ;)


Let me ask you once again, does Scripture speak of more than one resurrection?Not outside Revelation no. In fact it is possible if children/pagans alive when Christ comes are allowed to live out their natural lives that there will a second resurrection when a transitional period has been completed, but that's supposition and Revelation is not a safe tool to interpret the rest of the Bible.


The Sadducees, not quite like you, say there is no resurrection.Do you know why? :dunno: As far as I can tell it seems to be because they put their hope in the immortality of the soul, so they didn't need resurrection :(.


Mt. 22:29-32 Now answering, Jesus said to them, “You are deceived, not being acquainted with the scriptures, neither the power of God. For in the resurrection they are neither marrying nor giving in marriage, but are as messengers [angels] of God in heaven. Now concerning the resurrection of the dead, did you not read that which is declared to you by God, saying, ’I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”

The Bible in the above passage certainly teaches heaven-going through spiritual resurrection. How can a passage that doesn't mention heaven be used to overturn verses like Acts 2:34 which say (after AD30) that say David still did not ascend to heaven, or Hebrews 11:13 which says (long after AD30) that Abraham still has "not received what he was promised", or 1Thess 4:17 (long after AD30) that the dead are "asleep", or 1Co15:23 (long after AD30) that "each in his own order... when he comes". All Matt22:29 means is the same as the parallel in Luke:

Luke 20:38 Now he is not God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him.”

They do live to him. Because their names are written in the Book of Life. Because their reward is in, and "comes from", heaven, because their mansion comes "from heaven", because their tent-house comes "from heaven". Because their citizenship comes from heaven. But not them, they don't come from heaven because they aren't in heaven.

Again we go back to Paul saying 1Co15:16,18 For if the dead are not raised,... 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.

If the dead are not raised, then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are not immortal in heaven, they have perished. Sorry but you haven't demonstrated from scripture that immortality is bestowed at baptism/conversion rather than at the return of Christ. In fact Romans 6, the baptism chapter, shows clearly that immortality is not granted on baptism:

Romans 6:22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life.

God bless
Steven