Speculation for a seemingly biblical contradiction

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
#41
Thank's for your christian love and fellowship. Too bad, I suppose, I''m unworthy. Trolls are legendary little green dwarf disciples of Satan himself that live under bridges, right? Now you have a picture in your mind of my appearance & you know better than cross my bridge, huh?

LOL .....I don't extend love OR fellowship to trolls.....and you, dear troll, have no clue about REAL biblical Christian love or fellowship....which was the first clue that gave you away. Another clue on trolls is that they ask questions that are way beyond the precepts of coming to knowledge. To be a successful troll you must ask more basic questions, like how is a person born again? Or what does the word 'reprobate' mean. I hope that will be helpful to your future trolling.

Don't forget the big play now for you is to name me as mean girl.....so here are a couple of faces to help you gain sympathy (trolls love sympathy) :cry: :ROFL:
 

Blain

The Word Weaver
Aug 28, 2012
19,213
2,548
113
#42
Make sure you visit my every post and denounce me as a satanic slimy green troll because I ask questions you can't answer. Actually in my opinion you're simply proving you have zero christian values yourself. I'll pray for you!
I just did and I can conclude you are not a troll in fact it seems to me that you are seeking wise council and guidence and have responded in a very respeful manner to people
Some of the things you posted and asked about I may be able to help with especially the hearing of God's voice
 

Blain

The Word Weaver
Aug 28, 2012
19,213
2,548
113
#43
LOL .....I don't extend love OR fellowship to trolls.....and you, dear troll, have no clue about REAL biblical Christian love or fellowship....which was the first clue that gave you away. Another clue on trolls is that they ask questions that are way beyond the precepts of coming to knowledge. To be a successful troll you must ask more basic questions, like how is a person born again? Or what does the word 'reprobate' mean. I hope that will be helpful to your future trolling.

Don't forget the big play now for you is to name me as mean girl.....so here are a couple of faces to help you gain sympathy (trolls love sympathy) :cry::ROFL:
And there lays my point we are called to love and teach show and respond in love even to trolls I just read all of robo's posts and your assumption was way off
 
Aug 14, 2019
1,374
307
83
#44
The thing here is: you don't KNOW that I am wrong about his motives. So unfair criticism....I tested that spirit....only Satan questions the word of God, it began with this: (Satan to Eve: "did God REALLY say......?)
Contradictions like this are invitations to question. The answers resolve mystery and at the same time draw the believer deeper into Scriptures. I'm sure that is the intention of the Lord.
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
#45
And there lays my point we are called to love and teach show and respond in love even to trolls I just read all of robo's posts and your assumption was way off
Blain, I suspect your heart is in the right place but you need to bring your head into your posts. If you are born again, it must have been fairly recently as your discernment button as not been activated yet. The bible alone is our sole authority on faith (which includes doctrine) and morals. Anything else has come out of the imperfect minds of men. I have solid information FROM THE BIBLE on just what Christian love and fellowship are. One little bit of info on fellowship is from 1 Cor chapter1 in that we are to be in fellowhip ONLY with those of like mind with NO divisions among us. That "mind" being the mind of Christ. That mind is what scripture has revealed to us and nothing else.
Study to be approved as a workman who is ABLE to handle ACCURATELY the word of truth 1 Tim 2:15
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#46
The context should answer the seeming contradiction. Here is the full text. John 3:7-17

7 "Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?
10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?
11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
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.
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved."


The indications of what is being said here are somewhat hidden, but here they are.
  1. The sequence in verse 13. First is "ASCENDING" in verse 13. In our understanding, Jesus should have said that He had DESCENDED FROM heaven
  2. The tense in verse 13. The "son of man IS in heaven" - present tense. But at that moment Jesus was on earth.
But first we must establish why our Lord Jesus accused Nicodemus. Does the Old Testament reveal the rebirth? It does - in at least two places. The Book of John is written for one reason alone. That reason is found in John 20:30-31;

30 "And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name."


The reason John is written is to achieve what was suspended at the Gate of Eden. Man was to have access to the Tree of LIFE. What happens when we eat fruit. The body starts a process whereby we become organically one with the fruit. The NATURE of the fruit is organically MIXED with us. If you cut open the eater after a day, you will not find the fruit anywhere. It has become ONE with the man. And thus was God's plan. Adam was a perfect human. But he was missing the decisive ingredient to be really like God - God's LIFE and God's NATURE. Eve settles it for us. After God had paraded all the living creatures before Adam, and he had inspected them and named them, not one was found "MEET" for him. "MEET" means "up to the standard of". For Eve to be "up to the standard of Adam", she had to possess his SUBSTANCE and his NATURE. So also, to be in the likeness and image of God, we need to be INFUSED organically with God's Nature. This does not mean that we ARE God, but that we are humans with the capability to display and project God. Nicodemus should have known this.

What Nicodemus should also have known is the lesson of the Bronze Serpent in Numbers 21. Israel murmured. Serpents bit them. The death that caught up with the bitten coursed in their veins. The bitten had intrinsic death in them. The issue was not the wound as if a lion had bitten them. It was the very "death-nature" that coursed in them that was the problem. So when God solved the problem by FAITH in the Bronze Serpent, it does not say that the bitten WERE HEALED! It says "THEY LIVED". The hanging of the Bronze Serpent on a wooden pole as a substitute, caused imminent DEATH to change to LIFE (Nu.22:8). And what was the rebirth for? Nicodemus should have clicked that man does not need HEALING from his Adamic nature. He needs a NEW LIFE - one that operates out of the SEAT of human life - the human spirit (Jas.2:26).

There are more examples like the Manna and the various Offerings that Israelites ATE and became organically one with. But Israel had made the fatal error of not recognizing that the Adamic nature could not be fixed by the law of Moses. The Law was "unto life" (Rom.7:10), but it addressed the utterly weak flesh. Nicodemus, an educated man at his peak after 1,500 years of proof that men could not keep the Law, did not have a clue why the bronze serpent was "lifted up". So our Lord told him that he did not comprehend because it was a matter hatched in heaven. And it was hatched by "WE" (Jn.3:11). Who is a "WE" and domicile in heaven? Why, the TRIUNE GOD - Father Son and Holy Spirit. From this August source comes the original plan to INFUSE man with God's LIFE. And no MAN has ascended to heaven to be a WITNESS of this plan. It is not a contradictory word against Enoch and Elijah. It is about WHO is in heaven who WITNESSED this plan in the making.

The mean is NOT that no man has ascended, but that no one ascended to witness the plan except the Son of man Who WAS IN HEAVEN AT THE TIME (present tense) and Who goes there to accomplish it. So the sequence is:
  • Jesus is born to a woman but not man. He is thus 100% man but does not have Adam's blood coursing in his veins
  • Jesus leads a perfect life under Law to make Him eligible to die for men who could not
  • Jesus dies as a perfect, unblemished Substitute. He is "lifted up" on a wooden pole.
  • Jesus, Who has no sin, is judged as a Serpent. But He is a bronze Serpent because He does not have the nature of a snake
  • Jesus must be resurrected to be proof that every little sin was dealt with
  • Jesus must "ascend" first to present His blood to the Father (Heb.9:12). This He does before the woman may touch Him
  • Jesus "descends" that evening and BREATHES the Holy Spirit INTO His disciples
  • His disciples are NOT healed but RECEIVE (DIVINE) LIFE
  • The plan hatched in heaven, to which the Triune God ALONE was "witness" is accomplished
  • Since then believers are "partakers of the divine life" - 2nd Peter 1:4
Side trail but I don't think it was intended to interpret Jesus statement to Mary as saying he needed to make a quick trip to heaven to pour out some blood before he could allow anyone to touch him. Actually I know for a fact he did not intend for us to get that understanding from his words because if you look at Matthew's Gospel you find that all the women mentioned their clung to his feet and he told them to go tell his disciples to meet him in Galilee. So they touched him.
Matthe 28

8And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word. 9And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.

And once you concede that Matthew clearly states that they touched him then you must abandoned the theory that no one could touch him before his trip to heaven. Mary apparently did not stop clinging to him when the other women or woman got up to obey Jesus and go tell the disciples and Jesus had to tell Mary to stop clinging to him. He was trying to explain to her that after his ascension He would come and make his abode in her heart, but she was afraid of losing him again. That ascension took place later in front of all the witnesses. There is no mention of two ascensions in theology in the rest of scriptures.

Heb 9 is explaining what Jesus accomplished to fulfill the types and shadows of the temple sacrifice and atonement. Jesus shed blood was accepted the day he spilled it on the cross. The day he said it is finished and that blood was on the ground the veil was torn from top to bottom and Jesus did not need to take a container of that blood to heaven post resurrection to accomplish what Heb 9 is saying was accomplished on the cross.

What, was Jesus still bleeding while telling Mary not to keep clinging to him? Did the other women get blood all over them from clinging to his feet (Matthew version) or did he have a flask of blood in his pocket he saved from the cross to physically pour out a second time in heaven? Did he cut his wrists in heaven and pour out this blood on the mercy seat in heaven after his ascension? Reread Heb 9 without these presuppositions and you will find that he is talking about what was accomplished spiritually by the physical sacrifice of the cross.
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
#47
Contradictions like this are invitations to question. The answers resolve mystery and at the same time draw the believer deeper into Scriptures. I'm sure that is the intention of the Lord.
I give up........now we have birds of a feather.............
 

Blain

The Word Weaver
Aug 28, 2012
19,213
2,548
113
#48
Blain, I suspect your heart is in the right place but you need to bring your head into your posts. If you are born again, it must have been fairly recently as your discernment button as not been activated yet. The bible alone is our sole authority on faith (which includes doctrine) and morals. Anything else has come out of the imperfect minds of men. I have solid information FROM THE BIBLE on just what Christian love and fellowship are. One little bit of info on fellowship is from 1 Cor chapter1 in that we are to be in fellowhip ONLY with those of like mind with NO divisions among us. That "mind" being the mind of Christ. That mind is what scripture has revealed to us and nothing else.
Study to be approved as a workman who is ABLE to handle ACCURATELY the word of truth 1 Tim 2:15
You can say what you wish about me but again I ask you how did you discern robo's spirit?
 

bojack

Well-known member
Dec 16, 2019
2,309
1,006
113
#49
“Enoch walked with God, and he was not, for God took him" reads Genesis 5:22–24

2 Kings 2:11, "And as they still went on and talked, behold, chariots of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.".

In John 3:13, Jesus tells us the following: “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven” (John 3:13)

Might I speculate about this seemingly biblical contradiction? First let me say, I’m attempting to in no way take from, or add too the biblical scriptures. My opinions here are simply speculation ^ pure unproven opinion, & I welcome all to speculate with me.

It seems that common sense would have it that Enoch and Elijah either “ascended” to earth from heaven, or didn’t go to heaven. I’m subscribing to the latter with pure speculation. I speculate that in the Father’s House are many mansions, i.e. “Other worlds,” i.e. planets, thus I’m speculating that Enoch & Elijah were taken by the Lord to other perfect worlds in God’s great universe? What’s your opinion?
It's kinda like a ''free spin'' .. I can't explain it but just an idea
26 And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?
27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

One of these guys had died and the other was taken up alive from what I read ..
4 And there appeared unto them Elias with Moses: and they were talking with Jesus.
 

bojack

Well-known member
Dec 16, 2019
2,309
1,006
113
#51
It's kinda like a ''free spin'' .. I can't explain it but just an idea
26 And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?
27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

One of these guys had died and the other was taken up alive from what I read ..
4 And there appeared unto them Elias with Moses: and they were talking with Jesus.
I can relate to Peter , he seemed to be at a loss for words .. lol
5 And Peter answered and said to Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
6 For he wist not what to say; for they were sore afraid.
 

Robo36

Active member
Nov 27, 2019
186
58
28
#52
And no it would not make any logical sense to apply a physical realm of just another planet to a spiritual realm that the scriptures are referring to when Elijah was taken up into heaven in chariots and horses of fire. It is of another world for sure but not a physical world but a higher heavenly world.
But isn’t earth a physical world? If God created earth as a physical place inhabited by the flesh and blood physical beings, why is it senseless to assume in all of the cosmos of stars and planets we know physically exist, we would reject any idea that other physical inhabited worlds of God’s creation also exist? Why is it senseless to imagine that there are other physically populated worlds not condemned by sin and perfectly existing in pure loving everlasting life whereby earth’s saints taken alive by God have, (for lack of other words), been transplanted?
 

Blain

The Word Weaver
Aug 28, 2012
19,213
2,548
113
#53
But isn’t earth a physical world? If God created earth as a physical place inhabited by the flesh and blood physical beings, why is it senseless to assume in all of the cosmos of stars and planets we know physically exist, we would reject any idea that other physical inhabited worlds of God’s creation also exist? Why is it senseless to imagine that there are other physically populated worlds not condemned by sin and perfectly existing in pure loving everlasting life whereby earth’s saints taken alive by God have, (for lack of other words), been transplanted?
Mainly because of the word eternal. in the universe nothing is eternal not on this side of the spectrum when he does take us it won't be a place in the physical realm
 

Robo36

Active member
Nov 27, 2019
186
58
28
#54
Mainly because of the word eternal. in the universe nothing is eternal not on this side of the spectrum when he does take us it won't be a place in the physical realm
Excellent point, but nothing is impossible with God even an eternal planet, would you not agree? By your concept, God made the physical earth and began physical life on it with the purpose of birth and death even before the first sin? Of what value is the physical universe if it's not to be used by intelligent life? Why hasn't God created everything purely in a spiritual realm?
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
#55
You can say what you wish about me but again I ask you how did you discern robo's spirit?
Robo's original post shouted loud and clear that he was seeking debate, not knowledge.

Robo's post #1
It seems that common sense would have it that Enoch and Elijah either “ascended” to earth from heaven, or didn’t go to heaven. I’m subscribing to the latter with pure speculation. I speculate that in the Father’s House are many mansions, i.e. “Other worlds,” i.e. planets, thus I’m speculating that Enoch & Elijah were taken by the Lord to other perfect worlds in God’s great universe? What’s your opinion?

I answered that question biblically and right away Robo gets combative. Another person gave biblical answers and he too was confronted by Robo. Obviously Robo does not like scripture. He didn't want answers from the bible. Same as all the "un-born".

This subject is done to death by now and I for one am over this inanity. I see his ploy now is to ensnare you birds into a useless debate of things he imagines can make a mockery of scripture. That IS what trolls do.

REMEMBER TO NOT GO BEYOND WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE. (Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, 1 COR 4:6)
 

Blain

The Word Weaver
Aug 28, 2012
19,213
2,548
113
#56
Excellent point, but nothing is impossible with God even an eternal planet, would you not agree? By your concept, God made the physical earth and began physical life on it with the purpose of birth and death even before the first sin? Of what value is the physical universe if it's not to be used by intelligent life? Why hasn't God created everything purely in a spiritual realm?
He created us without sin but it was andam and eve who brought sin into us it was not God's intention he actually created the garden of eden to be exactly what heaven is. And the value of the physical realm is to show his wonder and glory
God's ways are not our ways and his thoughts are not our thoughts
 

Robo36

Active member
Nov 27, 2019
186
58
28
#57
He created us without sin but it was andam and eve who brought sin into us it was not God's intention he actually created the garden of eden to be exactly what heaven is. And the value of the physical realm is to show his wonder and glory
God's ways are not our ways and his thoughts are not our thoughts
Then of what value is the wondrous physical universe, its planets, suns and all other physical wonders? You truly believe that earth is God's only physical life creation? All life is spiritual with the single exception of earth? Though I find that idea interesting, I also find it hard to believe.
 
Jun 11, 2020
1,370
424
83
73
#58
Side trail but I don't think it was intended to interpret Jesus statement to Mary as saying he needed to make a quick trip to heaven to pour out some blood before he could allow anyone to touch him. Actually I know for a fact he did not intend for us to get that understanding from his words because if you look at Matthew's Gospel you find that all the women mentioned their clung to his feet and he told them to go tell his disciples to meet him in Galilee. So they touched him.
Matthe 28

8And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word. 9And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.

And once you concede that Matthew clearly states that they touched him then you must abandoned the theory that no one could touch him before his trip to heaven. Mary apparently did not stop clinging to him when the other women or woman got up to obey Jesus and go tell the disciples and Jesus had to tell Mary to stop clinging to him. He was trying to explain to her that after his ascension He would come and make his abode in her heart, but she was afraid of losing him again. That ascension took place later in front of all the witnesses. There is no mention of two ascensions in theology in the rest of scriptures.

Heb 9 is explaining what Jesus accomplished to fulfill the types and shadows of the temple sacrifice and atonement. Jesus shed blood was accepted the day he spilled it on the cross. The day he said it is finished and that blood was on the ground the veil was torn from top to bottom and Jesus did not need to take a container of that blood to heaven post resurrection to accomplish what Heb 9 is saying was accomplished on the cross.

What, was Jesus still bleeding while telling Mary not to keep clinging to him? Did the other women get blood all over them from clinging to his feet (Matthew version) or did he have a flask of blood in his pocket he saved from the cross to physically pour out a second time in heaven? Did he cut his wrists in heaven and pour out this blood on the mercy seat in heaven after his ascension? Reread Heb 9 without these presuppositions and you will find that he is talking about what was accomplished spiritually by the physical sacrifice of the cross.
Thank you for your reply. Your objections I answer gladly. Language is given by God for transmitting ideas. It has two vital qualities. (i) The actual words used, and (ii) the rules of grammar. If I took your posting above and gave it a metaphorical meaning you would not agree, and might even be angry that your plain words were abused and made to mean something you did not intend. So also is God's Word. It is literal and plain unless (i) it states that it is metaphorical or a parable, (ii) an absurdity would arise if it is taken literally. This does not preclude layers of meaning, but it sets a rule that we men abide by at the first level of language - the idea it shows. That is, it means what it says unless there are serious grounds to apply another meaning. "Thou shalt not ..." in the Law of Moses means "thou shalt not .... ."

Now, when Moses was called on high to receive instruction on how to built God's Tabernacle, he was commanded to make it according to the pattern of the heavenly Tabernacle. There is no legal way to say that a Physical Tabernacle does not exist in heaven. And when it says that Christ took His blood into a, "... greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building", and that He, "by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having (already) obtained eternal redemption for us", (Hebrews 9:11-14), what is there to say that this did not really happen? The High Priest of Israel did it physically in a "lesser tabernacle". In what way, after having shed His blood physically, was He, the New High Priest of them who believe His ACTIONS, subject to the NON_FULFILLING of these great works?

I propose that it is your job to show why they did not happen as scripture says? It also does not help to belittle it. The Holy Spirit has said in the inspired record that Christ, New High Priest, took His blood to the greater Tabernacle to present it to the Father in like manner that Israel's High Priest did it on earth.

But in attempting to make it meaningless, you overlooked another great truth. That is, the reason why the disciples, men and women, were not to touch Him until He had been to the Father. It is that He was "Firstfruits". He was the Firstfruits of the dead and the Firstfruits belong to God. Only when God has been satisfied, may man profit. By annulling the reality of our Lord Jesus being FIRST for the Father, and only then for us, you propose that we had claim on the Firstfruits.

With both these matters in mind, we turn to the wording of Matthew 28. Maybe unwittingly, you have pitted John against Matthew. But is there a contradiction? I say no. Let us read Matthew 28:1-10:

  1. In verse 1 two Marys came to the sephulcre. This is confirmed by verse 5 in that the angel address "women" only.
  2. In verse 6 the angel said that our Lord was "not there". That is, a period of time passed while our Lord was said to be "not there"
  3. In verse 7 the women are commanded to speedily travel and report that Jesus was going ahead of them TO GALILEE
  4. In verse 8 they obeyed the angel. More time passes as they make their way
  5. In verse 9 the women are on the way and meet Jesus, who does not say "I have not YET ascended", but "I go to Galilee"
  6. In verse 9 they (the women) held Him by the feet
The end of the matter is that more than enough time had passed for our Lord to ascend to the Father and return.

Then, returning to John Chapter 20, a completely different different account is given. I will not list the salient points of verses 1-18, but suffice to say that you are in a difficult position. You cannot pit one scripture against another without giving our enemies a laughing fit. You must, at all times, try to reconcile the seeming differences. Otherwise we can all pack up and go home. My explanation would have been that John's account is a separate and EARLIER set of events, with only ONE Mary to start with and the disciples coming, inspecting the sepulcher and going home (v.10). Our Lord too says differently. Here He says that He goes to the Father - plainly - NOT Galilee. But you have tried to showed me wrong by pitting one inspired account against another. I don't for a moment think you meant to do damage to scripture. I actually think that you are one of the best students of scripture on this Forum. But maybe you should have written your objection as a question.
  1. The Lord Jesus, as Firsfruits of those that slept, forbade any human to touch Him until He had presented Himself to the Father
  2. The Lord Jesus did, as New High Priest, present His blood to the Father in the Holy of Holies in heaven
  3. The Lord Jesus had adequate time to do this and still satisfy BOTH accounts of the events on that glorious day
  4. There is no reason to make the inspired account less than literal and accurate
Nevertheless, should you hold to your objection, I uphold your right to it and still wish God's richest blessings on you.
 

Blain

The Word Weaver
Aug 28, 2012
19,213
2,548
113
#59
Then of what value is the wondrous physical universe, its planets, suns and all other physical wonders? You truly believe that earth is God's only physical life creation? All life is spiritual with the single exception of earth? Though I find that idea interesting, I also find it hard to believe.
Scientifically no it is impossible but we have yet to find any actually find any intelligent life but from God's perspective he has only concerned himself with this world and with man not other species of creatures in the universe the theory you proposed wasn't about aliens though
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#60
Thank you for your reply. Your objections I answer gladly. Language is given by God for transmitting ideas. It has two vital qualities. (i) The actual words used, and (ii) the rules of grammar. If I took your posting above and gave it a metaphorical meaning you would not agree, and might even be angry that your plain words were abused and made to mean something you did not intend. So also is God's Word. It is literal and plain unless (i) it states that it is metaphorical or a parable, (ii) an absurdity would arise if it is taken literally. This does not preclude layers of meaning, but it sets a rule that we men abide by at the first level of language - the idea it shows. That is, it means what it says unless there are serious grounds to apply another meaning. "Thou shalt not ..." in the Law of Moses means "thou shalt not .... ."

Now, when Moses was called on high to receive instruction on how to built God's Tabernacle, he was commanded to make it according to the pattern of the heavenly Tabernacle. There is no legal way to say that a Physical Tabernacle does not exist in heaven. And when it says that Christ took His blood into a, "... greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building", and that He, "by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having (already) obtained eternal redemption for us", (Hebrews 9:11-14), what is there to say that this did not really happen? The High Priest of Israel did it physically in a "lesser tabernacle". In what way, after having shed His blood physically, was He, the New High Priest of them who believe His ACTIONS, subject to the NON_FULFILLING of these great works?

.

I think you add too much commentary to the scripture to weave a narrative that is not necessary about an ascension before the ascension.
They did hold his feet at the morning of the resurrection and their is no space of time for this ascension that could have happened before the holding of the feet. I think you are trying to hard on that one. It is not a natural hermeneutic and should scream "probably not what John was meaning" But I can understand why people are confused.

As to Hebrew 9 just read it in it entirety and you see that the offering of himself fulfilled these requirements especially summarizing it with the final statement...
28So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.
He is contrasting the inefficacy of the blood of bulls and goats with the blood of Christ.
14How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

His sacrifice on the cross is when his blood was shed. At that time it was accepted. He ascended into heaven and appears before God for us but I see no record of him bleeding again in heaven. That which was done on the cross is what Heb 9 is referring to. People have imagined more than what is being said in Heb 9. Contrasting what they did in the tabernacle and trying to imagine an exact repeat of it in heaven after the cross is not what Heb 9 is saying that is what others are trying to make it say. The cross was the blood that was offered not another additional sprinkling after the ascension. That is made up in peoples minds, not mentioned in this text and not intended. One shedding of blood. ONCE. Not twice. People attempt to say Heb 9 says that Jesus had to spread his blood on the mercy seat in heaven, etc... but just read the text and you see it does not say all that.


6Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God. 7But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people: 8The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: 9Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 10Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

11But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; 12Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 13For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: 14How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

15And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. 16For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. 17For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. 18Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. 19For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, 20Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. 21Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. 22And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

23It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: 25Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; 26For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: 28So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.