Gen, I just sent you a private message. If you want to discuss this outside of the forum then return my message. In the meantime, please try to not take this discussion personally. And if you have a different view than what I and others have stated then please state your views on this forum. And if you have already stated some of them here I must have missed it so please restate your views. And please read these scriptures and ask God for understanding.
1 Cor 13:8-13
8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12 Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
NIV
And if you want to read my interpretation of the above scriptures you can ask me and I will answer you.
So Roy, are you one of those people who believes that right after you die your soul goes immediately to heaven to be with God and Jesus or to hell to be tormented forever? Because if you do I have a different view of death and the after life.
Gen, I am only adding biblical insight. To many times people use unbiblical words with a result of a degradation of understanding. You are not the only person that uses the word rapture. I am just pointing out what I see in my bible software.
For everyone I recommend that you check the first page of the link that I just provided. When it comes to the prophetic future we see through a glass darkly. There is no reason to argue about something that no one has perfect vision of.
Mark, you say, "I am only adding biblical insight." That's not entirely true; you also added, "To many times people use unbiblical words with a result of a degradation of understanding."
I agree with you 100% on the literal truth of what you have said that I’ve quoted, but I wonder about the placement of these two statements. Is it true that the use of the word “rapture” is one of those “Too many times people use unbiblical words with a result of a degradation of understanding?"
I’ve come to the point where I view “unbiblical” terms as a given that the concept itself is unbiblical. So, in my view, this term “rapture,” if not deserving of immediate disqualification as an unbiblical concept, certainly requires further investigation.
The book, Global Warning, states, “The English word rapture comes from the Latin rapto, which is a translation of the Greek word harpazo in the Greek New Testament. All these terms mean “caught up” or “snatched away.” While the word rapture does not appear in English translations of the Bible, the concept of the rapture certainly does. It is a sudden and instantaneous event that occurs without warning.”
So, perhaps the word “rapture,” unlike too many other unbiblical terms that are just unbiblical concepts (concepts of man in biblical disguise), is a legitimate biblical concept (and term).
The book goes on to show that “the rapture and the glorious appearing are two separate phases of the second coming,” and asks the reader to consider the following differences:
The book places all the following side by side, but I couldn’t figure out how to place them side by side online here. I certainly suggest you try to view the following comparing number one in the rapture with number one in the Glorious Appearing & so forth side by side. There are too many differences to consider these to be the same event.
The Rapture of the Church:
1. Christ comes for believers in the air.
2. All Christians are translated into new bodies.
3. Christians are taken to the Father’s house in heaven.
4. There is no judgment upon the Earth.
5. The church will be taken to heaven.
6. It could occur at any time (it is imminent).
7. There are no signs preceding it.
8. It affects only believers.
9. It is a time of joy.
10. It occurs before the “day of wrath.”
11. Satan is not bound, but wreaks havoc on the Earth.
12. Christians are judged at the judgment seat of Christ.
13. The marriage supper of the Lamb takes place.
14. Only Christ’s own will see him.
15. The seven year Tribulation follows.
The Glorious Appearing:
1. Christ comes with believers to the Earth.
2. There is no translation of bodies.
3. Resurrected saints remain on the Earth.
4. Christ judges the inhabitants of the Earth.
5. Christ sets up His kingdom on Earth.
6. It cannot occur until the end of the seven-year Tribulation.
7. There are numerous signs preceding it.
8. It affects all humanity.
9. It is a time of mourning.
10. It occurs after the “day of wrath.”
11. Satan is bound in the abyss for 1,000 years.
12. Christians have already been judged at the judgment seat of Christ.
13. The marriage supper of the Lamb has already taken place.
Good to hear from you. I always value your comments and thanks for posting.
Let me give you a little simple explanation of how I study things. When I am studying a biblical subject I locate biblical words that pertain to the subject and see how they are used in the bible and in their context. Then I use the Strong's numbering system for the New Testament and see all the places where these words are used and in the context of the scriptures. Then by studying the scriptures of how the various related biblical words are used I gain more understanding.
This is a very simple, yet effective method of study. Do you see the problem with the above method of study when using words that are not used in the bible?
And I do not want to argue about the use of words. That is a waste of time for everyone. Words are descriptive in nature and are in the eye of the beholder. One can take unscriptural words and use them to teach biblical truth or they can take unscriptural words and use them to teach error.
Let me give you a little simple explanation of how I study things. When I am studying a subject I locate biblical words that pertain to the subject and see how they are used in the bible and in their context. Then I use the Strong's numbering system for the New Testament and see all the places where these words are used and in the contextual scriptures. Then by studying the scriptures of how the various related biblical words are used I gain more understanding.
This is a very simple, yet effective method of study. Do you see the problem with the above method of study when using words that are not used in the bible?
And I do not want to argue about the use of words. That is a waste of time for everyone. Words are descriptive in nature and are in the eye of the beholder. One can take unscriptural words and use them to teach biblical truth or they can take unscriptural words and use them to teach error.
It seems to me that if the bible were truly "inerrant", God could have made it so that these differences over word usage, translation and interpretation didn't arise.
And I think He could have made it so that you didn't have to be as intelligent as either Gen-2, or Mark to understand it. I think He could have made it so that there wasn't any doubt.
At the very least, He could have offered us some updates. It's been about 2,000 years.
Good to hear from you. I always value your comments and thanks for posting.
Let me give you a little simple explanation of how I study things. When I am studying a subject I locate biblical words that pertain to the subject and see how they are used in the bible and in their context. Then I use the Strong's numbering system for the New Testament and see all the places where these words are used and in the contextual scriptures. Then by studying the scriptures of how the various related biblical words are used I gain more understanding.
This is a very simple, yet effective method of study. Do you see the problem with the above method of study when using words that are not used in the bible?
And I do not want to argue about the use of words. That is a waste of time for everyone. Words are descriptive in nature and are in the eye of the beholder. One can take unscriptural words and use them to teach biblical truth or they can take unscriptural words and use them to teach error.
I'm not a foreign lannguage expert. I suppose I'm not an English language expert either, but I am an English teacher, and have some facility in the area. I wonder if it might be a legitimate move to substitute the Latin translation of the Greek harpazo & procede with your method - tracing the word harpazo as if you were tracing the Latin rapto in the process - as the Latin rapto is presented as the equivalent of the Greek harpazo? That is the rationale presented in the book, Global Warning. What do you think? Yes, maybe, no?
It sure would make the answer to this question simple. There would be no need to argue the use of a word. God could not be construed as making this important article of faith difficult to understand.
That sounds reasonable Tom. But I and perhaps everyone here does not know biblical Greek (harpazo). I could look up this word though if I knew the Strong's number that represents harpazo in the biblical Greek text. Does any one know what that number is?
That sounds reasonable Tom. But I and perhaps everyone here does not know biblical Greek (harpazo). I could look up this word though if I knew the Strong's number that represents harpazo in the biblical Greek text. Does any one know what that number is?
if you look at things are biblical only you miss a lot of God love because do not study unbiblical words you never get true meaning
The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon
Strong's Number: 726
Original Word Word Origin
arpazo from a derivative of (138)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Harpazo 1:472,80
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
har-pad'-zo Verb
Definition
to seize, carry off by force
to seize on, claim for one's self eagerly
to snatch out or away
NAS Word Usage - Total: 14
carry off 1, caught 4, snatch 2, snatched...away 1, snatches 1, snatches away 1, snatching 1, take...away...by force 1, take...by force 2
NAS Verse Count
Matthew 3
John 4
Acts 2
2 Corinthians 2
1 Thessalonians 1
Jude 1
Revelation 1
Total 14
Greek lexicon based on Thayer's and Smith's Bible Dictionary plus others; this is keyed to the large Kittel and the "Theological Dictionary of the New Testament." These files are public domain.
Bibliography Information
Thayer and Smith. "Greek Lexicon entry for Harpazo". "The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon". . 1999.
how about a unbiblical word "to take by forced" or "to go un-peaceful"
Good job Roy. You looked up that Greek word that Tom mentioned using the Strong's number 726 and posted what you found for everyone to look at and examine.
In Revelation Chapter fourteen, verse one, we learn that Christ will stand on Mount Sion with 144,000. And in verse thirteen it says Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth, & etc...
Therefore we know that Christ returns and is on Mount Sion (a boots on the ground thing), that not all who shall die in the name of the Lord have yet died. Many events are recorded to happen between then and the first resurrection.
Actualy the account in Thessalonians that you quoted seems al lot more like the account in Revelation Chapter eleven verse twelve, than it does - the Resurrection of the Just.
Yet even then, though it is more similar it isn't the same.
And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.
Well,... that account is only listed as happening for the two prophets (in that context) But they ascend up to heaven in a much more similar way to Thessalonians than the much later first resurrection and this happens before Jesus has his boots on the ground.
There are many more, very easy to find examples that lead me to believe God is not limited to the two resurrections you've said are all. And it's easy to find on a word search, Heaven cloud ascend,.... etc
I have heard that most people that believe in the after life believe that resurrections in some form happens every time someone dies. Some also believe that some go directly to heaven and some go to hell to be tormented eternally. Does that make their beliefs true or based on the bible?
1 Cor 15:50-57
50 Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.
51 Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed,
, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.
53 For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, "DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP in victory.
55 "O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR STING?"
56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law;
57 but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
NASU
If one wants to learn about the resurrection of the dead they should read 1 Corinthians chapter 15. There are 4 usages of the word resurrection in this chapter and the whole chapter deals with this concept. In contrast there is only 2 usages in the book of Revelation that has the word resurrection. These two usages are Revelation chapter 20 verses 5 and 6 which I have previously quoted. The book of Revelation is a very difficult book to read with a lot of imagery and symbolism. I don't think it is a good idea to base ones foundational theology on this book because of all the difficult imagery and symbolism.
I have heard that most people that believe in the after life believe that resurrections in some form happen every time someone dies. Some also believe that some go directly to heaven and some go to hell to be tormented eternally. Does that make their beliefs true and based on the bible?
You're asking me if what you've heard is true?
Edited to add: While the above quote was your entire original post,.. I see you've gone back and edited it to answer your own questions. I was pretty sure you never wanted to hear what I had to say, just by the way you're phrasing things. You don't actually care what I say, so why ask? You're just trolling here. You asked me for an example, and when I gave one you decided not to reply. Your comment on the book of Revelation is perhaps based on the fact that I quoted from it? You certainly doesn't seem to be applying that sentiment to your own basis for your foundational theology on the resurrections, although they were oddly the basis of your initial post concerning it.
Thanks for the edit. It explains a lot about your heart on this. I'm the one that doesn't understand Love, I need to go back and study it, while you, on the other hand. you're only doing this out of your great love for me, no doubt.
It's quite reminiscent of what I've heard of Way Corps dressing downs or confrontations, do your best to belittle the other person and their beliefs while professing great care for God and His words. Cut out a rather clear example if it doesn't support your view, and be dismissive and rude to others that you do not like, and it's quite clear you do not like me by the drippingly sweet forced condescending tone you've taken with me, because I don't believe as you do about one issue.
Congradulations Mark, job well done, you've managed to hurt my feelings again, not that that matters to you. Well done!
Gen2, all you are doing right now is accusing me of doing exactly what you are doing. And nothing else.
Gen, the book of Revelation really is a difficult book to understand. Below is an example from the Nelson Bible dictionary. Read about the imagery in it. For example below, do you know what the following is? Because I don't know.
"an angel whose legs are pillars of fire, men who ride on horses while smiting the earth with plagues of destruction, and a fiery red dragon with seven heads and ten horns who crouches before a heavenly woman about to deliver a child."
REVELATION OF JOHN
The last book of the Bible, and the only book of APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE in the New Testament. Apocalypse, the title of this book in the original Greek, means "unveiling" or "disclosure" of hidden things known only to God. Other examples of apocalyptic literature can be found in the Old Testament in Daniel (chaps. Dan), Isaiah (24-27), Ezekiel (chaps. 37-41), and Zechariah (chaps. 9-12).
Like its counterparts, the Book of Revelation depicts the end of the present age and the coming of God's future kingdom through symbols, images, and numbers. These symbols include an angel whose legs are pillars of fire, men who ride on horses while smiting the earth with plagues of destruction, and a fiery red dragon with seven heads and ten horns who crouches before a heavenly woman about to deliver a child.
Why was apocalyptic literature written in such imagery? One reason is that these books were written in dangerous times when it was safer to hide one's message in imags than to speak plainly. Moreover, the symbolism preserved an element of mystery about details of time and place. The purpose of such symbolism, however, was not to confuse, but to inform and strengthen believers in the face of persecution.
Although the keys to some symbols have been lost, the overall message of this book is clear: God is all-powerful. No countermoves of the devil, no matter how strong, can frustrate the righteous purposes of God.
Do you know what the difference between us in this discussion is? I know when I don't know something, but you think you know everything.
One thing I do know though is that if I would have insulted you as much as you have insulted me lately on this forum you would have been whinning and complaining by now telling everyone how badly I have treated you. On second thought you are already complaining. You are now telling everyone how much I have hurt your feelings. Sorry, but what ever hurt you are feeling now and where ever it came from I am not going to be able to help you on this.
And for you to think that I don't like you is just plain baloney. Gen2, you may need some emotional counseling, but I am not qualified to offer this to you.
... Do you know what the difference between us in this discussion is? I know when I don't know something, but you think you know everything.
You know, that's actually quite funny when you read it.
And for you to think that I don't like you is just plain baloney. Gen2, you may need some emotional counseling, but I am not qualified to offer this to you.
Thanks for your diagnosis, oh unqualified one.
I'm outta here Mark this is pointless. That's what I think, and you're in your 4th edit on this post already at 1:01 n the AM
I got a 12 hour drive to make , starting in 2 hours. ciao!
Let me give you a little simple explanation of how I study things. When I am studying a biblical subject I locate biblical words that pertain to the subject and see how they are used in the bible and in their context. Then I use the Strong's numbering system for the New Testament and see all the places where these words are used and in the context of the scriptures. Then by studying the scriptures of how the various related biblical words are used I gain more understanding.
This is a very simple, yet effective method of study. Do you see the problem with the above method of study when using words that are not used in the bible?
And I do not want to argue about the use of words. That is a waste of time for everyone. Words are descriptive in nature and are in the eye of the beholder. One can take unscriptural words and use them to teach biblical truth or they can take unscriptural words and use them to teach error.
I am reading a really great little book by DA Carson entitled Exegetical Fallacies. The first chapter deals with some of traps we can fall into when doing word studies....it is not as simple as locating the word, its root, and how it has been used before.....and trying to put how we understand the word into the context. Even if we try reading it in context it can be a trap to assert meaning.
With Jesus....well, there were many Rabbi's saying things...true things...and speeches full of biblical words...but, it was the authority He had that was given to Him....that set Him apart. That is the difference with the Apostles as well...their authority with the words they spoke.
It is fun to trace words through the bible.....but, we have to be cognizant of many other variables to really glean an understanding. In English....we can board a plane...or be on the board of directors....or we can be bored....or bore a hole(whole). Sometimes with words like, Phileo, Agape, Pletho, and Pleroo the differences in meaning are so insignificant that their different uses don't alter the meaning of scripture. We can read meaning into their uses though. Because of our background we can be tempted to fall into the trap of bibliolatry....and embrace yet another heresy because of what we think we understand with words.
Remember, people use the same words...found in scripture...to praise the Lord and also to blaspheme Him. Biblical words. Our attitude and how we approach scripture is the key to biblical interpretation IMO, but even more key is our attitude when approaching the Lord.
Some of the epistles refer to Jesus predominantly as Lord, some as the Christ, and it is FUN to learn the differences and why....but, it is important to remember that they are pointing to one distinct person for a reason and not to lose sight of that as we study words.
In the book, Carson speaks of the different word study fallacies and one of them is "Root Fallacies" thinking that all words have meaning bound up by its shape or components.....sometimes it is true and he uses the example of our "goodbye" and "God be with you" but, also uses our word "Nice" which comes from the Latin word for ignorant...nescius... this makes the point the root is not always the answer. They look alike and we can trace them out, but sometimes they don't match up. We can fall into the trap of looking for hidden or literal meaning that just isn't there.
The point is ....etymology is not always correspondent to meaning. How do you understand words that only appear once? If there is nothing else available then we have to attach meaning to them! We have no choice.
He mentions ....Romans 1:16 when Paul uses the word power...people are fond of saying that dunamis is where we get our word dynamite.....so this power of God blows everything up and makes all else obsolete? Well, there was no dynamite to blow things up when Paul wrote this...so it may not have been what he had in mind...or 2 Corinthians 9:7 God loves a cheerful (Hilarious) giver....is this a commandment to play a laugh track as we give? No....could be Paul meant it in a different manner than we understand hilarious....
"Semantics is more than the meaning of words it involves phrases, sentences, discourse, genre, style; it demands a feel for not only syntagmatic word studies(those that relate words to other words) but also paradigmatic word studies(those that ponder why this word is used instead of that word). " DA Carson
They didn't argue with Jesus over semantics...they called His authority into question! To top it off...He also claimed He could give authority to others.....there is so much MORE in scripture than words....their meaning...and how they are used. Before we can understand their meaning combined we need to have faith in their subject....but then again, the purpose is to wet our appetite for Him...not arrive at knowledge.
Here are the word study fallacies Carson covers for anyone interested....it is a handy and helpful little book that really kind of shook me...The Root Fallacy, Semantic Anachronism, Semantic Obsolescence, Appeal to unknown or unlikely meaning, Careless Appeal to Background Material, Verbal Parallelomania, Linkage of Language and Mentality, False Assumptions about Technical Meaning, Problems Surrounding Synonyms and Componential Analysis, Unwarranted Semantic Disjunctions and Restrictions, Unwarranted Restriction of the Semantic Field, Problems related to the Semetic Background of the NT, and Unwarranted Linking of Sense and Reference.
Hi Geisha, thanks for posting. Actually I touch on a little bit of what you just posted on the first page of the web site that I just recently placed on the world wide web. Although, the overall subject of the site is a different one with a different emphasis. This one deals with the reconciliation of all through the Lord Jesus Christ. You might like the site. Have a great day.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
16
21
18
20
Popular Days
May 24
24
Apr 25
13
May 23
13
Apr 24
11
Top Posters In This Topic
Mark Sanguinetti 16 posts
Steve Lortz 21 posts
geisha779 18 posts
Gen-2 20 posts
Popular Days
May 24 2010
24 posts
Apr 25 2010
13 posts
May 23 2010
13 posts
Apr 24 2010
11 posts
Popular Posts
Tom
Not sure what you are saying here, Steve, when you say, "I don't think the gift of holy Spirit first poured out on the day of Pentecost is salvation itself." Unless all you mean is that it is not the
JeffSjo
I like it. Much better to be able to face it and deal. Much easier to keep it stuffed away out of sight. Much easier to write them off for the very same faults I myself have. Much easier to think
Gen-2
Since you cannot be PM'd Mark I'll leave this not here for you I'm not sure why you assumed I am one of those "unbiblical" "Rapture" people whom you seem to detest, or why you simply refused to respo
Mark Sanguinetti
Gen, I just sent you a private message. If you want to discuss this outside of the forum then return my message. In the meantime, please try to not take this discussion personally. And if you have a different view than what I and others have stated then please state your views on this forum. And if you have already stated some of them here I must have missed it so please restate your views. And please read these scriptures and ask God for understanding.
1 Cor 13:8-13
8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12 Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
NIV
And if you want to read my interpretation of the above scriptures you can ask me and I will answer you.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Mark Sanguinetti
I have different understanding
and I have a lot Bible programs
but there a wasted of Time
Resurrection Jesus Christ was the first and it be the last
how can this be so unless there happening at the same time
Paul has Rose from the dead
My time is still coming
Paul was looking his death to changed into a greater form
just I am waiting for my death to changed into a greater form
the changed is the living word not a book made of paper
Adam has changed like many others
yes the word paints a picture but what is a picture but illusion of what might happen
because until it happen it only a illusion of what may happen
but it happen it no more a illusion but a reality
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Edited by year2027Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
So Roy, are you one of those people who believes that right after you die your soul goes immediately to heaven to be with God and Jesus or to hell to be tormented forever? Because if you do I have a different view of death and the after life.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
Mark, you say, "I am only adding biblical insight." That's not entirely true; you also added, "To many times people use unbiblical words with a result of a degradation of understanding."
I agree with you 100% on the literal truth of what you have said that I’ve quoted, but I wonder about the placement of these two statements. Is it true that the use of the word “rapture” is one of those “Too many times people use unbiblical words with a result of a degradation of understanding?"
I’ve come to the point where I view “unbiblical” terms as a given that the concept itself is unbiblical. So, in my view, this term “rapture,” if not deserving of immediate disqualification as an unbiblical concept, certainly requires further investigation.
The book, Global Warning, states, “The English word rapture comes from the Latin rapto, which is a translation of the Greek word harpazo in the Greek New Testament. All these terms mean “caught up” or “snatched away.” While the word rapture does not appear in English translations of the Bible, the concept of the rapture certainly does. It is a sudden and instantaneous event that occurs without warning.”
So, perhaps the word “rapture,” unlike too many other unbiblical terms that are just unbiblical concepts (concepts of man in biblical disguise), is a legitimate biblical concept (and term).
The book goes on to show that “the rapture and the glorious appearing are two separate phases of the second coming,” and asks the reader to consider the following differences:
The book places all the following side by side, but I couldn’t figure out how to place them side by side online here. I certainly suggest you try to view the following comparing number one in the rapture with number one in the Glorious Appearing & so forth side by side. There are too many differences to consider these to be the same event.
The Rapture of the Church:
1. Christ comes for believers in the air.
2. All Christians are translated into new bodies.
3. Christians are taken to the Father’s house in heaven.
4. There is no judgment upon the Earth.
5. The church will be taken to heaven.
6. It could occur at any time (it is imminent).
7. There are no signs preceding it.
8. It affects only believers.
9. It is a time of joy.
10. It occurs before the “day of wrath.”
11. Satan is not bound, but wreaks havoc on the Earth.
12. Christians are judged at the judgment seat of Christ.
13. The marriage supper of the Lamb takes place.
14. Only Christ’s own will see him.
15. The seven year Tribulation follows.
The Glorious Appearing:
1. Christ comes with believers to the Earth.
2. There is no translation of bodies.
3. Resurrected saints remain on the Earth.
4. Christ judges the inhabitants of the Earth.
5. Christ sets up His kingdom on Earth.
6. It cannot occur until the end of the seven-year Tribulation.
7. There are numerous signs preceding it.
8. It affects all humanity.
9. It is a time of mourning.
10. It occurs after the “day of wrath.”
11. Satan is bound in the abyss for 1,000 years.
12. Christians have already been judged at the judgment seat of Christ.
13. The marriage supper of the Lamb has already taken place.
14. All those on Earth will see Him.
15. The 1,000-year millennium follows.
Tom
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Mark Sanguinetti
No and yes
because time has no meaning but which you give it
I changed right then and I have to wait
when I take fleshly things out of the picture there no way to measure time
is not that what spirit is
Jesus Christ is coming and has came already
but you do picture what I am saying because you see things inside the box of the bible
That is vain and void thinking I was a child once too
wisdom comes by thinking thinking there no fleshly world but we live in it
when you see spirit for what is
words do not tell you but God/Serpent does
like why Eve was temped by the Serpent so God teach about good
The evil the Serpent taught Eve God replace with love
the love God share with Eve was wash away the Serpent evil lesson
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Edited by year2027Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Hi Tom:
Good to hear from you. I always value your comments and thanks for posting.
Let me give you a little simple explanation of how I study things. When I am studying a biblical subject I locate biblical words that pertain to the subject and see how they are used in the bible and in their context. Then I use the Strong's numbering system for the New Testament and see all the places where these words are used and in the context of the scriptures. Then by studying the scriptures of how the various related biblical words are used I gain more understanding.
This is a very simple, yet effective method of study. Do you see the problem with the above method of study when using words that are not used in the bible?
And I do not want to argue about the use of words. That is a waste of time for everyone. Words are descriptive in nature and are in the eye of the beholder. One can take unscriptural words and use them to teach biblical truth or they can take unscriptural words and use them to teach error.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
It seems to me that if the bible were truly "inerrant", God could have made it so that these differences over word usage, translation and interpretation didn't arise.
And I think He could have made it so that you didn't have to be as intelligent as either Gen-2, or Mark to understand it. I think He could have made it so that there wasn't any doubt.
At the very least, He could have offered us some updates. It's been about 2,000 years.
Those are my thoughts, anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
I'm not a foreign lannguage expert. I suppose I'm not an English language expert either, but I am an English teacher, and have some facility in the area. I wonder if it might be a legitimate move to substitute the Latin translation of the Greek harpazo & procede with your method - tracing the word harpazo as if you were tracing the Latin rapto in the process - as the Latin rapto is presented as the equivalent of the Greek harpazo? That is the rationale presented in the book, Global Warning. What do you think? Yes, maybe, no?
It sure would make the answer to this question simple. There would be no need to argue the use of a word. God could not be construed as making this important article of faith difficult to understand.
Tom
Edited by TomLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
That sounds reasonable Tom. But I and perhaps everyone here does not know biblical Greek (harpazo). I could look up this word though if I knew the Strong's number that represents harpazo in the biblical Greek text. Does any one know what that number is?
Thanks for posting Tom. Good to hear from you.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
The KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon
Strong's Number: 726
Thanks for the welcome, Mark.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks everybody
if you look at things are biblical only you miss a lot of God love because do not study unbiblical words you never get true meaning
how about a unbiblical word "to take by forced" or "to go un-peaceful"
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Tom
I guess were written while was
I guess our minds think alike my friend
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Good job Roy. You looked up that Greek word that Tom mentioned using the Strong's number 726 and posted what you found for everyone to look at and examine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
In Revelation Chapter fourteen, verse one, we learn that Christ will stand on Mount Sion with 144,000. And in verse thirteen it says Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth, & etc...
Therefore we know that Christ returns and is on Mount Sion (a boots on the ground thing), that not all who shall die in the name of the Lord have yet died. Many events are recorded to happen between then and the first resurrection.
Actualy the account in Thessalonians that you quoted seems al lot more like the account in Revelation Chapter eleven verse twelve, than it does - the Resurrection of the Just.
Yet even then, though it is more similar it isn't the same.
And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.
Well,... that account is only listed as happening for the two prophets (in that context) But they ascend up to heaven in a much more similar way to Thessalonians than the much later first resurrection and this happens before Jesus has his boots on the ground.
There are many more, very easy to find examples that lead me to believe God is not limited to the two resurrections you've said are all. And it's easy to find on a word search, Heaven cloud ascend,.... etc
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
I have heard that most people that believe in the after life believe that resurrections in some form happens every time someone dies. Some also believe that some go directly to heaven and some go to hell to be tormented eternally. Does that make their beliefs true or based on the bible?
1 Cor 15:50-57
50 Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.
51 Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed,
52 in a moment (Greek word NT:823 atomos, atomon
that cannot be cut in two or divided, indivisible; 1 Cor 15:52 (from Thayer's Greek Lexicon, Electronic Database. Copyright © 2000 by Biblesoft)
, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.
53 For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, "DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP in victory.
55 "O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR STING?"
56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law;
57 but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
NASU
If one wants to learn about the resurrection of the dead they should read 1 Corinthians chapter 15. There are 4 usages of the word resurrection in this chapter and the whole chapter deals with this concept. In contrast there is only 2 usages in the book of Revelation that has the word resurrection. These two usages are Revelation chapter 20 verses 5 and 6 which I have previously quoted. The book of Revelation is a very difficult book to read with a lot of imagery and symbolism. I don't think it is a good idea to base ones foundational theology on this book because of all the difficult imagery and symbolism.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
You're asking me if what you've heard is true?
Edited to add: While the above quote was your entire original post,.. I see you've gone back and edited it to answer your own questions. I was pretty sure you never wanted to hear what I had to say, just by the way you're phrasing things. You don't actually care what I say, so why ask? You're just trolling here. You asked me for an example, and when I gave one you decided not to reply. Your comment on the book of Revelation is perhaps based on the fact that I quoted from it? You certainly doesn't seem to be applying that sentiment to your own basis for your foundational theology on the resurrections, although they were oddly the basis of your initial post concerning it.
Thanks for the edit. It explains a lot about your heart on this. I'm the one that doesn't understand Love, I need to go back and study it, while you, on the other hand. you're only doing this out of your great love for me, no doubt.
It's quite reminiscent of what I've heard of Way Corps dressing downs or confrontations, do your best to belittle the other person and their beliefs while professing great care for God and His words. Cut out a rather clear example if it doesn't support your view, and be dismissive and rude to others that you do not like, and it's quite clear you do not like me by the drippingly sweet forced condescending tone you've taken with me, because I don't believe as you do about one issue.
Congradulations Mark, job well done, you've managed to hurt my feelings again, not that that matters to you. Well done!
Edited by Gen-2Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Gen2, all you are doing right now is accusing me of doing exactly what you are doing. And nothing else.
Gen, the book of Revelation really is a difficult book to understand. Below is an example from the Nelson Bible dictionary. Read about the imagery in it. For example below, do you know what the following is? Because I don't know.
"an angel whose legs are pillars of fire, men who ride on horses while smiting the earth with plagues of destruction, and a fiery red dragon with seven heads and ten horns who crouches before a heavenly woman about to deliver a child."
REVELATION OF JOHN
The last book of the Bible, and the only book of APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE in the New Testament. Apocalypse, the title of this book in the original Greek, means "unveiling" or "disclosure" of hidden things known only to God. Other examples of apocalyptic literature can be found in the Old Testament in Daniel (chaps. Dan), Isaiah (24-27), Ezekiel (chaps. 37-41), and Zechariah (chaps. 9-12).
Like its counterparts, the Book of Revelation depicts the end of the present age and the coming of God's future kingdom through symbols, images, and numbers. These symbols include an angel whose legs are pillars of fire, men who ride on horses while smiting the earth with plagues of destruction, and a fiery red dragon with seven heads and ten horns who crouches before a heavenly woman about to deliver a child.
Why was apocalyptic literature written in such imagery? One reason is that these books were written in dangerous times when it was safer to hide one's message in imags than to speak plainly. Moreover, the symbolism preserved an element of mystery about details of time and place. The purpose of such symbolism, however, was not to confuse, but to inform and strengthen believers in the face of persecution.
Although the keys to some symbols have been lost, the overall message of this book is clear: God is all-powerful. No countermoves of the devil, no matter how strong, can frustrate the righteous purposes of God.
(from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Copyright ©1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)
Do you know what the difference between us in this discussion is? I know when I don't know something, but you think you know everything.
One thing I do know though is that if I would have insulted you as much as you have insulted me lately on this forum you would have been whinning and complaining by now telling everyone how badly I have treated you. On second thought you are already complaining. You are now telling everyone how much I have hurt your feelings. Sorry, but what ever hurt you are feeling now and where ever it came from I am not going to be able to help you on this.
And for you to think that I don't like you is just plain baloney. Gen2, you may need some emotional counseling, but I am not qualified to offer this to you.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Mark Sanguinetti
unbiblical/biblical or biblical/unbiblical
It like saying "help my unbelief"
have you ever heard this saying
get off your high biblical views and became to see thing as they are
we have biblical views and unbiblical views
we are humans fleshly limit morals that to become like gods
I love you Mark Sanguinetti
that I giving the word whether its unbiblical/biblical or biblical/unbiblical
learn the words both ways
see things bigger than real and smaller than real
nothing is what it seems to be
everything is more and less
than we see
the illusion is there but its not there
its real and it a illusion
because its spirit
that which I see is not of this world
so I do not really see it
that I cry "help my unbelief" with my belief
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Edited by year2027Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
You know, that's actually quite funny when you read it.
Thanks for your diagnosis, oh unqualified one.
I'm outta here Mark this is pointless. That's what I think, and you're in your 4th edit on this post already at 1:01 n the AM
I got a 12 hour drive to make , starting in 2 hours. ciao!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Gen-2
see you later my friend
thanks for the wisdom my friend
because your one smart lady
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
I am reading a really great little book by DA Carson entitled Exegetical Fallacies. The first chapter deals with some of traps we can fall into when doing word studies....it is not as simple as locating the word, its root, and how it has been used before.....and trying to put how we understand the word into the context. Even if we try reading it in context it can be a trap to assert meaning.
With Jesus....well, there were many Rabbi's saying things...true things...and speeches full of biblical words...but, it was the authority He had that was given to Him....that set Him apart. That is the difference with the Apostles as well...their authority with the words they spoke.
It is fun to trace words through the bible.....but, we have to be cognizant of many other variables to really glean an understanding. In English....we can board a plane...or be on the board of directors....or we can be bored....or bore a hole(whole). Sometimes with words like, Phileo, Agape, Pletho, and Pleroo the differences in meaning are so insignificant that their different uses don't alter the meaning of scripture. We can read meaning into their uses though. Because of our background we can be tempted to fall into the trap of bibliolatry....and embrace yet another heresy because of what we think we understand with words.
Remember, people use the same words...found in scripture...to praise the Lord and also to blaspheme Him. Biblical words. Our attitude and how we approach scripture is the key to biblical interpretation IMO, but even more key is our attitude when approaching the Lord.
Some of the epistles refer to Jesus predominantly as Lord, some as the Christ, and it is FUN to learn the differences and why....but, it is important to remember that they are pointing to one distinct person for a reason and not to lose sight of that as we study words.
In the book, Carson speaks of the different word study fallacies and one of them is "Root Fallacies" thinking that all words have meaning bound up by its shape or components.....sometimes it is true and he uses the example of our "goodbye" and "God be with you" but, also uses our word "Nice" which comes from the Latin word for ignorant...nescius... this makes the point the root is not always the answer. They look alike and we can trace them out, but sometimes they don't match up. We can fall into the trap of looking for hidden or literal meaning that just isn't there.
The point is ....etymology is not always correspondent to meaning. How do you understand words that only appear once? If there is nothing else available then we have to attach meaning to them! We have no choice.
He mentions ....Romans 1:16 when Paul uses the word power...people are fond of saying that dunamis is where we get our word dynamite.....so this power of God blows everything up and makes all else obsolete? Well, there was no dynamite to blow things up when Paul wrote this...so it may not have been what he had in mind...or 2 Corinthians 9:7 God loves a cheerful (Hilarious) giver....is this a commandment to play a laugh track as we give? No....could be Paul meant it in a different manner than we understand hilarious....
"Semantics is more than the meaning of words it involves phrases, sentences, discourse, genre, style; it demands a feel for not only syntagmatic word studies(those that relate words to other words) but also paradigmatic word studies(those that ponder why this word is used instead of that word). " DA Carson
They didn't argue with Jesus over semantics...they called His authority into question! To top it off...He also claimed He could give authority to others.....there is so much MORE in scripture than words....their meaning...and how they are used. Before we can understand their meaning combined we need to have faith in their subject....but then again, the purpose is to wet our appetite for Him...not arrive at knowledge.
Here are the word study fallacies Carson covers for anyone interested....it is a handy and helpful little book that really kind of shook me...The Root Fallacy, Semantic Anachronism, Semantic Obsolescence, Appeal to unknown or unlikely meaning, Careless Appeal to Background Material, Verbal Parallelomania, Linkage of Language and Mentality, False Assumptions about Technical Meaning, Problems Surrounding Synonyms and Componential Analysis, Unwarranted Semantic Disjunctions and Restrictions, Unwarranted Restriction of the Semantic Field, Problems related to the Semetic Background of the NT, and Unwarranted Linking of Sense and Reference.
And that is just the chapter on Word Studies.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Funny thing is, hell and heaven look the same.
Thanks Roy, yes resurrections are always happening.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks cman
thanks my friend
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Hi Geisha, thanks for posting. Actually I touch on a little bit of what you just posted on the first page of the web site that I just recently placed on the world wide web. Although, the overall subject of the site is a different one with a different emphasis. This one deals with the reconciliation of all through the Lord Jesus Christ. You might like the site. Have a great day.
http://www.christian-universalism.info/
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.