Some conclusions I've made and want to start a debate

[james57]

Like yesterday you said I did not agree with my own Churches teaching but I do it was you who got something wrong on what I believe.

today you think I did not believe that only a few went to heaven while the rest await the resurrection but I have believe that for a long time.

I think you are confused. But that can be the nature of written communication I find. not blaming you personally it can just as easily by my communication that is the problem.

I'm just going to keep repeating your latest belief concerning this subject. One person -Elijah who died in ot times went straight to heaven. Everyone else who lived in ot times must await the resurrection of the dead

 

[james57]

Like yesterday you said I did not agree with my own Churches teaching but I do it was you who got something wrong on what I believe.

today you think I did not believe that only a few went to heaven while the rest await the resurrection but I have believe that for a long time.

I think you are confused. But that can be the nature of written communication I find. not blaming you personally it can just as easily by my communication that is the problem.

So you believe Enoch, Noah, Abraham Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon, sammuel, Daniel, the prophets and all others who lived in OT times must await the resurrection of the dead. Apart from Elijah who you believe God singled out to go straight to heaven when he left this earth

 

[gotime]

Look James I am going to chalk this up to a breakdown in communication. I am going to assume you are not as irrational and illogical as you come across to me on here. I will assume that your comments are based on my inability to communicate clearly in type. That may well be the case.

Any way again this has become fruitless and I don't see this conversation really helping. I feel you don't really read what I say and thus come up with wrong Ideas on what I am saying. But that is I suppose the nature of written communication. I know I am not great at this form of communication so I don't blame you maybe its all my fault. But trust me when I say that you have totally misunderstood my position who how I operate. sure you have bits right but your construct of those things is wrong.

I am sure you are a wonderful person who in person I may well get along with quite well. But here its just not working.

so Ill stop blessings.

 

[james57]

Look James I am going to chalk this up to a breakdown in communication. I am going to assume you are not as irrational and illogical as you come across to me on here. I will assume that your comments are based on my inability to communicate clearly in type. That may well be the case.

Any way again this has become fruitless and I don't see this conversation really helping. I feel you don't really read what I say and thus come up with wrong Ideas on what I am saying. But that is I suppose the nature of written communication. I know I am not great at this form of communication so I don't blame you maybe its all my fault. But trust me when I say that you have totally misunderstood my position who how I operate. sure you have bits right but your construct of those things is wrong.

I am sure you are a wonderful person who in person I may well get along with quite well. But here its just not working.

so Ill stop blessings.

I don't see how I can have misunderstood. You quoted scripture earlier that proved no one mentioned in heb ch 11 could have gone to heaven when they died. You quoted it, not me.
The list in that chapter includes Enoch, Moses Noah, Abraham, isaac, Jacob, Sammuel, the prophets and you have also accepted David awaits the resurrection of the dead. When I asked you if you believed God took anyone else to heaven as the people mentioned you accept didn't go, you mentioned no one, appearing to support your belief only Elijah went
So what am i misunderstanding?
Your latest belief is clearly only Elijah in OT tines attained to heaven.
If you believe God took others to heaven while making those wait who appear in hwb Ch11 until the resurrection of the dead, please tell me

 

[Brother_J_BELGIUM]

First of all, I appreciate the fact that you try to form your own opinion, based on what you studied on in the Bible. However, since this is a discussion forum, I'd like to say that I do not believe exactly the same as you but I guess that's ok.

The things you mentioned about the Vatican being the whore of Revelation (End Times Babylon) and America being the beast are subjects that really interest me as a Bible student myself.

The Vatican can't be end times Babylon because Isaiah said so:

Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.
And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.
It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation: neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there; neither shall the shepherds make their fold there. (Isaiah 13)

On the Day of the Lord, Babylon will be destroyed and the Arabian will no longer pitch tent there.

How can this be the Vatican? We all know where Arabians pitch tents, do we?


Secondly, I think it's impossible for America to be the beast of the sea for so many reasons. I will try to sum up the most important one(s).

According to verse 1 of the 13th chapter of Revelation, this beast has seven heads (kingdoms) and ten horns (kings).
The second verse tells us that this beast was like unto a leopard and had feet like a bear and a mouth as a lion. Every kid knows that Daniel chapters 4 and 7 (?) talk about these three animals/beasts and it gives us the following explanation:

Leopard = Grecian kingdom
Bear = Persian kingdom
Lion = Babylonian kingdom

The beast out of the sea is like a leopard, like a bear and like a lion. It's simple.

Grecian kingdom + Persian kingdom + Babylonian kingdom = the beast out of the sea.

This is the eighth kingdom which is a revival of the seventh. What is the seventh kingdom? The seventh kingdom is the kingdom that "crushes" all other metals as described in Daniel 2:40.

It crushes the gold, the silver and the bronze. In other words, the seventh kingdom crushes the Babylonian, the Persian and the Grecian kingdom. America never, ever crushed and conquered Persia or the Grecian kingdom.

The only empire that has ever crushed both the Babylonian, the Persian and the Grecian empires is the Islamic empire/Ottoman Empire. When we look at the Islamic world, it sure looks like a beast that looks like a leopard (Grecian kingdom), like a bear (Persian kingdom) and like a Grecian kingdom. Just take a look at all the maps of these ancient kingdoms and you will see that this vast region is entirely Islamic.

 

[james57]

We believe that Elijah went to heaven because that is what it says.

We believe most did not because that is what it says:

Heb 11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
Heb 11:40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

while some clearly went as the scriptures say. Most await the resurrection. Even David who was a man after Gods own heart did not go yet.

The above was your post in which you used heb 11:39&40 to prove most didn't go to heaven when they died but awaited the resurrection of the dead. I have given you the list of those mentioned in the chapter who therefore according to your stated verses must await the resurrection of the dead

 

[williamjordan]

I do truly believe Jesus Christ was created at the beginning of creation, he was present there in the beginning because he was created in the beginning, and AFTER he was made, were ALL THINGS made THROUGH HIM, in a certain scripture we even read:

who is the image of the unseen God, first-born of all creation; (Colossians 1:15 [ABP])
​

​

He is the first born of things created! Meaning he too, was created!

It is ONLY the Father, that has no beginning.

The early church in Acts was not instructed ever to tithe, that was something that was done in the time of the Jews and the temple. And taking this further, we see clear evidence that the believers did not tithe, but rather, did something even GREATER, they SOLD EVERYTHING that they had, and gave as each had need:


Here we see indicated that although the believers sold all their stuff, they still kept control of the money. The money wasn't pooled into one church account, it was merely just shared as each had need. This is how the church should run!

Given my background, and area of study, I feel as if it's my duty to respond to this.

In regards to Colossians 1.15 ("He is the image of the invisible God, firstborn of all creation"), we could discuss partitive genitives (“i.e., one of the students of the class”), or genitives of subordination (“i.e., King over Israel”) and its correlative analogous genitive (“i.e., King of Israel”); however, I would instead like to direct attention to the preposition found in v. 16, ὅτι (“He is the image of the invisible God, the Firstborn of all creation, because…”), because our understanding of the subsequent things that Paul has to say is key to understanding what he meant by referring to Christ as “Firstborn of all creation.” The reason for Christ being called the “Firstborn of all creation” is “because all things were made in Him… through Him… and for Him.” This statement of course makes little or no sense if the phrase “Firstborn of all creation” is meant to mean that Christ is the first thing that God ever created. How is it that Christ is the first-created of all creation, because all things were created in, through, and for Him?

Christ’s creation of “all things” serves as the sole basis of Him being “Firstborn of all creation.” If I were to say, “He is president of the United States, because he received the most votes,” the ground clause “because he received the most votes” modifies the predicate nominative “president” (giving the grounds for it) but does not contribute anything to the subordinate prepositional phrase “of the United States.”

Whatever we take “Firstborn of all creation” to mean (and there are divergent views within Orthodoxy), it must be on the basis of Christ existing before, and creating all things as indicated in the ground clause, “because in Him all things in heaven and on earth were created.” This is elsewhere expressed throughout the NT, where the authority of the Creator over creation derives from the very act of creation itself (Rev. 4.11, Hebrews 2.8).

With this in mind, consider the lexical field of πρωτότοκος ("Firstborn"). It is commonly recognized that “Firstborn,” as it is used throughout the OT is often used in reference to the preeminence of an individual. In the highly Messianic Psalm, David (who here is a typification of the coming Messiah, Jesus Christ), the youngest amongst the sons of Jesse (1 Sam 16.11-13), is described and appointed as God’s “firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth” (Psalm 89.27). It is Christ, as the Son of God, who is the “Firstborn” in the sense that He is the “heir” of all things, for everything that belongs to the Father also belongs to the Son (John 16.15, 17.10). As the “firstborn” is the heir to all of his father’s estate, so too is Christ the heir of all the Heavenly Father’s estate, namely, all of creation (Col 1.15, Heb 1.2, Psalm 2.7-8).

This understanding of πρωτότοκος ("Firstborn") sheds light on the preposition in v. 16. Christ is the "Firstborn" of all creation, because all things were created in, through, and for Him.

 

[Ahwatukee]

Given my background, and area of study, I feel as if it's my duty to respond to this.

In regards to Colossians 1.15 ("He is the image of the invisible God, firstborn of all creation"), we could discuss partitive genitives (“i.e., one of the students of the class”), or genitives of subordination (“i.e., King over Israel”) and its correlative analogous genitive (“i.e., King of Israel”); however, I would instead like to direct attention to the preposition found in v. 16, ὅτι (“He is the image of the invisible God, the Firstborn of all creation, because…”), because our understanding of the subsequent things that Paul has to say is key to understanding what he meant by referring to Christ as “Firstborn of all creation.” The reason for Christ being called the “Firstborn of all creation” is “because all things were made in Him… through Him… and for Him.” This statement of course makes little or no sense if the phrase “Firstborn of all creation” is meant to mean that Christ is the first thing that God ever created. How is it that Christ is the first-created of all creation, because all things were created in, through, and for Him?

Christ’s creation of “all things” serves as the sole basis of Him being “Firstborn of all creation.” If I were to say, “He is president of the United States, because he received the most votes,” the ground clause “because he received the most votes” modifies the predicate nominative “president” (giving the grounds for it) but does not contribute anything to the subordinate prepositional phrase “of the United States.” In fact, you could remove the subordinate prepositional phrase without issue, which again seems to indicate that there isn’t a link between it and the ground clause.

Whatever we take “Firstborn of all creation” to mean (and there are divergent views within Orthodoxy), it must be on the basis of Christ existing before, and creating all things as indicated in the ground clause, “because in Him all things in heaven and on earth were created.” This is elsewhere expressed throughout the NT, where the authority of the Creator over creation derives from the very act of creation itself (Rev. 4.11, Hebrews 2.8).

With this in mind, consider the lexical field of πρωτότοκος ("Firstborn"). It is commonly recognized that “Firstborn,” as it is used throughout the OT is often used in reference to the preeminence of an individual. In the highly Messianic Psalm, iDavid (who here is a typification of the coming Messiah, Jesus Christ), the youngest amongst the sons of Jesse (1 Sam 16.11-13), is described and appointed as God’s “firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth” (Psalm 89.27). It is Christ, as the Son of God, who is the “Firstborn” in the sense that He is the “heir” of all things, for everything that belongs to the Father also belongs to the Son (John 16.15, 17.10). As the “firstborn” is the heir to all of his father’s estate, so too is Christ the heir of all the Heavenly Father’s estate, namely, all of creation (Col 1.15, Heb 1.2, Psalm 2.7-8).

This understanding of πρωτότοκος ("Firstborn") sheds light on the preposition in v. 16. Christ is the "Firstborn" of all creation, because all things were created in, through, and for Him.

Hi WilliamJordan,

Just FYI, cgaveria was banned, so he won't be seeing this post.

 

[Blain]

Hi WilliamJordan,

Just FYI, cgaveria was banned, so he won't be seeing this post.

unless he is one of those types to constantly come back under another user name

 

[james57]

Islam's prophet, Muhammad, believed Jesus was the Messiah, Allah's anointed messenger. Allah's people (Muslims) are told to listen to Allah's messengers (Koran, 4.171; 5. 111*) Muhammad's revelations about Jesus, contained in the Koran, should be read by his followers, all Muslims, as the Koran requires. The Qur'an/Koran proves Jesus is the Messiah and Muhammad did not replace him as final prophet.

Thank you for that. I guess I should have read the Quran before chatting to Muslims lol. That's amazing the Quran states Mohammad did not replace Jesus as the final prophet. Muslins quoted to me from somewhere Mohammad claimed to be the final prophet.
When I chatted to them, I was left with the impression ( obviously I guess) it was just people using baised logical reasoning in debate. It became clear the gulf was they didn't have the holy spirit.
BTW
All they wanted to do was ask questions, never answer any

 

[Magenta]

Thank you for that. I guess I should have read the Quran before chatting to Muslims lol. That's amazing the Quran states Mohammad did not replace Jesus as the final prophet. Muslins quoted to me from somewhere Mohammad claimed to be the final prophet.
When I chatted to them, I was left with the impression ( obviously I guess) it was just people using baised logical reasoning in debate. It became clear the gulf was they didn't have the holy spirit.
BTW
All they wanted to do was ask questions, never answer any

You are welcome There are links hidden in the text that will explain it... use your cursor to find them... I was actually looking for the sura that has Jesus talking about His resurrection, which, of course, Muslims deny He was crucified so He could not have resurrected in that case.... Muslims are all over the place when it comes to Jesus.

 

[Magenta]

Here it is. You know in the Koran, Jesus speaks while yet a baby.

Muhammad also speaks of the resurrection of Jesus:

"Thereupon she pointed to him. They said, 'How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?' Jesus said, 'I am a servant of ALLAH. HE has given me the Book, and has made me a Prophet; 'And HE has made me blessed wheresoever I may be, and has enjoined upon me Prayer and almsgiving so long as I live; 'And HE has made me dutiful towards my mother, and has not made me arrogant and graceless; 'And peace was on me the day I was born, and peace will be on me the day I shall die, and the day I shall be raised up to life again.' That was Jesus, son of Mary. This is a statement of the truth concerning which they entertain doubt."—Qur'an, Surah 19:30-35

http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/quran-jesus.html
​

 

[james57]

Here it is. You know in the Koran, Jesus speaks while yet a baby.

Muhammad also speaks of the resurrection of Jesus:

"Thereupon she pointed to him. They said, 'How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?' Jesus said, 'I am a servant of ALLAH. HE has given me the Book, and has made me a Prophet; 'And HE has made me blessed wheresoever I may be, and has enjoined upon me Prayer and almsgiving so long as I live; 'And HE has made me dutiful towards my mother, and has not made me arrogant and graceless; 'And peace was on me the day I was born, and peace will be on me the day I shall die, and the day I shall be raised up to life again.' That was Jesus, son of Mary. This is a statement of the truth concerning which they entertain doubt."—Qur'an, Surah 19:30-35

http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/quran-jesus.html
​

Thanks for these. When I debated with Muslims on facebook a woman who had read the Quran used her knowledge of it to prove Islamic error. She told me she got a lot of death threats in return. You should be safe on here!

 

[Magenta]

Thanks for these. When I debated with Muslims on facebook a woman who had read the Quran used her knowledge of it to prove Islamic error. She told me she got a lot of death threats in return. You should be safe on here lol

Have you seen this video on Geert Wilders? Very much well worth watching!

[video=youtube;wWF8W-RZzeY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWF8W-RZzeY[/video]

 

[james57]

Have you seen this video on Geert Wilders? Very much well worth watching!

[video=youtube;wWF8W-RZzeY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWF8W-RZzeY[/video]

He is a brave man who has sacrificed hugely to tell the truth
I honestly believe Islam will be used to fulfill biblical prophecy. It is only going to grow stronger and be the dominant religion of the world. In less than forty years France is expected to be an Islamic country, Britain less than fifty. I believe the major countries of the earth will become Islamic and these countries will attack Israel as mentioned in zech chs 12&14. Then Christ will appear and fight for Israel and Islam will finally be defeated. But until then it will just grow in strength.
As Jesus said
The time is coming when anyone who kills you will believe they are doing God a service john 16:2

 

[gotime]

I don't see how I can have misunderstood. You quoted scripture earlier that proved no one mentioned in heb ch 11 could have gone to heaven when they died. You quoted it, not me.
The list in that chapter includes Enoch, Moses Noah, Abraham, isaac, Jacob, Sammuel, the prophets and you have also accepted David awaits the resurrection of the dead. When I asked you if you believed God took anyone else to heaven as the people mentioned you accept didn't go, you mentioned no one, appearing to support your belief only Elijah went
So what am i misunderstanding?
Your latest belief is clearly only Elijah in OT tines attained to heaven.
If you believe God took others to heaven while making those wait who appear in hwb Ch11 until the resurrection of the dead, please tell me

First I was not simply speaking of this one topic. But on this topic I did quote that verse. I have also since posted on a error I made in what that verse was saying. Eg it is not talking about heaven but rather the city and the earth made new as the context shows but I missed when I first posted it.

So the text is not dealing with Heaven as I first assumed but rather the reward of the meek inheriting the earth made new. So no that verse does not prove that no one there could not have gone to heaven. I have already dealt with my mistake there yet you are still going on about it as if I have not done so.

I have not said or at least did not mean to say or indicate that no one else went. What I did say was that only Elijah clearly says it. But I did mention that I believe Moses did go however I admit I can not prove that by showing a verse that says Moses went to heaven. So it is my opinion based on what I know of scripture, but I could be wrong so I wont be dogmatic on that.

The reason I believe that is that the bible teaches about the resurrection when Jesus comes. It does not say that people went to heaven except Elijah so I accept that for whatever reason God chose to take Elijah. Enoch may well have gone as well but I can not prove he did or prove he did not.

So only Elijah is clear. I don't believe this arbitrarily but because it says so and I simply take that by faith.

 

[james57]

First I was not simply speaking of this one topic. But on this topic I did quote that verse. I have also since posted on a error I made in what that verse was saying. Eg it is not talking about heaven but rather the city and the earth made new as the context shows but I missed when I first posted it.

So the text is not dealing with Heaven as I first assumed but rather the reward of the meek inheriting the earth made new. So no that verse does not prove that no one there could not have gone to heaven. I have already dealt with my mistake there yet you are still going on about it as if I have not done so.

I have not said or at least did not mean to say or indicate that no one else went. What I did say was that only Elijah clearly says it. But I did mention that I believe Moses did go however I admit I can not prove that by showing a verse that says Moses went to heaven. So it is my opinion based on what I know of scripture, but I could be wrong so I wont be dogmatic on that.

The reason I believe that is that the bible teaches about the resurrection when Jesus comes. It does not say that people went to heaven except Elijah so I accept that for whatever reason God chose to take Elijah. Enoch may well have gone as well but I can not prove he did or prove he did not.

So only Elijah is clear. I don't believe this arbitrarily but because it says so and I simply take that by faith.

As you told me, context where Elijah is concerned!!!
It would contradict all other scripture concerning this subject if one believes he went to dwell in THE heaven with God.

 

[james57]

First I was not simply speaking of this one topic. But on this topic I did quote that verse. I have also since posted on a error I made in what that verse was saying. Eg it is not talking about heaven but rather the city and the earth made new as the context shows but I missed when I first posted it.

So the text is not dealing with Heaven as I first assumed but rather the reward of the meek inheriting the earth made new. So no that verse does not prove that no one there could not have gone to heaven. I have already dealt with my mistake there yet you are still going on about it as if I have not done so.

I have not said or at least did not mean to say or indicate that no one else went. What I did say was that only Elijah clearly says it. But I did mention that I believe Moses did go however I admit I can not prove that by showing a verse that says Moses went to heaven. So it is my opinion based on what I know of scripture, but I could be wrong so I wont be dogmatic on that.

The reason I believe that is that the bible teaches about the resurrection when Jesus comes. It does not say that people went to heaven except Elijah so I accept that for whatever reason God chose to take Elijah. Enoch may well have gone as well but I can not prove he did or prove he did not.

So only Elijah is clear. I don't believe this arbitrarily but because it says so and I simply take that by faith.

So is your view now, those who went straight to heaven in the OT will be transferred to the new Jerusalem on this earth as prophesied in rev 21:1-3 I am assuming it is.

Your view contradicts a lot of plain scripture, you must also believe they entered heaven in an imperfect state as per your quote of hwb 11:40

I don't see how that is possible, but I'm sure you can explain it!!!

 

[james57]

First I was not simply speaking of this one topic. But on this topic I did quote that verse. I have also since posted on a error I made in what that verse was saying. Eg it is not talking about heaven but rather the city and the earth made new as the context shows but I missed when I first posted it.

So the text is not dealing with Heaven as I first assumed but rather the reward of the meek inheriting the earth made new. So no that verse does not prove that no one there could not have gone to heaven. I have already dealt with my mistake there yet you are still going on about it as if I have not done so.

I have not said or at least did not mean to say or indicate that no one else went. What I did say was that only Elijah clearly says it. But I did mention that I believe Moses did go however I admit I can not prove that by showing a verse that says Moses went to heaven. So it is my opinion based on what I know of scripture, but I could be wrong so I wont be dogmatic on that.

The reason I believe that is that the bible teaches about the resurrection when Jesus comes. It does not say that people went to heaven except Elijah so I accept that for whatever reason God chose to take Elijah. Enoch may well have gone as well but I can not prove he did or prove he did not.

So only Elijah is clear. I don't believe this arbitrarily but because it says so and I simply take that by faith.

Rev21:3 states:

NOW( not before) the dwelling of God is with men.

 

[gotime]

As you told me, context where Elijah is concerned!!!
It would contradict all other scripture concerning this subject if one believes he went to dwell in THE heaven with God.

I have yet to see where it contradicts scripture. I accept you think it does but I do not.